Spirit or Light? Ephesians 5:9

It is to be expected that when we write polemically, we try to put our own position in the best light. Some Bible translations write their text-critical notes to put their position in the best light. While I expect them to believe what they produce, nevertheless it seems that text-critical notes should be aimed more at education than disputation. What am I talking about?

This is often seen in comments on Mark 16:9-20, where it is pointed out that this text is “not in the oldest and best manuscripts.” They most often do not clarify they are only talking about two manuscripts, both of which have quirks at the end of Mark. See, for example, Odd Features at the Ending of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus.

This type of diversion can be seen in the text-critical note on Ephesians 5:9 in the New English Translation (NET) by Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. The traditional reading is “Spirit,” while most modern translations have “light” instead

• NET: for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness, and truth—
• KJV: for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;

The Textus Receptus and Critical Texts differ in one word.

• CT: ὁ γὰρ καρπὸς τοῦ φωτὸς ἐν πάσῃ ἀγαθωσύνῃ καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ
• TR: ὁ γὰρ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματος ἐν πάσῃ ἀγαθωσύνῃ καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ

Excerpted from the NET Bible®:

Ephesians 5:9 tc Several mss (P⁴⁶ D² Ψ 1175* 1505 M) have πνεύματος (pneumatos, “Spirit”) instead of φωτός (phōtos, “light”) ... Further, the external evidence for φωτός is quite compelling (P⁴⁹ א A B D* F G P 33 81 1175^c 1739 1881 2464 latt co).

Notice how that, according to the NET, “Several mss” have “Spirit” (6 are listed), but the “external evidence for φωτός is quite compelling” – and over twice as many MSS are listed in support of that reading. This could impress the uninitiated that the majority of manuscripts support the reading φωτός/light. Nevertheless, the majority of extant manuscripts actually support the traditional reading – πνεύματος/Spirit. See, for example, the Majority Text of Robinson-Pierpont, which agrees with the Textus Receptus:

ὁ γὰρ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματος ἐν πάσῃ ἀγαθωσύνῃ καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ —

In my opinion, Critical Text advocates often find their tales in cracks and try to skew the evidence polemically toward their viewpoint rather than educationally pointing out the facts for readers to consider and make a choice. Again, I am not opposed to disputation in polemical fields of discussion. Nevertheless, text-critical notes in Bibles are not the place for such sleight-of-hand magic tricks!