Matius 8:18

Challenging Professed Followers

8:18 Now when Jesus saw a large crowd ¹  around him, he gave orders to go to the other side of the lake. ² 

Matius 28:13

28:13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came at night and stole his body ³  while we were asleep.’

Matius 28:17

28:17 When ⁴  they saw him, they worshiped him, ⁵  but some doubted. ⁶ 

[8:18]  ¹ tc ‡ Codex B and some Sahidic mss read simply ὄχλον (oclon, “crowd”), the reading that NA²⁷ follows; the first hand of א, as well as ˹ and a few others, has ὄχλους (oclous, “crowds”); other witnesses read πολὺν ὄχλον (polun oclon, “a large crowd”). But the reading most likely to be original seems to be πολλούς ὄχλους (pollou" oclou"). It is found in א² C L Θ 0233 ˹³ 33 Ï lat; it is judged to be superior on internal grounds (the possibility of accidental omission of πολλούς/πολύν in isolated witnesses) and, to a lesser extent, external grounds (geographically widespread, various texttypes). For reasons of English style, however, this phrase has been translated as “a large crowd.”

[8:18]  ² tn The phrase “of the lake” is not in the Greek text but is clearly implied; it has been supplied here for clarity.

[28:13]  ³ tn Grk “him.”

[28:17]  ⁴ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated.

[28:17]  ⁵ tn The word “him” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[28:17]  ⁶ tn The Greek text reads here οἱ δὲ ἐδίστασαν (Joi de edistasan). Some scholars argue that the article is functioning like a personal pronoun, thus “they doubted” (e.g., D. A. Hagner, Matthew [WBC], 2:884). If so, then all the disciples would be in view. The translation of the text takes οἱ as an alternative pronoun which has a partitive notion (i.e., some of the disciples doubted, but not all). The difficulty with the personal pronoun view is that there are no examples of it in Matthew in which the same subject immediately precedes with its own verb (as would be the case in “they worshiped…they doubted”). Such, in fact, would be quite awkward, for the article would be unnecessary since the pronominal referent is already embedded in the verb. The only reason for the article here would be to distinguish the subject in some way; but if the same subject is in view, no distinction is being made.