1 JOHN 5:1 @kai.# to,n {C} On the one hand, the absence of kai, in B Y 048 33 62 326 2298 itr vg copsa Speculum _al_ may be the result of accidental oversight; on the other hand, the presence of kai, in a A K P 049 81 614 1739 most minuscules syrp, h copbo arm eth _al_ may well be a scribal emenda... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:2 poiw/men {B} The expression ta.j evntola.j auvtou/ poiw/men (B Y (33 poiou/men) 81 614 1739 itr vg syrp, h copsa, bo arm eth _al_) is extremely rare in the New Testament (elsewhere only in the inferior text of Revelation 22:14). In a K L P and most minuscules the verb is replaced by the... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:6 ai[matoj {A} The original reading appears to be ai[matoj, which is well supported by a variety of witnesses, including representatives of both the Alexandrian and the Western types of text (B Y 1739* itr vg syrp Tertullian _al_). Copyists who recalled John 3:5 (evx u[datoj kai. pneu,mato... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:7-8 marturou/ntej( 8 to. pneu/ma kai. to. u[dwr kai. to. ai-ma {A} After marturou/ntej the Textus Receptus adds the following: evn tw|/ ouvranw|/( o` Path,r( o` Lo,goj( kai. to. {Agion Pneu/ma\ kai. ou-toi oi` trei/j e[n eivsi. (8) kai. trei/j eivsin oi` marturou/ntej evn th|/ gh|/. That... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:10 evn e`autw|/ {B} On the basis of a Y 049 88 1739 _al_ a majority of the Committee preferred e`autw|/, a reading that the minority regarded as a secondary development from auvtw|/ understood in a reflexive sense.... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:13 u`mi/n After u`mi/n the Textus Receptus, following K L P most minuscules, reads toi/j pisteu,ousin eivj to. o;noma tou/ ui`ou/ tou/ qeou/( i[na eivdh/te o[ti zwh.n e;cete aivw,nion( kai. i[na pisteu,hte eivj to. o;noma tou/ ui`ou/ tou/ qeou/. Although one could argue that the shorter re... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:17 ouv {A} The negative ouv, which is strongly attested, is lacking in several Greek and versional witnesses, probably for dogmatic reasons.... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:18 o` gennhqei.j evk {A} The ambiguity of reference intended by the words o` gennhqei.j evk tou/ qeou/ (a reading strongly attested by witnesses of all textual types) prompted copyists to introduce one or another change in the interest of clarification of meaning. (See also the following... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:20 h[kei After o` ui`o.j tou/ qeou/ h[kei several Latin witnesses (vgmss Julianus of Toledo) add, without Greek authority, the following doctrinal expansion: _et carnum induit nostri causa et passus est et resurrexit a mortuis; adsumpsit nos et dedit…_ (“[The Son of God has come] and was... [ Continue Reading ]
1 JOHN 5:21 eivdw,lwn) {A} After eivdw,lwn the Textus Receptus, following K L P 81 614 _Byz Lect,_ reads avmh,n, a common liturgical addition. The earlier text, without avmh,n, is strongly supported by the best Alexandrian and Western witnesses (a A B 33 itr vg Speculum _al_). -------------------... [ Continue Reading ]