I am inclined to think that the editions have it
right, that MENOUSAN came first, and ENOIKOUSAN later.
Some points to think about:
1, with the preposition EN following as it does in
all MSS, ENOIKOUSAN is redundant
2. Perhaps scribes and readers of John are so used
to hearing John use the word MENW as meaning "indwelling," or abiding IN
something, so that some uncounsciously replaced MENOUSAN with
3, The Coptic has OUSAN. It would be
interesting to look for how the Coptic translates the Greek word MENW in all
other instances of it.
4. Could the variants MENOUSAN and ENOIKOUSAN
both be secondary clarifications of an original OUSAN?
5. With OUSAN in the continuous aspect, the meaning
is really close to the same as the MENOUSAN- continuing to be in us. staying in
us, abiding in us.
David Robert Palmer
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 5:34
Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: 2
for making your notes on 2 John available.
For the alternate readings
of MENOUSAN in 2 John 2
(i.e., ENOIKOUSAN, OUSAN, or [omit]), what is the
likely order of their introduction into the manuscript
were they (or some of them) introduced
independently of one another in