Luke 20:30
 
Luke 20:30
(KJV) And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.
(1611 KJV) And the second tooke her to wife, and he died childlesse.
(1587 Geneva Bible) And the second tooke the wife, and he dyed childelesse.
(1535 Matthews) And the second took the wife, and he died childless.
(1526 Tyndale) And the seconde toke the wyfe and he dyed chyldlesse.
 
Counterfeit Versions
(1881 RV) and the second:
(1901 ASV) and the second:
(2011 NIV) The second
(NASV) and the second
(THE MESSAGE) The second married her and died
(AMP) And the second
(NLT) So the second brother married the widow, but he also died.
(ESV) And the second
(NCV) Then the second brother married the widow, and he died.
(CEB) The second
(GNB) Then the second one married the woman,
(HCSB) Also the second
(NIRV) The second one got married to her
(RSV) and the second
(NAB-Roman Catholic) Then the second
(NWT-Jehovah’s Witness) So the second,
 
Textus Receptus - Traditional Text
και ελαβεν ο δευτερος την γυναικα και ουτος απεθανεν ατεκνος
 
Hort-Westcott - Critical Text
και ο δευτερος
 
Corrupted Manuscripts
This verse is corrupted in the following manuscripts:
Aleph 01 - Sinaiticus - Nineteenth Century Counterfeit
B 03 - Vaticanus - Fourth century
D 05 - Bezae Cantabrigiensis - Fifth century
L 019 - Seventh century
 
Manuscripts which agree with the Textus Receptus for this verse
Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.)
A 02 - Alexandrinus - Fifth century
K 017 - Ninth century
P 024 - Sixth century
W 032 - Fourth/fifth century
1 (Minuscule) - Seventh century
13 (Minuscule) - Eighth century
036 - (Majuscule) Tenth century
037 - (Majuscule) Ninth Century
038 - (Majuscule) Ninth century
 
Published Critical Greek Texts with Corruptions
Omit “took her to wife, and she died childless” after “the second”
Alford, Henry - 1849 revised in 1871
Nestle - 1927 as revised in seventeenth edition in 1941
Nestle-Aland - 1979 - Twenty Sixth Edition
Tischendorf, Constantine - 1869
Tregelles, Samuel - 1857
Westcott and Hort - 1881
 
Affected Teaching
In this discourse, the Sadducees had tried to give the Lord Jesus Christ a question which would trip Him up. First of all, it must be noted that the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection so this was also an attempt to discredit it. Yet they put forth this question. Starting in verse 29, they asked a question about a woman who was married seven times and they specify that the first husband died without children and then the second husband died and he too without children, up to seven husbands. They wanted to know whose wife she would be in the resurrection. When the Sadducees started asking this question, they built up the scenario by stating specifically that the first and second husband died childless and then in like manner the other ones also died. There is absolutely no reason for the modern versions to omit the last part of verse 30 where it states the husband died childless since the manuscript evidence is 9 in favor of the reading against 4 that omit it. The modern version translators and editors claim that manuscript evidence is most important but here we have a case where the proper reading has the majority of manuscripts including it, yet they go with the two most corrupt manuscripts which omit it. This is why textual criticism is dangerous because it is subjective. It puts the Bible at the whim of every critic.
Back