Minuscule 918 - Revision history

Nick at 21:20, 11 October 2025

2025-10-11T21:20:50Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 21:20, 11 October 2025
Line 22:		Line 22:
	The commentary on GA 918 has:		The commentary on GA 918 has:
	:.....ἀλλα ὁ λόγος του θυ σε σαρκωματος, ᾧ καί ἐ μαρτύρησεν ὁ πηρʹ, οὒτος εσιν ὁ υἱος μενὁ ἀγαπητοςʹ. ὁμοίως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ, ὅτε ἐνόμισαν βροντὴν εἶναι, ὅτε καὶ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἔσταξεν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν.		:.....ἀλλα ὁ λόγος του θυ σε σαρκωματος, ᾧ καί ἐ μαρτύρησεν ὁ πηρʹ, οὒτος εσιν ὁ υἱος μενὁ ἀγαπητοςʹ. ὁμοίως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ, ὅτε ἐνόμισαν βροντὴν εἶναι, ὅτε καὶ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἔσταξεν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν.
		+
	Translated as:		Translated as:
-	.....but the word of God came to you in the flesh, and the Father testified, "You are the beloved Son." Likewise also on the cross, when they thought it was thunder, when also his blood dripped onto the earth.	+
		+	:.....but the word of God came to you in the flesh, and the Father testified, "You are the beloved Son." Likewise also on the cross, when they thought it was thunder, when also his blood dripped onto the earth.
		+
		+	The commentary is speaking of the ''λόγος'' of God that came in the flesh. The Textus Receptus is the only text that reads "λόγος" in the entire chapter of 1 John 5, so it is significant to have a commentary written here mentioning the logos.

	==[[Elijah Hixson]]==		==[[Elijah Hixson]]==

Nick at 21:17, 11 October 2025

2025-10-11T21:17:47Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 21:17, 11 October 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:
	[[Elijah Hixson]] said on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog in his article [https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-greek-manuscripts-of-comma.html The Greek Manuscripts of the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8)]:		[[Elijah Hixson]] said on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog in his article [https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-greek-manuscripts-of-comma.html The Greek Manuscripts of the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8)]:

-	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel (Der byzantinische Text) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.	+	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel ([https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Der_byzantinische_Text_der_katholischen/lbTYAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 Der byzantinische Text]) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.

	:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.		:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.
Line 39:		Line 39:

	Group 453 as found in a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/fig6.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawNXo7xleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFGUmtCS1VUM21kVVUwNjl6AR5z26tS0D2mL4tlxJUFgPmKSTxqcS6YVhxLiAbT6k7PWBesKwcY2F_kxLIoBA_aem_wzNinKVtAwvqWpULvfdfzQ phylogentic tree (in blue)]] Here is a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/ link to an article in TC Journal] (see Para 35) where they were able to isolate the group by using phylogenetic analysis.		Group 453 as found in a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/fig6.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawNXo7xleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFGUmtCS1VUM21kVVUwNjl6AR5z26tS0D2mL4tlxJUFgPmKSTxqcS6YVhxLiAbT6k7PWBesKwcY2F_kxLIoBA_aem_wzNinKVtAwvqWpULvfdfzQ phylogentic tree (in blue)]] Here is a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/ link to an article in TC Journal] (see Para 35) where they were able to isolate the group by using phylogenetic analysis.
-
-	~~==[[Elijah Hixson]]==~~
-
-	~~[[Elijah Hixson]] says of Minuscule 918:~~
-	~~:918 (date: probably 1573–1578)~~
-	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel ([https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Der_byzantinische_Text_der_katholischen/lbTYAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 Der byzantinische Text]) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.
-	:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.
-	~~:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.~~

	Jeff Riddle responded on his [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2020/01/wm-149-hixson-cj-and-roman-catholic.html blog]:		Jeff Riddle responded on his [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2020/01/wm-149-hixson-cj-and-roman-catholic.html blog]:

Nick: /* Johannine Comma */

2025-10-11T21:15:10Z

Johannine Comma

←Older revision		Revision as of 21:15, 11 October 2025
Line 19:		Line 19:

	The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.		The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.
		+
		+	The commentary on GA 918 has:
		+	:.....ἀλλα ὁ λόγος του θυ σε σαρκωματος, ᾧ καί ἐ μαρτύρησεν ὁ πηρʹ, οὒτος εσιν ὁ υἱος μενὁ ἀγαπητοςʹ. ὁμοίως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ, ὅτε ἐνόμισαν βροντὴν εἶναι, ὅτε καὶ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἔσταξεν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν.
		+	Translated as:
		+	.....but the word of God came to you in the flesh, and the Father testified, "You are the beloved Son." Likewise also on the cross, when they thought it was thunder, when also his blood dripped onto the earth.
		+
		+	==[[Elijah Hixson]]==
		+	[[Elijah Hixson]] said on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog in his article [https://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-greek-manuscripts-of-comma.html The Greek Manuscripts of the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8)]:
		+
		+	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel (Der byzantinische Text) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.
		+
		+	:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.
		+
		+	:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.
		+
		+	[[Elijah Hixson]] says that 918 is a member of a manuscript group (Group 453) and not a copy of a printed edition. His claim is that it copied Erasmus' third edition at 1 John 5:7. The fact that it breaks from the rest of its Group (Group 453) at that point shows it is a distinctive reading. The variations in form of the [[Comma Johanneum]] point to Erasmus' third edition and similar texts being the source.
		+
		+	Joey McCollum did a mathematical analysis of Wasserman's full collations of Jude and concluded that it's group members are 453, which include 94, 307, 180, 424, 453, 468, 720, 918, 1678, 1840, 2186, 2197, and 2818.
		+
		+	Group 453 as found in a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/fig6.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawNXo7xleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFGUmtCS1VUM21kVVUwNjl6AR5z26tS0D2mL4tlxJUFgPmKSTxqcS6YVhxLiAbT6k7PWBesKwcY2F_kxLIoBA_aem_wzNinKVtAwvqWpULvfdfzQ phylogentic tree (in blue)]] Here is a [http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v07/SWH2002/ link to an article in TC Journal] (see Para 35) where they were able to isolate the group by using phylogenetic analysis.

	==[[Elijah Hixson]]==		==[[Elijah Hixson]]==

Nick: /* Johannine Comma */

2025-10-11T20:20:49Z

Johannine Comma

←Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 11 October 2025
Line 19:		Line 19:

	The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.		The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.
		+
		+	==[[Elijah Hixson]]==

	[[Elijah Hixson]] says of Minuscule 918:		[[Elijah Hixson]] says of Minuscule 918:

Nick: /* Further reading */

2025-10-02T11:59:13Z

Nick at 09:02, 2 October 2025

2025-10-02T09:02:54Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 09:02, 2 October 2025
Line 26:		Line 26:
	:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.		:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.

-	Jeff Riddle responded on his blog:	+	Jeff Riddle responded on his [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2020/01/wm-149-hixson-cj-and-roman-catholic.html blog]:
	:EH begins by stating that “this is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance.”		:EH begins by stating that “this is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance.”

Nick: /* Johannine Comma */

2025-09-30T23:37:29Z

Johannine Comma

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:37, 30 September 2025
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.		:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.
	:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.		:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.
		+
		+	Jeff Riddle responded on his blog:
		+	:EH begins by stating that “this is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance.”
		+
		+	:He also points out that this is one of three mss. of these ten (along with 61 and 429marg) which agree with Erasmus. So, “Erasmus is likely the source,” adding, “consequently 918 is not a witness to the pre-Erasmian CJ.”
		+
		+	:Questions: As with 429marg do the conclusions here risk the charge of circular reasoning? Is it possible that 918 and Erasmus were both dependent on a common source?
		+
		+	:EH adds this conclusion: “GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.”
		+
		+	:How strange indeed that a Spanish mss. would follow the reading of Erasmus and not the Complutension!

	== History ==		== History ==

Nick: /* Johannine Comma */

2025-09-30T23:30:34Z

Johannine Comma

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 30 September 2025
Line 10:		Line 10:
	==Johannine Comma==		==Johannine Comma==
	[[Image:Minuscule_918_Johannine_Comma.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|The Johannine Comma in Minuscule 918 [https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/en_GB/manuscript-workspace?docID=30918].]]		[[Image:Minuscule_918_Johannine_Comma.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|The Johannine Comma in Minuscule 918 [https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/en_GB/manuscript-workspace?docID=30918].]]
-	It contains the [[Comma Johanneum]] from the original scribe.<sup>[6]</sup> It is ~~believed~~ that Minuscule 918 was copied from Erasmus' 1522 Greek New Testament. CSNTM’s short article and several TR-oriented sites list 918 as a 16th-century witness with the comma. (This is a central reason people suspect printed-text influence.) The two are compared below:	+	It contains the [[Comma Johanneum]] from the original scribe.<sup>[6]</sup> It is claimed that Minuscule 918 was copied from Erasmus' 1522 Greek New Testament. CSNTM’s short article and several TR-oriented sites list 918 as a 16th-century witness with the comma. (This is a central reason people suspect printed-text influence.) The two are compared below:

	:ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, λόγος, καὶ πνεῦμα ἅγιον, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ, πνεῦμα, καὶ ὕδωρ, καὶ αἷμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν. (Minuscule 918)		:ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, λόγος, καὶ πνεῦμα ἅγιον, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ, πνεῦμα, καὶ ὕδωρ, καὶ αἷμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν. (Minuscule 918)
Line 20:		Line 20:
	The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.		The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.

-	Elijah Hixson says of Minuscule 918:	+	[[Elijah Hixson]] says of Minuscule 918:
	:918 (date: probably 1573–1578)		:918 (date: probably 1573–1578)
-	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel (Der byzantinische Text) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.	+	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel ([https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Der_byzantinische_Text_der_katholischen/lbTYAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 Der byzantinische Text]) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.
	:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.		:We can say a bit more about 918. We know that the scribe is one Nicolás de la Torre (sometimes written as Νικόλαος Τουρριανός; see the reference in Ernst Gamillscheg and Dieter Harlfinger, Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800–1600). Nikolaos was born in Crete, but he worked for Philip II of Spain at the Library of El Escorial beginning in 1573. Nikolaos’ dated manuscripts have a range of 1562–1586, but given the ties to El Escorial (where the manuscript remains to this day), and given what we know about Nikolaos employment there and travels elsewhere, I would expect that he made the manuscript between 1573 and 1578.
	:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.		:Conclusion: GA 918 is a manuscript of Spanish Catholic provenance from the 1570s that broke from its textual tradition by adding the CJ from Erasmus’ third edition.

Nick at 22:39, 30 September 2025

2025-09-30T22:39:22Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 30 September 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	'''Minuscule 918''' (in the [[Biblical manuscript#Gregory-Aland\|Gregory-Aland]] numbering), O <sup>66</sup> ([[Biblical manuscript#Von Soden\|von Soden]]),<sup>[1]</sup> is a 16th-century [[Greek language\|Greek]] [[Lower case\|minuscule]] [[manuscript]] of the [[New Testament]] on paper, with a commentary. The manuscript is famous for the [[Comma Johanneum]].	+	'''Minuscule 918''' (in the [[Biblical manuscript#Gregory-Aland\|Gregory-Aland]] numbering), O <sup>66</sup> ([[Biblical manuscript#Von Soden\|von Soden]]),<sup>[1]</sup> also ''[[Codex Escurialensis]]'', is a 16th-century [[Greek language\|Greek]] [[Lower case\|minuscule]] [[manuscript]] of the [[New Testament]] on paper, with a commentary. The manuscript is famous for the [[Comma Johanneum]].

	== Description ==		== Description ==

Nick: /* Johannine Comma */

2025-09-30T21:34:19Z

Johannine Comma

←Older revision		Revision as of 21:34, 30 September 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:
	The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.		The only difference is Minuscule 918 has the Nomen Sacrum <span style="text-decoration: overline">πηρ</span>, whereas Erasmus' 1522 does not, but has the expanded πατὴρ.

-	;Elijah Hixson on 918	+	Elijah Hixson says of Minuscule 918:
	:918 (date: probably 1573–1578)		:918 (date: probably 1573–1578)
	:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel (Der byzantinische Text) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.		:GA 918 is another manuscript with a Catholic provenance. It is one of three manuscripts (the other two are 61 and 429marg) that have a CJ in exactly the same form as Erasmus’ third edition, so Erasmus is likely the source of the CJ here. If that were not enough, Wachtel (Der byzantinische Text) places 918 in “Group 453”. It is the youngest member of that group by a couple of centuries and the only member to have the CJ, so per my remarks above, it’s beyond a reasonable doubt that the CJ is an addition derived from Erasmus. We might have expected the Complutensian Polyglot here given its Spanish Catholic provenance (see below), but there are a number of differences between Erasmus’ third edition and the Complutensian Polyglot in the CJ, and 918 matches Erasmus perfectly. Consequently, 918 is not a witness to a pre-Erasmian CJ.

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:59, 2 October 2025
Line 62:		Line 62:
	* Emmanuel Miller, [http://books.google.pl/books?id=iiIDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR27&lpg#PPP9,M1 ''Catalogue des manuscrits grecs de la bibliothèque de l'Escurial''] (Paris 1848), pp. 54-66.		* Emmanuel Miller, [http://books.google.pl/books?id=iiIDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR27&lpg#PPP9,M1 ''Catalogue des manuscrits grecs de la bibliothèque de l'Escurial''] (Paris 1848), pp. 54-66.
	* Gregory, Caspar René (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testamentes (in German). Vol. 1. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. p. 228.		* Gregory, Caspar René (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testamentes (in German). Vol. 1. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. p. 228.
		+	* [https://rbdigital.realbiblioteca.es/files/biblio_esc/griegos_4.pdf Σ.I.5] Page 21

	== External links ==		== External links ==