Rev 3:12 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]814
Ὁ νικῶν, ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ ἔξω οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃ ἔτι· καὶ γράψω ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τῆς πόλεως τοῦ Θεοῦ μου τῆς καινῆς Ἰερουσαλὴμ, ἡ καταβαίνει ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ τὸ ὄνομά μου τὸ καινόν.
Rev 3:12 [Textus Receptus (Roberti Stephani) (1511)]269b
Ο νικῶν, ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ ἔξω οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃ ἔτι, καὶ γράψω ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τῆς πόλεως τοῦ Θεοῦ μου τῆς καινῆς Ἰερουσαλὴμ, ἡ καταβαίνουσα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, καὶ τὸ ὄνομά μου τὸ καινόν.
Rev 3:12 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]q90f2vc2
ο νικων ποιησω αυτω<ον> στυλον <εν> τω ναω του θυ μου και εξω ου μη εξελθη και γραψω επ αυτον το ονομα του θυ μου και το ονομα της πολεως του θυ μου της κενης ϊηλμ <τ>η<ς> καταβαινουσα<ης> εκ του ουρανου απο του θυ μου και το ονομα μου το καινον
Rev 3:12 [Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D VIII) (A02) (5th century)]126rc1
ο νικω- ποιησω αυτον στυλον εν τω ναω του θυ μου και εξω ου μη εξελθη ετι· και γραψω επ αυτον το ονομα του θυ μου και το ονομα της πολεως του θυ μου της καινης ϊηλμ η καταβαινουσα εκ του ουνου απο του θυ μου και το ονομα μου το καινον.
Critical Apparatus :
(1) αυτον : א1, A
(2) αυτω : א*
(3) εν τω ναω : א1, A
(4) OMIT εν : א*
(5) ετι : A
(6) OMIT ετι : א
(7) καινης : A
(8) κενης : א
(9) η καταβαινει : Elzevir
(10) η καταβαινουσα : א*, A, Stephanus
(11) της καταβαινουσης : א1
A Textual Commentary On Revelation 3:12
(a) In Rev. iii. 12, all the MSS. known, and all the editions printed before Beza, have ναῷ ; those, therefore, who have compared the MSS., have not indicated any various reading in this place. In Beza’s edition λαῷ was substituted for ναῷ by an error of the press : Beza observed , and subsequently corrected, the mistake : one Huiss, however, who collated the Codex Alexandrinus with a copy of Beza’s edition printed with the mistake λαῷ, noted ναῷ as a various reading of the Codex Alexandrinus. On which ground Maestricht has by this Canon condemned the reading ναῷ, as if it were found in only one MS., though it is really found in all, and is undoubtedly the true reading. These mistakes could not have been committed by Maestricht, unless his Crisis, taken as a whole, were erroneous. The last words of this Canon, “provided the Received Text,” etc., needlessly imperil the reading of the Received Text. (Bengel, Gnomon, pp. 27-28).