Why Is Matthew 17 21 Missing

Why is Matthew 17:21 Missing? Exploring the Textual Variant

The question of a missing verse in Matthew 17:21 is a fascinating one that delves into the complexities of biblical textual criticism. There's no single, universally accepted "missing verse" in Matthew 17:21, but rather a significant textual variant that appears in some ancient manuscripts but not others. This article explores the different readings, their historical context, and the reasons behind the discrepancy. Understanding this variance helps illuminate the processes involved in establishing the biblical text we read today.

The Varying Readings

The key difference lies in whether or not a particular sentence appears after verse 20. Most modern translations (like the NIV, ESV, and NRSV) do not include this additional sentence. However, some older manuscripts and translations do include a verse, often numbered 17:21, which typically reads something along the lines of, "But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting." This statement, usually attributed to Jesus, follows the account of the disciples' failure to heal the epileptic boy.

The Significance of Textual Variants

It's crucial to understand that textual variants are common in ancient manuscripts. The Bible wasn't originally written with a standardized, universally agreed-upon text. Early copies were hand-copied, and variations inevitably crept in—some due to unintentional scribal errors, others perhaps through deliberate alterations. Textual criticism is the scholarly discipline dedicated to analyzing these variants to determine the most likely original reading.

Why the Discrepancy? Possible Explanations:

Several explanations have been proposed for the presence or absence of the disputed verse (Matthew 17:21):

• Scribal Error: A simple copying mistake could have resulted in the omission or addition of the phrase. Ancient scribes, working without the benefit of modern tools, were prone to errors. The addition might have arisen from a marginal note or a similar passage being incorporated into the main text. The omission could have been due to a simple oversight or accidental skipping of a line.

• Harmonization: Some scholars suggest the verse was added to harmonize Matthew's Gospel with Mark's account of similar events. The addition could be a later attempt to create consistency across the Gospels.

• Theological Emphasis: The verse's content – emphasizing the power of prayer and fasting – might have been added by a scribe who wished to highlight the importance of these spiritual disciplines. Conversely, its omission could reflect a different theological emphasis.

How Scholars Determine the Most Likely Reading:

Scholars utilize various criteria to assess the reliability of different manuscript readings:

• Age of the Manuscripts: Older manuscripts are generally considered more reliable, reflecting a closer proximity to the original text.

• Geographical Distribution: The wider geographical distribution of a particular reading can point towards its greater authority.

• Internal Consistency: A reading that aligns more closely with the overall style and theology of the Gospel writer is often preferred.

Conclusion:

The absence or presence of Matthew 17:21 isn't a matter of a lost verse, but a testament to the dynamic process of biblical textual transmission. The variant readings highlight the inherent challenges in reconstructing ancient texts. While the verse may be absent from many modern translations, studying the textual variations offers valuable insights into the history of the biblical text and the careful scholarly work involved in producing the versions we read today. The focus should always remain on understanding the broader context of the Gospel narrative and the overall message of Jesus's teachings.