JOHN 13:2 ginome,nou {B} This verse contains two serious textual problems. The first involves but a single letter: dei,pnou genome,nou is generally taken to mean “supper being ended” (AV), whereas dei,pnou ginome,nou means “during supper” (NRSV). The former reading is by far the more difficult, for... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 13:10 ouvk e;cei crei,an eiv mh. tou.j po,daj ni,yasqai {B} The rearrangement of ouvk e;cei crei,an to ouv crei,an e;cei (C3 D E* K L G D Q ¦13 892 _al_) seems to have been made in the interest of euphony. Instead of eiv mh, the Textus Receptus (following C3 E* D ¦1 28 700 _al_) substitutes h;... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 13:18 mou {C} Although metV evmou/ (î66 a A D K W D Q P Y ¦1 ¦13 28 33 700 it vg syrs, p, h, pal goth arm geo _al_) is much more widely attested than mou (B C L 892 1071 1230 copsa eth _al_), which is also the reading of the Septuagint, a majority of the Committee preferred the latter reading... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 13:26 ba,yw to. ywmi,on kai. dw,sw auvtw|/ {C} It is more likely that scribal alteration went from the simple (dw,sw) to the compound verb (evpidw,sw), which John uses nowhere else. Furthermore, the Semitic, paratactic style of two finite verbs connected by kai, is typically Johannine, whereas... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 13:32 @eiv o` qeo.j evdoxa,sqh evn auvtw|/# {C} Normally the age and range of the witnesses that support the shorter text (î66 a* B C* D L W X P ¦1 _al_) would seem to create a presumption that the clause eiv o` qeo.j evdoxa,sqh evn auvtw|/ is a secondary intrusion into such witnesses as ac A... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 13:37 Ku,rie {A} Ku,rie, which is absent from a* 33 565 vg syrs copsams, bomss, may be regarded as an accretion in the other witnesses by assimilation to ver. John 13:36. On the other hand, however, in view of early and widespread manuscript support for the word, a majority of the Committee vo... [ Continue Reading ]