The overall Greek manuscript evidence for the Acts of the Apostles displays the most significant textual variation of any New Testament book. For over two hundred years, textual critics have sought to resolve these difficulties. Building upon the excellent work of Editio Critica Maior 2017 (an update to NA28), this volume tackles these concerns and seeks to improve the text of Acts still further. All data sets were considered (e.g., the Byzantine/mainstream tradition was not ignored). Uniquely, a more primitive form of the "Western" tradition than the one represented by Codex D was used as a basis of comparison. Finally, no regionally authorized ancient formal recensions were assumed. The book answers the following questions. How can a new text-critical canon, inspired by manuscript 614, help the process? Was Luke the author of two significantly different editions of Acts, e.g., one like Codex B (Alexandrian tradition) and one like Codex D ("Western" tradition)? Which of the three main traditions preserves the most accurate text? How accurate is the Editio Critica Maior? Are there clear and justifiable improvements to be made? Finally, what do the three great textual traditions each contribute toward the goal of best approximating Luke's original wording?
