Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

tc-list re: 1 Jn 4:3

Expand Messages
  • M A Robinson
    Just to make the contrast a little more proper, the TR should not be the standard of comparison against WH; rather BYZ versus NA27. Not that there is any
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 2, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      Just to make the contrast a little more proper, the TR should not be the
      standard of comparison against WH; rather BYZ versus NA27. Not that
      there is any difference between WH and NA27 (as normal); but BYZ as R/P
      or H/F edited it differs from the TR in omitting (with K pm) TON ante
      IHSOUN (and of course no brackets in the verse):

      1Jo 4:3 BYZ
      KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI IHSOUN CRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA
      EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTICRISTOU O AKHKOATE
      OTI ERCETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH

      1Jo 4:3 NA27
      KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
      EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTICRISTOU O AKHKOATE
      OTI ERCETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH

      Now to the other point:

      On Mon, 02 Nov 1998 13:43:44 +0000 Jim West <jwest@...> writes:
      >At 01:20 PM 11/2/98 -0500, you wrote:

      >Yuri- the answer seems simple- the RSV gives the text attested in the
      >best and oldest mss whereas the KJV and the other versions have expanded

      >the text (based, to be sure, on expansions in various Greek mss).

      I know your principles, Jim, and you are continuing to act in accordance
      with them.
      But it would be nice to stop blaming the KJV for the Byzantine readings
      :-)

      Also it would probably be more helpful to at least acknowledge the other
      more obvious possibility, namely that the phrase CRISTON EN SARKI
      ELHLUQOTA _could_ simply have been omitted in a _very_ small minority of
      MSS (A B 323 945 1241 1739 pc it-r vg cop Ir-lat Or) by two simultaneous
      (or nearly so) stages of homoioteleuton which could easily have happened
      during the copying process in a small number of witnesses which may have
      been less-than-careful at this point.

      Stage 1 -- omit CRISTON by homoioteleuton IN XN -> IN (cf. not only the
      previous small group of witnesses at that point, but also Psi 33 81 630
      1505 pc which read only IHSOUN, but left the other longer reading in
      place); stage 2 --accompany this by the homoioteleuton from E1 to E3
      causing EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA EK to leave only EK as a result.

      Since even other witnesses of the same texttypes as those supporting NA27
      here do not side with the shorter variant in this unit, the chance of
      error as the primary cause should not be minimized or overlooked.

      As for "Byzantine" or other scribal expansion, I would ask why ? You
      wrote,

      >This is one of those places where the various scribes just tried to
      >make clear something they perceived as unclear.

      The expansion is already present and quite "clear" for the entire context
      in verse 2, so why would you think the "various scribes" (i.e. nearly all
      of them, including "early" ones) would think it necessary to clarify
      further in the verse immediately following?

      >those who, like the proto-gnostics- deny the authenticity
      >of the incarnation are not to be believed... that is, it seems to me,
      John's
      >point plain and simple

      Exactly, and that is my point. The textual variant arose primarily by
      accident; if deliberate it could only be argued that, since the context
      was already plain, the phrase was stylistically removed to eliminate a
      redundancy (but I do not make that line of argument in a case where error
      is so likely and where so few witnesses agree in support of such a
      reading).

      ==============================================================
      Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D.
      Professor of Greek and New Testament
      Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
      Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA

      ___________________________________________________________________
      You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
      Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
      or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.