Matt 8:4 προσενεγκε

Textual-Critical Analysis of Matthew 8:4: The Imperative of προσφέρω

This exegetical study of textual variants in Matthew 8:4 is based on a scholarly discussion concerning the Greek text. The initial inquiry focuses on the imperative form of the verb προσφέρω, specifically comparing the widely attested reading προσενεγκε with the less common προσενεγκον. This distinction is crucial for understanding scribal tendencies in early Koine Greek and their impact on the manuscript tradition.

The main exegetical issue at hand revolves around the morphological variation in the aorist imperative of προσφέρω (to bring, to offer). The standard second aorist active imperative form is προσενεγκε. However, a minority of manuscripts exhibit προσενεγκον, reflecting a known, albeit occasional, Koine phenomenon where first aorist active imperative endings (-ον) encroach upon second aorist stems (which typically take -ε). This textual problem requires careful consideration of external evidence (manuscript attestation) and internal probabilities (scribal habits, linguistic trends, potential for error) to determine the most likely original reading and to assess the implications for translation.

Greek text (Nestle 1904):

Καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ὅρα μηδενὶ εἴπῃς, ἀλλ᾽ ὕπαγε σεαυτὸν δεῖξον τῷ ἱερεῖ, καὶ προσένεγκε τὸ δῶρον ὃ προσέταξεν Μωϋσῆς εἰς μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς.

  • Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
    • For Matthew 8:4, the SBLGNT (2010) aligns with the Nestle 1904 reading, presenting προσένεγκε. There are no direct differences in this specific verb form between these two critical editions.
    • However, the SBLGNT (2010) is noted in the broader discussion for its acceptance of minority readings in other passages, such as Matthew 22:17 (εἶπε vs. εἶπον) and Matthew 24:3 (εἶπε vs. εἶπον), often *contra* NA28 and largely based on internal probability. This indicates a methodological tendency in the SBLGNT that, while not applied to Matt 8:4, is relevant to the broader discussion of aorist imperative forms.

Textual Criticism (NA28), Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

Textual Criticism (NA28): In Matthew 8:4, the textual apparatus of critical editions like NA28 (and implicitly Nestle 1904, Soden, Vogels) prioritizes προσενεγκε. This reading is supported by an overwhelming majority of manuscripts, including major uncials (ℵ c ε κ λ μ ν σ υ β ω χ Γ Δ Θ Π Σ Ω 047 0211) and numerous minuscules (f1.13.[35] 33. 399. 461. 565. 566. 892. [1424]. 1500 2224, with some variation to προσενεγκαι in f35 1424). In contrast, the variant προσενεγκον is attested by only two early manuscripts (β ξ), predating the 10th century. This minimal external evidence strongly favors προσενεγκε.

Internal probability also plays a significant role. The variant προσενεγκον reflects a known Koine tendency for first aorist endings to intrude upon second aorist stems, as seen in other New Testament passages like Matthew 4:3 (εἶπε/εἶπον), 22:17 (εἶπε/εἶπον), and 24:3 (εἶπε/εἶπον). While this encroachment did occur, its presence in Matthew 8:4 is extremely limited. The question for proponents of “reasoned transmissionalism” or Byzantine priority is whether a scribal preference for Atticistic purism or the influence of parallel passages (Mark 1:44; Luke 5:14, which also use second aorist forms) could have almost universally displaced an original προσενεγκον. Given the overall rarity of προσενεγκον for this verb and the fact that Koine scribes often exhibited no universal aversion to such forms (cf. Mark 5:19 ἀπάγγειλον; Luke 24:29 μεῖνον; Acts 11:13 ἀπόστειλον; 28:26 εἶπον), the minimal presence of προσενεγκον suggests it is less likely to be original. Furthermore, a plausible explanation for προσενεγκον is a scribal accident, potentially influenced by the preceding imperative δεῖξον just four words prior in the same verse (Matt 8:4), leading to a mechanical assimilation of the ending.

Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):

  • προσφέρω (root of προσενεγκε/προσενεγκον):
    • BDAG: Defines προσφέρω as “to bring to, offer, present.” In the context of Matthew 8:4, it specifically refers to presenting a gift or an offering, as mandated by the Mosaic Law. The imperative form emphasizes a direct command to perform this action.
    • KITTEL (TDNT): Elaborates on προσφέρω as “to bring, to offer, to present,” especially in the cultic sense of offering sacrifices or gifts. For Matthew 8:4, it is explicitly noted as referring to the offering required of a leper who has been cleansed, in accordance with Leviticus 14:2-32. The command to “offer the gift” highlights the fulfillment of ceremonial law following divine healing, serving as a testimony. Lexically, both προσενεγκε and προσενεγκον convey the same semantic meaning of “bring” or “offer”; the distinction is purely morphological and text-critical.

Translation Variants

The grammatical distinction between προσενεγκε (second aorist active imperative) and προσενεγκον (first aorist active imperative, non-standard for this stem) primarily reflects a textual-critical and morphological issue rather than a significant semantic or rhetorical one in translation. Both forms function as a direct command to “bring” or “offer.”

  • Grammatical Analysis:
    • προσενεγκε: This is the regular and expected second aorist active imperative form of προσφέρω. It denotes a simple, unrepeated command without emphasis on the duration or completion of the action, focusing solely on the action itself. Grammatically, it is sound and conventional.
    • προσενεγκον: While morphologically irregular for this verb’s stem, this form would still be understood as an imperative. The “Koine encroachment” phenomenon indicates that such forms, though less common for certain verbs, were sometimes used in spoken and written Koine Greek. However, its presence in Matthew 8:4 is too scant to suggest it represents a mainstream grammatical variant.
  • Rhetorical Analysis:
    • Rhetorically, both forms issue a direct command. The choice between them does not alter the forcefulness, urgency, or specific nature of Jesus’ instruction to the healed leper. The command is clear: perform the required ritual offering. Any rhetorical nuance would be imposed by the translator rather than derived intrinsically from the slight morphological variation in the Greek text. The emphasis remains on the obedience to the Mosaic Law as a testimony.

Therefore, while the textual decision is crucial for establishing the original Greek, the semantic import for English translation remains largely unchanged regardless of which variant is chosen, as both convey a command to “offer” or “bring.”

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the overwhelming external evidence from the manuscript tradition and strong internal probabilities, the reading προσενεγκε (second aorist active imperative) is confidently affirmed as the original text in Matthew 8:4. The variant προσενεγκον, supported by only two manuscripts, appears to be a localized scribal phenomenon, possibly a late introduction into the tradition, or a scribal error influenced by the preceding imperative δεῖξον. The occasional Koine tendency for first aorist endings to encroach on second aorist stems, while attested elsewhere, does not sufficiently account for the nearly universal dominance of προσενεγκε in this passage. Lexically, both forms convey the same imperative meaning, but the textual-critical process prioritizes fidelity to the most robustly attested and internally coherent reading.

  1. “And offer the gift which Moses commanded for a testimony to them.”
    This translation emphasizes the act of presenting the offering in fulfillment of the Law, maintaining a direct and formal tone.
  2. “And bring the offering that Moses prescribed as a testimony to them.”
    This rendition uses “bring” and “prescribed” to convey the instructional aspect of the command, underscoring the legalistic context of the passage.
  3. “Then go and make the offering Moses commanded as a witness to them.”
    This version focuses on the consequential action of “making the offering” and uses “witness” for “testimony,” offering a slightly more dynamic phrasing suitable for modern readability.

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]