Which NT Greek text with Apparatus?

[Tim Gascho]

I am trying to decide between NA28 with Apparatus and UBS4 with Apparatus. Since I am a pastor and my primary interest is in looking at the variants that effect the exegesis the UBS4 seems to best meet my needs.

 

Any comments would be welcome.

 

Thanks

[Bob Kuo]

The text of UBS4 and NA27 are identical - the only difference is in the apparatus. The difference between the NA27 and NA28 is in the Catholic epistles and an updated apparatus.

 

The UBS4 was designed to note in the apparatus those textual variants that effect translation. While it is a bit of a subjective call which variants "effect translation", I think they do a good job. I would go with the UBS4. Another bonus is that it has, in my opinion, a simpler to understand apparatus.

 

I'd also recommend Metzger's text commentary or Comfort's commentary as they provide even more information about variants. Also, a good commentary should note the variants for a given passage.

[JonathanHuber]

If you think you will eventually want the UBS5, you might consider getting the NA28 now since that's already been updated. Personally, I like that the NA28 apparatus covers more variants. However, I agree that the UBS apparatus is easier to use and may serve you better given your purpose.

 

The textual commentaries Bob mentioned are both helpful, especially Comfort's.

Edited September 5, 2013 by JonathanHuber

[Abram K-J]

Jonathan: Do you know anything about UBS5, timing, etc.?

[JonathanHuber]

Nope, but I assumed it's coming eventually. Am I wrong?

[Abram K-J]

No! Not wrong at all--I've seen it mentioned by reputable sources (including you). Just haven't seen anything concrete yet, and was curious.

[Julia Falling]

Tim — The UBS4 is definitely easier to read. Most of the changes (I think there were 34) between the NA27 —> NA28 were either including a word that had been in brackets or leaving out a word that had been in brackets. There were a couple of changes that were more significant, but nothing to wring one's hands over. I think the NA editions are designed more to track genealogy of a given text, not cite the variants with theological significance, but I may be wrong there.

 

When the UBS5 comes out, there will probably be a bit of a discount for those who already own the UBS4. The UBS4 also gives the "rating" of the variant. How convinced were the editors that the reading in the text was in the autograph? Rated {A} to {D} with {A} being very sure and {D} being a "coin toss." Metzger's commentary will give you the thinking behind the editors' decision. Comfort, in my opinion, is more useful in discussing the significance of the variant.

 

If I had to choose just two of the resources for teaching/preaching, I'd go with UBS4 and Comfort. At some point you may want to pick up Metzger & the NA28.

 

Also very useful is having the UBS4 and TR open side-by-side as well as the (NASB or ESV) and (NKJV or KJV) open side-by-side. The number of variants between the two is actually quite large. While most are the moveable nu and other spelling variations, there are a whole bunch that are complete word changes and additions (the TR being longer). If you have a congregation like the one to which we belong, you will have people sitting before you with many English versions. We're are mostly NASB/NAS95, but we do have KJV and NIV folks, too. The people really do need to know why the versions sometimes read so differently, and that it often was not the translators' choice, but the translators' text.

 

 

Edited September 6, 2013 by Julie Falling

[Matthew Burgess]

I'm a little late to this thread, but I'll add my two cents anyway!

 

I've always felt that the NA and UBS editions are best used as a "both/and," rather than an "either/or." The NA editions cover a larger number of variants, but the UBS editions include additional witnesses for the variants that they include (especially patristic witnesses), which is very helpful. However, if you aren't hugely interested in textual criticism, UBS is sufficient, especially if you don't have much experience with the sigla of the NA apparatus (the hyperlinks of the Accordance edition are extremely helpful, but it's still a little cumbersome if you don't know the sigla at all).

 

I would agree with Bob and others that a textual commentary is essential. In my opinion, Comfort's commentary is preferable for beginning and intermediate readers, as it includes English translations of all of the variants, and also lists some of the English editions that adopt each variant. Metzger's commentary is very good, but I would add a caveat: the ratings system is extremely suspect. For more information on this, I recommend Kent Clarke's Textual Optimism: A Critique of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (JSNT Supplement Series 138; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997).

[Timothy Jenney]

I agree, I often recommend the Comfort Text Commentary to pastors: http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=Comfort+Text+Commentary

 

It is only about as comprehensive as the UBS apparatus, but it explains the variants in more understandable and practical terms. It also includes a list of modern Bible translations and notes that support each text variant. It's really helpful when preaching to a crowd where people are using multiple translations. It is also not tied to any specific Bible text, Greek or otherwise, so users can select any Bible they wish. The

 

The UBS Translators Handbooks for the NT are a much more complete reference: http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=UBS+Handbooks-NT They contain more explanation of the meaning of the variants—and helpful tips for those of us trying to explain the meaning of the Bible to another culture (even if it is simply our teenagers' culture!). I find many people, including scholars, are unable to explain why it is important that a passage be rendered in a particular way. The UBS Handbooks shine at this task.

[Jonathan C. Borland]

Hey Accordancers,

 

NA records something like 10,000 variants (or more?), whereas UBS records around 1/10 that amount. Don't know if that helps. If you're really into TC and you can only afford one text, there's really only one option, and that is to get NA28 which is THE standard all-in-one handheld text.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jonathan

[Ιακοβ]

NA records something like 10,000 variants (or more?), whereas UBS records around 1/10 that amount. Don't know if that helps. If you're really into TC and you can only afford one text, there's really only one option, and that is to get NA28 which is THE standard all-in-one handheld text.

 

Actually, recording 10 times more of the variants is not necessarily a good thing. It depends on what your needs are. 

 

• UBS is better if your primarily interested in variants that may potentially impact how we understand the message of the text itself, and have not so much of an interest in every minute variant.
• NA is better if you do want to see all the tiny less significant variants, this can (for example) allow you to get a better understanding of the characteristics of a manuscript.

So for example, in a particular pericope (paragraph or block of text), UBS will highlight any variants that are important and you really should be aware of, whereas for that same pericope, NA may, through its abundance of annotations, reveal that the scribe of D here, has been particularly sloppy (Allowing you therefore to decide for yourself how much you trust D over A, or something like that.)