John 9:30

John 9:30 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]345
Ἀπεκρίθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· Ἐν γὰρ τούτῳ θαυμαστόν ἐστιν, ὅτι ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε πόθεν ἐστί, καὶ ἀνέῳξέ μου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς.

John 9:30 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]q80f7rc3
Απεκριθη ο ανθρωπος και ειπεν αυτοις· εν τουτω γαρ το θαυμαστο- εστιν · οτι ϋμεις ουκ οιδαται ποθεν εστιν και ηνοιξε- μου τους οφθαλμους·

John 9:30 [Codex Alexandrinus (A02) (5th century)]47vc1
απεκριθη Ο ανος και ειπεν αυτοις εν γαρ τουτω θαυμαστον εστιν οτι ϋμεις ουκ οιδατε ποθε- εστιν· και ανεωξεν μου τους οφθαλμους

MSS: A, ℓ1 (f78r-v)

John 9:30 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]1364c3
Απεκριθη ο ανθρωπος και ειπεν αυτοις εν τουτω γαρ θαυμαστον εστιν οτι ϋμεις ουκ οιδατε ποθεν εστι- και ηνοιξεν μου τους οφθαλμους

John 9:30 [Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (D05) (5th century)]141v/252
Απεκριθη ο ανθρωπος και ειπεν εν τουτω ουν θαυμαστον εστιν οτι ϋμεις ουκ οιδατε ποθεν <εσ>τιν και ηνυξε μου τους οφθαλμους·

John 9:30 [Codex Washingtonianus (W032) (5th century)]152
Απεκριθη ο ανος και ειπεν αυτοις εν τουτω γαρ θαυμαστο- εστιν οτι ὑμεις ουκ οιδατε ποθεν εστι- και ηνεωξεν μου τους οφθαλμους·

Critical Apparatus :

(1) ειπεν αυτοις : א, A, B, W, ℓ1, ℓ339, ℓ1086
(2) OMIT αυτοις : D

(3) γαρ τουτω : A, ℓ1,
(4) γαρ τουτο : ℓ339, ℓ1086
(5) τουτω γαρ : א, B, W
(6) τουτω ουν : D

(7) οιδατε : A, B, D, W, ℓ1, ℓ339, ℓ1086
(8) οιδαται : א

(9) εστι : ℓ339
(10) εστιν : א, A, B, D1, W, ℓ1, ℓ1086
(11) τιν : D*

(12) ανεωξε : ℓ339
(13) ανεωξεν : A, ℓ1, ℓ1086
(14) ηνεωξεν : W
(15) ηνοιξεν : א, B
(16) ηνυξε : D

 

 

A Textual Commentary On John 9:30

(a) MOVABLE FINAL LETTERS – In the earlier editions the rules of the grammarians in reference to ν ἐφελκυστικόν were followed. These, however, were found to be so seldom sustained by the manuscripts , that at present Tischendorf has retained ν ἐφελκυστικόν before every consonant without exception, and has carried out this rule consistently, with very few exceptions, throughout the N. T. [i.e. in ed. 7, cf. Prol. p. liii ; in ed. 8 he has dropped it in several cases , following the best MSS. ; see the note below.] Lachmann (in his large edition) also writes it before all the consonants ; yet in particular cases, following the MSS., he has not admitted it ; these, however, almost disappear in the multitude that remain : e.g. Matt. vi. 24 ; John ix . 30, 32 ; Acts ii. 6, 22, 40 ; vii. 25 ; ix. 22 ; x. 40 ; xii. 6 ; xxi . 33 ; Rom. ii. 8 ; Rev. xix. 17 ; Luke xvii . 29 , etc.¹
The numeral εἴκοσι appears everywhere, even at the end of a sentence and before a vowel (Acts i . 15 [ yet Treg . –σιν]), without ν ἐφελκυστικόν. So too in the O. T., see Tdf’s. ed. praef. p. xxxiv. (ed. 4 ; cf. N. T. ed. 7, p. liv.]. Precisely the same procedure occurs in connection with οὕτως, so that the other form οὕτω is at present almost completely banished from the text (cf. Tdf. ed. 7, p. liii]. There are rare exceptions again in Lchm. ; as, Phil. iii. 17 ; Acts xxiii  11 ; Rom. i. 15 ; vi. 19, etc.

The case is quite different with respect to μέχρις and αχρις. Both these forms never occur before consonants, but always μέχρι and αχρι. On the other hand, μέχρις is regularly used before vowels, e.g. μεχρις ου, μεχρις αιματος Heb. xii. 4. Only αχρι stands several times even before vowels ; but not always without reason. For while in the common phrase αχρις ου the word remains everywhere unaltered, αχρι is everywhere used, manifestly to avoid cacophony , in the phrase αχρι ης ημερας : Matt. xxiv. 38 ; Luke i. 20 ; xvii. 27 ; Acts i. 2, cf. xxiii. 1. Elsewhere the two forms are interchanged before vowels, as αχρις [ –ρι Treg. Tdf. ] αυγης Acts xx. 11, άχρις [ –ρι Treg. Tdf. ] αππιου φόρου xxviii. 15 , αχρι (αχρις Rec.) ημερων πέντε xx. 6.

¹ Perhaps we can hardly hope ever to succeed in clearing up this point, since , as the liberty of later times in the use of ν was manifestly unrestrained, and the thing itself is so trivial, the transcribers (learned and unlearned) of the N. T. books felt little hesitation in employing or omitting it at option. Consequently the consistent introduction of the ν ἐφελκυστικόν throughout may be justified as a silent confession of the impossibility of tracing out the original mode of spelling of the authors themselves ; and so much the more, as the cases in which all the MSS. employ ν contrary to the grammatical rule appear to be very frequent, while cases of the other class (in which all MSS. omit it), are extremely rare. It would only be necessary, then, to bring one’s self to use the ν in these rare cases contrary to the MSS., as in Luke xvi. 13 ; Matt. vi. 24 ( δυσί Tdf. (so too Treg.) even in ed. 7, with the remark : sic codd. unc. omnes, ut videtur (cf. note on Luke 1.c. ed. 8]). If we are unwilling to do this , then Lachmann’s [and Tdf.’s ?] method of allowing here as elsewhere the authority of the oldest MSS. to decide, deserves unqualifiedly the preference , as affording the only stable anchorage in the matter. To be sure, we should need in that case a more careful collation. (Alexander Buttmann, A Grammar of the New Testament Greek, p. 9-10)

This entry was posted in 04. Κατὰ Ἰωάννην. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.