JOHN 2:3 u`sterh,santoj oi;nou Several witnesses (a* ita, b, ff2, j, r syrhmg eth) paraphrase by reading oi=non ouvk ei=con( o[ti sunetele,sqh o` oi=noj tou/ ga,mou\ ei=ta (“They had no wine, because the wine of the wedding feast had been used up; then …”). Two Old Latin witnesses (ite, l) describe... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 2:10 mequsqw/sin The Textus Receptus (following ac A X G D Q L P and many other witnesses) makes a smoother reading by adding to,te. The shorter reading adopted for the text is decisively supported by î66, 75 a* B L 083 0141 57 248 573 579 1010 1279 ù185 ita, e, ff2, l, q syrpal copsa, bo eth... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 2:12 kai. h` mh,thr auvtou/ kai. oi` avdelfoi. @auvtou/# kai. oi` maqhtai. auvtou/ {C} The manuscripts present many differences as to the sequence of words as well as the omission of one or more words. The auvtou/ following avdelfoi, is lacking in î66*, 75 B Y 0162; the auvtou/ following maqht... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 2:15 frage,llion {B} Several witnesses, including the two oldest (î66, 75 L Wsupp X 0162 ¦1 33 565 _al_), prefix w`j. If this word had been present in the original text, there is no good reason that would account for its having been omitted from the other witnesses. On the other hand, it is p... [ Continue Reading ]
JOHN 2:24 auvto,n (1) {C} In place of the first auvto,n, many witnesses clarify the sense by writing e`auto,n (î66 a2 Ac Wsupp Q Y _al_). Although the word was omitted (probably accidentally) by a few copyists, the Committee judged that there was sufficiently weighty support (a* A* B L 700 _al_) t... [ Continue Reading ]