Sinaiticus readings with Vulgate support - other Old Latin and Vulgate quirks

Steven Avery


Revelation 22:19
296 2049 2067mg it vg copbo Ambrose Primasius Haymo Ps-Augustine ς ND


The Vulgate preserves several passages that are found in the Sinaiticus but were later lost in the majority of Byzantine copies:

e.g. “raise the dead” (Matthew 10:8),
νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε, λεπροὺς καθαρίζετε, δαιμόνια ἐκβάλλετε] ‭א B C* (D) N Σ Φ Ω f1 f13 22 33 108 157 349 399 543 565 700mg 892 1010 pc ita itb itc ith itk itl itq vg (vgms νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε before

“the Jews” (John 3:25),
μετὰ Ἰουδαίων] p66 ‭א* G Θ 0141 f1 f13 205 565 597 1071 1253 1342 1365 al l68 l185 l387 l547 l1627 lAD (ita) itaur itb itc ite itff2 itl (itd ad Iudaeos) (itf itj itq itr1 eth Iudaeos) vg syrc syrpal(ms) copsa(mss) copbo goth eth geo Origen Augustine ς ND Dio

“Church of God” (Acts 20:28)

Doxology (Romans 16:25-27)
Last edited:

Steven Avery


Houghton pointed out several examples of interpolations, glosses, or additions in Latin manuscripts (pp. 158, 159, 161, 163, 167-169, 174, 179). For one specific example, Houghton referred to “the lengthy interpolation at Matthew 20:28 of a text resembling Luke 14:8-10, present in many Old Latin codices as well as some Vulgate gospel books” (p. 80; see also pp. 158-159). Houghton asserted that “the Latin tradition of the Catholic Epistles is characterized by interpolations to an even greater extent than the Pauline Epistles” (p. 179). Edward F. Hills listed several additions found in the Old Latin manuscripts at Matthew 3:15, Matthew 20:28, Luke 3:22, Luke 6:4, Luke 23:53, John 6:56, Acts 15:20, and Acts 23:24 (Believing Bible Study, pp. 46-47; KJV Defended, pp. 121-122) and also several omissions (BBS, pp. 69-70; KJV Defended, p. 123). F. C. Burkitt maintained that “the earliest Latin versions contained a text of the Gospels enriched by additions” (Old Latin, p. 52). Houghton noted that “knowledge of the looseness of early translators should caution against using versional evidence to reconstruct Greek forms which are not preserved” (Latin NT, p. 146). Arthur Voobus claimed: "The textual complexion of the Old Latin version is marked by the boldest departures from the received text" (Early Versions of the NT, p. 47).