1 JOHN 2:4 h` avlh,qeia {A} Instead of “the truth,” several witnesses (Y 436 945 1505 _al_) weaken the statement by reading “truth”; on the other hand, a and a few other witnesses strengthen it by expanding to read “the truth of God.”... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:6 @ou[twj# {C} The external evidence for and against the presence of ou[twj is rather evenly divided (a C Y 81 _al_ for; A B 33 2464* _al_ against). From a transcriptional point of view, the word might have been accidentally omitted following auvto,j. On the other hand, it might have been... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:7 avgaphtoi, Instead of avgaphtoi, (strongly supported by a A B C P vg syrp, h copsa, bo arm _al_) the Textus Receptus, following K L and most minuscules, reads avdelfoi,. The latter word, which the author of 1 John almost never uses in the vocative (only in 1 John 3:13), crept into the B... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:14 e;graya (1) {A} Scribes of many of the later manuscripts (followed by the Textus Receptus) absent-mindedly wrote gra,fw in accord with the three previous instances of the present tense.... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:17 aivw/na At the close of the verse several versional and patristic witnesses expand the text by adding the gloss “just as God [or, that (one), copsa] abides for ever” (vgmss (copsa) Cyprian Lucifer Augustine). There is no Greek authority for the expansion (cf. 1 John 5:7-8).... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:18 o[ti (1) {B} The reading that best explains the origin of the other readings appears to be o[ti, which is strongly supported by a* B C Y 1739 _al_. The conjunction is lacking in a few witnesses (A L 1881 _al_), thus making a more direct statement. The definite article, which is not pre... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:20 pa,ntej {B} A majority of the Committee, understanding the passage to be directed against the claims of a few to possess esoteric knowledge, adopted the reading pa,ntej, read by a B P 398 1838 1852 copsa Jerome Hesychius. The reading pa,nta, which is widely supported by A C K 33 614 17... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:23 o` o`mologw/n … e;cei Because of homoeoteleuton (to.n pate,ra e;cei … to.n pate,ra e;cei), K L and most minuscules, followed by the Textus Receptus, have accidentally omitted the second part of the verse (o` o`mologw/n … e;cei). The words, however, belong to the original text, being st... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:25 h`mi/n {A} The external evidence supporting h`mi/n is extensive and diversified, including a A C 81 614 1739 _Byz Lect_ it65 vg syrp, h copsa, bo arm. A few witnesses (B 69* 241 451 1241 1881 2127 ith) read u`mi/n, which is either the result of scribal confusion between h and u, or a d... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 2:27 to. auvtou/ Instead of to. auvtou/, which is strongly supported by a B C P about twenty minuscules vg syrh copsa arm eth Athanasius Augustine _al,_ the Textus Receptus, following A K L most minuscules copbo Theophylact _al,_ reads to. auvto,. The latter construction (o` auvto,j), which... [ Continue Reading ]