From: Ben Crick (ben.crick@argonet.co.uk)
Date: Fri Apr 03 1998 - 19:00:15 EST
On Thu 2 Apr 98 (18:52:53), thmann@juno.com wrote:
>ÊI notice that the NRSV and a couple other versions translate the
>Êbeginning of John 10:29 as, "What my Father has given me is greater
>Êthan all else....," rather than the usual, "My Father, who has given
>Ê(them) to Me, is greater than all...." I don't understand the
>Êrationale behind the NRSV rendering. Will someone be kind enough to
>Êexplain it to me?
Dear Ted,
John 10:29 is a textual crux. My GNT reads hO PATHR MOU *hO* DEDWKEN MOI
PANTWN MEIZON ESTIN, KTL... This is attested by Vaticanus, the whole Latin
tradition, the Egyptian Bohairic, Ambrose, and Jerome. The Vulgate reads
Pater meus *quod* dedit mihi, majus omnibus est: etc. The English Revised
Version relegates this to the Margin, however.
The other reading is hO PATHR MOU *hOS* DEDWKEN MOI, ktl. This corrects the
neuter relative pronoun hO to the masculine hOS. This reading is supported
by the Bodmer Papyrus p66 (circa 200 AD), the Syriac, the Sahidic, the
Achmimic, and the Subachmimic St John; also the cursive families f1 and f13
and the Byzantine text (behind the KJV); and is the preferred RV Text.
The masculine pronoun hOS makes better sense and is what we would expect;
bu the Westcott & Hort principle is that the least appropriate and most
difficult variant is more likely to be the original, because a copyist
would be tempted to alter a difficult reading to a simpler one, not vice
versa.
But let's be sensible and prefer the Bodmer p66 and not try to be difficult
and obscurantist. Or understand that "Father" God is gender-neutral, (or
gender-inclusive), so therefore the neuter relative pronoun is quite in
order... 8-)
CAIREIN,
-- Revd Ben Crick, BA CF <ben.crick@argonet.co.uk> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:21 EDT