--- In textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...> wrote:
> On the ETC blog the variant ESTAI/ESTIN in Jo 14:17 came up and I revisited
> the question of P75 again.
> Have a look here:
> <http://www-user. uni-bremen. de/~wie/TCG/ prob/Jo-14- 17-P75.pdf>
Hello, Group! I'm new here. I've reviewed all of your messages during the past several weeks, but this is my first contribution.
Dr. Willker: I'm new here and while I agree with your conclusion on the link you provided, I don't see the importance to the average Bible reader of knowing the exact verb recorded in P75. Jesus' point in John14:17 appears clear even without a futuristic "he will be" or "he shall be" verb (cp., e.g., TEV and Weymouth, and my rendering of he is in and with you today (present tense in case the verb is ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½) and tomorrow(future tense in case the verb is ÎµÏƒÏ„Î±Î¹).
I see that Strong translated the disputed verb as ÎµÏƒÎ¿Î¼Î±Î¹ (1 pers sing fut mid ind; see Strong's #G2071), perhaps because he thought Jesus was speaking to only Philip in 14:8-21? I see, too, that W&H preferred ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½ (3 pers sing pres act ind based on P66*, 03, and speculated inP75) while TR and NA show ÎµÏƒÏ„Î±Î¹ (3 pers sing futmid ind based on P66c,01, and 02).
For those readers who haven't yet seen it, the NET Bible translators commented, in part:
"Some early and important witnesses … have ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½ … instead of ÎµÏƒÏ„Î±Î¹ … here, while other weighty witnesses (… as well as several versions and fathers), read the future tense. When one considers transcriptional evidence, ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½ is the more difficult reading and better explains the rise of the future tense reading, but it must be noted that both Ì66and D were corrected from the present tense to the future. If ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½ were the original reading, one would expect a few manuscripts to be corrected to read the present when they originally read the future, but that is not the case. When one considers what the author would have written, the future is on much stronger ground. The immediate context(both in 14:16 and in the chapter as a whole) points to the future, and the theology of the book regards the advent of the Spirit as a decidedly future event (see, e.g., 7:39 and 16:7). The present tense could have arisen from an error of sight on the part of some scribes or more likely from an error of thought as scribes reflected upon the present role of the Spirit. Although a decision is difficult, the future tense is most likely authentic….."
An interesting puzzle for the theologian? Yes. Important to the average Bible reader's understanding of Jesus` words in John 14:17? With respects, not so much.