[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