Why Was Matthew 17 21 Removed

Why Was Matthew 17:21 Removed?

Matthew 17:21 is a verse that has been a subject of debate among biblical scholars and theologians. This verse, which reads “However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting,” is missing from some modern translations of the Bible. In this article, we will explore the reasons behind the removal of Matthew 17:21 and examine the implications of this omission.

The Manuscript Evidence

One of the primary reasons for the removal of Matthew 17:21 is the lack of strong manuscript evidence supporting its inclusion. The verse is absent from several early Greek manuscripts, including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, which are considered to be among the oldest and most reliable manuscripts of the New Testament. These omissions raise questions about the originality of the verse.

Furthermore, the verse is also missing from important early translations of the Bible, such as the Syriac Peshitta and the Old Latin. This absence in multiple ancient sources suggests that Matthew 17:21 may have been added to the text at a later stage.

The Textual Criticism Perspective

Textual criticism is the field of study that aims to determine the most accurate version of a text by comparing different manuscripts and textual variants. Scholars who approach the Bible from a textual criticism perspective argue that Matthew 17:21 was likely a later addition to the Gospel of Matthew.

They point out that the verse interrupts the flow of the narrative in Matthew 17, where Jesus is transfigured before his disciples. The verse seems to be a parenthetical comment that does not fit naturally within the context. This stylistic inconsistency raises suspicions about its authenticity.

Additionally, textual critics argue that the language and vocabulary used in Matthew 17:21 differ from the rest of the Gospel of Matthew. This linguistic discrepancy suggests that the verse may have been inserted by a scribe who wanted to emphasize the importance of prayer and fasting.

Theological Considerations

While the removal of Matthew 17:21 may be supported by textual and manuscript evidence, it also raises theological questions. The verse speaks to the power of prayer and fasting in overcoming certain spiritual challenges. Its omission from some modern translations may lead to a diminished emphasis on the spiritual disciplines of prayer and fasting.

However, it is important to note that the teachings of Jesus regarding prayer and fasting are still present in other parts of the Bible. For example, in Matthew 6:16-18, Jesus instructs his disciples on how to fast and emphasizes the importance of sincerity and humility in their spiritual practices.

Implications for Christian Practice

The removal of Matthew 17:21 from some modern translations does not negate the importance of prayer and fasting in the Christian faith. These spiritual disciplines have been practiced by believers throughout history and continue to hold significance in many religious traditions.

While the specific verse may be absent, the broader teachings on prayer and fasting in the Bible remain intact. Christians are encouraged to seek a deeper relationship with God through these practices, recognizing their potential for spiritual growth and transformation.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Does the removal of Matthew 17:21 affect the overall message of the Bible?

No, the removal of Matthew 17:21 does not significantly impact the overall message of the Bible. The teachings on prayer and fasting can still be found in other parts of the Bible, such as Matthew 6:16-18 and Mark 9:29.

2. Why do some translations still include Matthew 17:21?

Some translations, particularly those based on the Textus Receptus, a Greek text used for the King James Version, include Matthew 17:21. These translations prioritize the preservation of traditional texts and may include verses that are absent from other manuscripts.

3. Are there other verses in the Bible that have been removed or disputed?

Yes, there are several other verses in the Bible that have been subject to debate and removal. Examples include Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11. These verses are missing from some manuscripts and are considered by many scholars to be later additions.

4. How should Christians approach the study of the Bible in light of textual variations?

Christians should approach the study of the Bible with an open mind and a willingness to engage with scholarly research. Understanding the historical and textual context of the Bible can deepen one’s appreciation for its message and help navigate textual variations.

5. Does the removal of Matthew 17:21 undermine the authority of the Bible?

No, the removal of Matthew 17:21 does not undermine the authority of the Bible. The Bible remains a sacred text that has shaped the beliefs and practices of millions of people worldwide. The removal of certain verses is a result of scholarly analysis and does not diminish the overall reliability of the Bible.

6. Can Christians still practice prayer and fasting without Matthew 17:21?

Absolutely. The teachings on prayer and fasting in the Bible extend beyond a single verse. Christians can still engage in these spiritual disciplines as a means of drawing closer to God, seeking guidance, and deepening their faith.

Conclusion

The removal of Matthew 17:21 from some modern translations of the Bible is a result of careful textual analysis and consideration of manuscript evidence. While this omission may raise theological questions and impact the emphasis on prayer and fasting, the broader teachings on these spiritual disciplines remain intact in other parts of the Bible. Christians are encouraged to approach the study of the Bible with an open mind, recognizing that textual variations do not undermine the overall authority and message of the sacred text.

Posted in Why