What meaneth this?

[prism]

Luke 16:9 KJV
And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

Why does it say ...'when ye fail'?

 

[John Bauer]

Because that is what the Greek text says in the Textus Receptus. It reads ἐκλίπητε—a second person plural verb, “when you fail” or “when you come to an end.”

Modern translations usually follow a different reading, ἐκλίπῃ—a third person singular verb, “when it fails”—referring to the mammon or worldly wealth just mentioned. This is the form found in the modern critical text (e.g., NA28). It is likely the original reading because it fits the immediate flow more naturally: The nearest plausible antecedent is μαμωνᾶ (“mammon,” wealth), so the sense becomes, “Use unrighteous mammon well, so that when it fails …” That coheres tightly with the parable’s emphasis on the transience of wealth.

So the verse means something like this: Use passing wealth now in acts of faithful stewardship and mercy, for ends that outlast this world. When money fails—as it certainly will—what will remain is not your balance sheet but the eternal significance of having served God rather than mammon.

That is the moral force of the passage: Worldly people plan intelligently for temporal survival; believers should show at least as much prudence with respect to eternal ends.

 

[makesends]

Luke 16:9 KJV
And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

Why does it say ...'when ye fail'?

Why useth thou the King's English?

New International Version
I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.

English Standard Version
And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.

Berean Literal Bible
And I say to you⁺, make friends for yourselves by the mammon of unrighteousness, so that when it fails, they might receive you⁺ into the eternal dwellings.

NASB 1995
“And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by means of the wealth of unrighteousness, so that when it fails, they will receive you into the eternal dwellings.

 

[prism]

Why useth thou the King's English?

I suppose I could use the NKJV...
Luke 16:9 NKJV
"And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home.

Either way it's a choice between CT (allegedly earlier) but with fewer attestations, or the Textus Receptus (later, but more attestations). So I chose the one I grew up on, being more familiar. Comprendeth thou this?

 

[John Bauer]

I suppose I could use the NKJV...
Luke 16:9 NKJV
"And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home.

Either way it's a choice between CT (allegedly earlier) but with fewer attestations, or the Textus Receptus (later, but more attestations). So I chose the one I grew up on, being more familiar. Comprendeth thou this?

To prefer the translation one grew up on is understandable. Familiarity is a legitimate psychological reason. However, to be clear, that’s an autobiographical fact, not a textual argument. An appeal to personal familiarity does not demonstrate superior textual accuracy, which is the concern of those who affirm sola scriptura.

And while it is rhetorically effective to frame it as a choice between early-but-few versus late-but-many, it is nevertheless imprecise and begins to lose force the moment anyone asks, “Many what?” Because the answer is, “Later manuscripts in the broader Byzantine or majority stream.” The Textus Receptus as a printed edition reaches back to the 1516 Greek New Testament produced by Erasmus, which was not itself based on “many” manuscripts (Andrews 2025). Erasmus used the manuscripts available to him, and those were few—and late, and not very good. In some places he even had to rely on the Latin tradition where his Greek evidence was lacking. (You should investigate how the Comma Johanneum entered the text, which Erasmus didn’t include in his first two editions.)

The true question remaineth whether the Textus Receptus doth more faithfully preserve the original reading than the modern Critical Text, which is furnished with manuscript evidence both more ancient and more ample. To style the critical text as “allegedly earlier,” and to speak of the Textus Receptus as though it had “more attestations,” serveth only to obscure the true issue and the actual history of the printed Textus Receptus.

 

[prism]

The true question remaineth whether the Textus Receptus doth more faithfully preserve the original reading than the modern Critical Text, which is furnished with manuscript evidence both more ancient and more ample. To style the critical text as “allegedly earlier,” and to speak of the Textus Receptus as though it had “more attestations,” serveth only to obscure the true issue and the actual history of the printed Textus Receptus.

Yes the CT is earlier but has less MSS evidence behind it than the TR. Even many of the Early Church Fathers quotes coincide with the Greek text corresponding to the TR