John 8:1 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]336
Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν.
MSS: E (f275v), G (f214vc2), K (f225r), M (f224vc1)
John 8:1 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]q80f6rc1
OMITTED. John 7:53-John 8:12
MSS: א, B, L (f220r), X (f19rc1), Y (f267v|528)
John 8:1 [Codex Alexandrinus (A02) (5th century)]
2 leaves missing. John 6:50–John 8:52
John 8:1 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]1361c3
OMITTED. John 7:53-John 8:12
John 8:1 [Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (D05) (5th century)]133v|236
Ιης δε επορευθη εις το ορος των ελαιων·
Critical Apparatus :
(1) John 8:1 : D, E, G, K, M, Stephanus , Beza, Elzevir, [Tischendorf], [von Soden]
(2) OMIT John 8:1 : א, B, L, W, X, Y※, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott & Hort, Weiss,
A Textual Commentary On John 8:1
(a) But Theodore Beza did not suppose that a text ought to be traditionally adopted, and then, as it were, stereotyped : his notes gave him the opportunity for expressing his opinions ; and he thus proved that if his attention were properly directed to ancient evidence on a passage, he so weighed it as to consider that it ought to prevail. Thus the passage in John viii. 1—12, the omission of which by critical editors has seemed to some such a proof of temerity, or of want of reverence for Holy Scripture, was differently regarded by Beza : he states the manner in which various ancient writers knew nothing about it, and the great variation in MSS. ; he then concludes thus : “As far as I am concerned, I do not conceal that I justly regard as suspected what the ancients with such consent either rejected or did not know of. Also such a variety in the reading causes me to doubt the fidelity of the whole of that narration.” *
* Ad me quidem quod attinet, non dissimulo mihi meritò suspectum esse quod veteres illi tanto consensu vel rejecerunt vel ignorarunt. Tanta denique lectionis varietas facit ut de totius istius narrationis fide dubitem.
(S. P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 34)