Eph 5:5 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]654-655
Τοῦτο γὰρ ἔστε γινώσκοντες, ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος, ἢ ἀκάθαρτος, ἢ πλεονέκτης, ὅς ἐστιν εἰδωλολάτρης, οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ.
Eph 5:5 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]
τουτο γαρ ϊστε γινωσκοντες οτι πας πορνος η ακαθαρτος η πλεονεκτης ο εστιν ειδωλολατρης ουκ εχει κληρονομιαν εν τη βασιλεια του χυ και θυ
Eph 5:5 [Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D VIII) (A02) (5th century)]
Eph 5:5 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]
Eph 5:5 [Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus (Grec 9) (C04) (5th century)]
Eph 5:5 [Codex Claromontanus (Grec 107) (D06) (5th century)]
Critical Apparatus :
(1) εστε : Elzevir
(2) ιστε : א
(3) ος : Elzevir
(4) ο : א
A Textual Commentary On Ephesians 5:5
(a) This subject, however, has of late acquired additional in terest from the Controversy occasioned by a work of Mr. Granville Sharp’s. This gentleman contends, that such phrases in the N. T. as τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ ought to be interpreted of one individual, so as to afford evidence of our Saviour’s Divinity ; and that such had been the rendering of many of our older English Versions. Beza had also strenuously sup ported the same opinion ; as did many other Critics. The interpretation maintained by Mr. Sharp became the more probable from being sanctioned by the excellent Editor of Danes’s Miscellanea Critica, the present Bishop of St. David’s. The same interpretation was also powerfully confirm ed by the elaborate researches of Mr. Wordsworth, who has proved that most of the disputed texts were so understood by the Fathers. If any thing under this head remained to be done, it was to show that the same form of expression in the Classical Writers required a similar explanation , and also to investigate the principle of the Canon, and to ascertain its limitations : this I have attempted in some of the following pages.
(Thomas F. Middleton, The Doctrine of the Greek Article; applied to the criticism and the illustration of the New Testament, p. xi)