Luke 2:14 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]194
Δόξα ἐν ὑψίστοις Θεῷ, καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς εἰρήνη, ἐν ἀνθρώποις εὐδοκία.
MSS: ℓ1086 (f288vc2)
Luke 2:14 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]q77f6vc1
δοξα εν υψιστοις Θω και επι γης ϊρηνη εν ανθρωποις ευδοκιας
Luke 2:14 [Codex Alexandrinus (A02) (5th century)]21vc1
Δοξα εν υψιστοις Θω· και επι γης ειρηνη· εν ανοις ευδοκιας.
Luke 2:14 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]39ac2
Δοξα εν ϋψιστοις Θω και επι γης ειρηνη εν ανθρωποις ευδοκιας
Luke 2:14 [Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (D05) (5th century)]189v|359
Δοξα εν ϋψιστοις Θω και επι γης ειρηνη εν ανθρωποις ευδοκιας
Luke 2:14 [Codex Zacynthius (Ξ040) (6th century)]18r
Δοξα εν υψιστοις Θω και επι γης ειρηνη εν ανοις ευδοκια·
Critical Apparatus :
(1) ειρηνη : A, B, D, Ξ, ℓ1086
(2) ιρηνη : א
(3) ευδοκια : א¹, Ξ, ℓ1086
(4) ευδοκιας : א*, A, B, D
A Textual Commentary On Luke 2:14
(a) Burkitt, Streeter, and Ropes held. εὐδοκία to be preferable to ευδοκιας of א, B, D (Metzger, Chapters, p 20)
(b) Instances of previous editors accommodating the biblical quotations to the ordinary text against the authority of the MSS. are given by Field in his edition of Chrysostom’s Homilies on St. Matthew². The same complaint of editors preferring their own judgment to the authority of the MSS. is mentioned by Dean Burgon³ with reference to Cyril of Jerusalem. Some of the Fathers have been satisfactorily edited in such a way that, though the acquisition of fresh material may make it necessary to supplement what has been done, the work will not require to be re-done. But the continued outcry for critical editions of the Fathers and Versions shows that much remains to be done before we have the materials properly before us on which textual criticism is to work.
² In Chrysostom’s quotation (Hom. xliv) of Luke xxii. 35-38 ὁμοίως is omitted by the MSS., inserted by the editors ; p. 589, in the quotation of Luke xi. 27, 28, the editors substitute κοιλία for γαστήρ.
³ Last Twelve Verses, p. 261. Dean Burgon quotes De Touttée’s admission that he inserted εὐδοκίας into Cyril’s quotation of Luke ii. 14, though he found εὐδοκία in the text.
(Ll. J. M. Bebb, THE EVIDENCE OF THE EARLY VERSIONS AND PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS ON THE TEXT OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica, vol. 2, p. 199)
(c) Lastly, CYRIL OF JERUSALEM is invariably cited by the latest Critics as favouring the reading εὐδοκίας. Those learned persons have evidently overlooked the candid acknowledgment of De Touttée, Cyril’s editor, (p. 180, cf. bottom of p. 162,) that though the MSS of Cyril exhibit εὐδοκία, yet in his editorial capacity he had ventured to print εὐδοκίας. This therefore is one more Patristic attestation to the trustworthiness of the Textus Receptus in respect of S. Luke ii. 14, which has been hitherto unaccountably lost sight of by Critics. (May I, without offence, remind Editors of Scripture that instead of copying, they ought in every instance to verify their references?)
(John W. Burgon, The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark, p. 261)