# Acts 2:1; where does Beza discuss this variant?



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 14, 2011)

Here's a question for Greek scholars (not me), the Westminster assembly in contending with the congregationalist members adduce Acts 2:1, and say the following:Reason 2. ‘But afterwards (Acts 2:1) another meeting of theirs is expressed in the same words, “They were all met with one accord,”’ etc.​To which we answer still, that it is not proved that they all there mentioned were “all the church.” Beza said that in two ancient copies he finds _tô Apostolô_, and brings probable reasons why they “all” should be meant of the apostles only. ​In what work would Beza discuss this? I have looked at _Annotationes_, and though I don't really read Latin, that didn't look like it. The Greek is not given for the alternate at least. Does Beza have a commentary on the book of Acts? Also, the transliteration may be off. Below is the text of the Greek.
View attachment 2201


----------



## Wayne (Aug 14, 2011)

In the critical apparatus for the UBS GNT (2d ed., Aland & Black), there are no variants shown for verse 1.

That would lead me to think that Beza is either referring to a very obscure variant, or more likely, that he had in mind some commentary.

Or perhaps a Bible with annotations. Here is the Geneva Bible on Acts 1:26-2:1



> 26 Then they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was by a common consent counted with the eleven Apostles.
> 
> Acts 2
> *2* The Apostles *4* filled with the holy Ghost *8* speak with divers tongues; *12* They are thought to be drunk, *15* but Peter disproveth that. *34* He teacheth that Christ is Messiah; *37* And seeing the hearers astonied, *38* he exhorteth them to repentance.
> ...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 14, 2011)

Thanks Wayne. I note Gill says Beza adduces two MS for the variant also. I haven't found much else.


----------



## Prufrock (Aug 14, 2011)

Chris, my guess is you looked at a printing which only has the short annotations, and not the longer comments. When he gets to the "omnes" in his text, he states that two older manuscripts had "hoi apostoloi" added, and he notes that such would, at least, cohere with the end of the previous chapter. If you want to look up an exact reference, you'll find it addressed in the text which begins with "in duobus vetustis codicibus additum est...". I looked it up in the 1642 printing of his NT, but I'm sure the text will be the same in other editions.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 14, 2011)

Many thanks Paul; I knew that once but get confused with all the editions. Is there something funky going on with the st in apostoloi? A two letter combo maybe for the Greek?


----------

