2018 Greek Reading Plan (Byzantine)

I found this Greek reading plan a few years ago over at Lee Iron’s site, but it was a pdf and needed to be updated each year. Further, I read the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine text and it (rightly!) places the Catholic Epistles immediately after Acts, and not the Pauline epistles.

So, for that tiny group out there who hopes to read through the Greek NT in 2018 following the old canonical order, here’s a plan to print out and check off as you go:

Greek NT Reading Plan-Byzantine (2018)

3 thoughts on “2018 Greek Reading Plan (Byzantine)”

    1. Here’s what they say in the preface:

      “According to the “canonical order,” the New Testament books are grouped as follows: Gospels, Acts and General Epistles, Pauline Epistles, and Revelation. The individual books within each category follow the familiar order, except that in the Pauline Epistles, Hebrews stands between Second Thessalonians and First Timothy, intentionally separating Paul’s local church epistles from those written to individuals” (xvii).

      which they footnote with this:

      “William H. P. Hatch, “The Position of Hebrews in the Canon of the New Testament,” HTR 29 (1936) 133-151. The canonical order Second Thessalonians-Hebrews-First Timothy is discussed on 136-143. Hatch shows that this order is found among early and geographically diverse Greek manuscripts, fathers, and versions, and was retained among some manuscripts over many centuries. Hatch termed this order “Alexandrian,” due to his views regarding textual development. The secondary “Western” (or early Latin) order (which is more familiar to the modern reader) was termed “Byzantine” by Hatch (143, 149-150), due to its presence in later Byzantine manuscripts that had adopted the Western usage. The editors suggest, on the contrary, that Hatch’s data support the early Greek canonical order as original and authentically “Byzantine.” Clearly, the earliest Greek canonical order differed from the early Western tradition; only much later did Byzantine Greek manuscripts adopt the Western order.

      So go check out Hatch.


      1. Cool. I like to think that Paul wrote it myself. John Owen somewhere argued that Hebrews is the best candidate for the letter that Peter says Paul wrote to the churches of Asia Minor (2 Pet 3:15). All the other letters of Paul are addressed to specific churches, not to a general audience of all the churches in Asia Minor. And all the other catholic epistles are attributed to authors other than Paul. Hebrews is all that’s left. Sounds convincing to me. I don’t find arguments on the basis of “style” at all convincing because my own style varies often enough—you feel me, yo? The stylistic argument is also just the sort of argument we reject when defending the single authorship of Isaiah. It’s funny to me how we can do that so zealously and then quickly give up Hebrews. It’s like an attempted peace-offering. “Here, we’ll give you Paul if we can keep Isaiah.”

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s