[B-Greek] INA GINWSKOMEN - 1Jn 5:20
Carlton Winbery
winberycl at earthlink.net
Fri Jul 11 13:37:03 EDT 2008
>... INA GINWSKOMEN... 1Jn 5:20
>
>Perhaps this is another instance where an indicative form should be regarded
>as having a subjunctive function. Or, is it?
>
>
>
>Vasile STANCU
Dear Vasile,
This does involve a textual problem, however which way is the
problem. Just because Metzger and the committee chose not to consider
it in the Textual Commentary or in the UBS texts does not mean that
the indicative could not be original. The Nestle-Aland 27th gives the
data and the claim of the indicative to originality is strong. In
fact in the face of the Alexandrian heavy weights, Aleph, A, B, & 33,
UBS chose to ignore the fact that -KOMEN must be the original which
gave rise to -KWMEN as a correction. I would consider that the
indicative is most likely original and would be an instance of the
use of the indicative with hINA. N.-A. 27 does print the subjunctive
but the 25th edition gives the sign in the aparatus that the editors
think that the indicative has a strong case to be original.
Tischendorf, Westcott/Hort, Merk and Souter list the indicative as
original.
I do not want to start a discussion of TC over this, just to say that
the scribes who passed on the indicative must be considered, and the
use of the indicative dealt with.
Carlton Winbery
--
Carlton L. Winbery
Retired Professor of Religion
Louisiana College
318-448-6103
winberycl at earthlink.net
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list