Johannine Comma and Thomas Middleton - Revision history

Nick at 09:02, 12 December 2024

2024-12-12T09:02:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:02, 12 December 2024
Line 11:		Line 11:
	The Article, when prefixed to εἷς, is not used in any peculiar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the purpose either of ''reference'' or of ''hypothesis''.		The Article, when prefixed to εἷς, is not used in any peculiar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the purpose either of ''reference'' or of ''hypothesis''.

	The passages of the N.T. in which ''εἷς'' or ''ἕν'' occurs with the Article, are somewhat more than twenty; without the Article, it is extremely common. Of its ''hypothetic'' use, I have observed no instance: in the way of ''reference'', we find it opposed to ''ὃ ἕτερος'', [[Matthew 6:24\|Matt. vi. 24]]. [[Luke 18:10\|Luke xviii. 10]]: sometimes to ''ὁ ἄλλος'', [[Revelation 17:10\|Rev. xvii. 10]]: sometimes to εἷς, [[1 Thessalonians 5:11\|1 Thess. v. 11]]: also to ''ὁ εἷς'', [[Matt. xxiv. 40]]. [[Romans 5:15\|Rom. v. 15]]. We find also ''ὁ εἷς'' used for one of two, [[Luke 24:18\|Luke xxiv. 18]]. In like manner, in an Inscription preserved by ''Gruter'', p. cccc. 1st ed. we have ''προξενιαν ἀναγραψαι εἰς χαλκωματα δυο καὶ TO ἑν δουναι, k.τ.λ.'' In these and similar instances, it is obvious that ''ὁ εἷς'' is properly used in reference to some one other person; for where three or more persons or things are in question, there the Article is omitted:		The passages of the N.T. in which ''εἷς'' or ''ἕν'' occurs with the Article, are somewhat more than twenty; without the Article, it is extremely common. Of its ''hypothetic'' use, I have observed no instance: in the way of ''reference'', we find it opposed to ''ὃ ἕτερος'', [[Matthew 6:24\|Matt. vi. 24]]. [[Luke 18:10\|Luke xviii. 10]]: sometimes to ''ὁ ἄλλος'', [[Revelation 17:10\|Rev. xvii. 10]]: sometimes to εἷς, [[1 Thessalonians 5:11\|1 Thess. v. 11]]: also to ''ὁ εἷς'', [[Matthew 24:40\|Matt. xxiv. 40]]. [[Romans 5:15\|Rom. v. 15]]. We find also ''ὁ εἷς'' used for one of two, [[Luke 24:18\|Luke xxiv. 18]]. In like manner, in an Inscription preserved by ''Gruter'', p. cccc. 1st ed. we have ''προξενιαν ἀναγραψαι εἰς χαλκωματα δυο καὶ TO ἑν δουναι, k.τ.λ.'' In these and similar instances, it is obvious that ''ὁ εἷς'' is properly used in reference to some one other person; for where three or more persons or things are in question, there the Article is omitted:

	(Done to here)		(Done to here)

Nick at 08:39, 12 December 2024

2024-12-12T08:39:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:39, 12 December 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:

	The Article, when prefixed to εἷς, is not used in any peculiar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the purpose either of ''reference'' or of ''hypothesis''.		The Article, when prefixed to εἷς, is not used in any peculiar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the purpose either of ''reference'' or of ''hypothesis''.

			The passages of the N.T. in which ''εἷς'' or ''ἕν'' occurs with the Article, are somewhat more than twenty; without the Article, it is extremely common. Of its ''hypothetic'' use, I have observed no instance: in the way of ''reference'', we find it opposed to ''ὃ ἕτερος'', [[Matthew 6:24\|Matt. vi. 24]]. [[Luke 18:10\|Luke xviii. 10]]: sometimes to ''ὁ ἄλλος'', [[Revelation 17:10\|Rev. xvii. 10]]: sometimes to εἷς, [[1 Thessalonians 5:11\|1 Thess. v. 11]]: also to ''ὁ εἷς'', [[Matt. xxiv. 40]]. [[Romans 5:15\|Rom. v. 15]]. We find also ''ὁ εἷς'' used for one of two, [[Luke 24:18\|Luke xxiv. 18]]. In like manner, in an Inscription preserved by ''Gruter'', p. cccc. 1st ed. we have ''προξενιαν ἀναγραψαι εἰς χαλκωματα δυο καὶ TO ἑν δουναι, k.τ.λ.'' In these and similar instances, it is obvious that ''ὁ εἷς'' is properly used in reference to some one other person; for where three or more persons or things are in question, there the Article is omitted:

	(Done to here)		(Done to here)

	~~The passages of the N. 'T.-in-which εἷς or. ἕν occurs with the~~		so Mark iv. 8. and xiv. 10: unless, indeed,
	~~Article, are somewhat more than twenty; without the Article,~~
	~~it is extremely common. Of its hypothetic use, I have ob-~~
	~~served no instance: in the way of reference, we find it opposed~~
	~~to ὃ ἕτερος, Matt. vi. 24. Luke xviii. 10: sometimes to ὁ~~
	~~ἄλλος, Rev. xvii. 10: sometimes to εἷς, 1 Thess. v. 11: also~~
	~~to ὁ εἷς, Matt. xxiv. 40. Rom. v. 15. We find also ὁ εἷς~~
	~~used for one of two, Luke xxiv. 18. In like manner, in an~~
	~~Inscription preserved by Gruter, Ὁ. ccce. 1st ed. we have προ-~~
	~~ἕενιαν ἀναγραψαι εἰς χαλκωματα δυο καὶ TO ἑν Sovvat, k. τ. X.~~
	~~In these and similar instances, it is obvious that ὁ εἷς is pro-~~
	~~perly used in reference to some one other person; for where~~
	~~three or more persons or things are in question, there the~~
	~~Article is omitted:~~ so Mark iv. 8. and xiv. 10: unless, indeed,
	in such instances as Herod. lib. iv. p. 152. ed. 1570, where, in		in such instances as Herod. lib. iv. p. 152. ed. 1570, where, in
	speaking of a quadrangular temple, he observes, τὰ piv τρία		speaking of a quadrangular temple, he observes, τὰ piv τρία

Nick at 12:38, 10 December 2024

2024-12-10T12:38:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:38, 10 December 2024
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Vv. 7, 8. Τ''ρεῖς εἰσιν of μαρτυροῦντες'' [''ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. Καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ'',] ''τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα· καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν.'' Every one knows of how much controversy this passage has been the subject, and that the words which I have enclosed in brackets are now pretty generally abandoned as spurious. It is foreign from my undertaking to detail the arguments by which this decision has been established; and as little is it my purpose to call in question their justness and solidity. He who would see the controyersy briefly, yet clearly, stated, may consult the Preface to Mr. ''Marsh’s'' Letters to Mr. ''Travis'', and an Appendix to the second volume of Mr. ''Butler's Horæ Biblicæ'': and if he wish to enter more fully into the inquiry, the same Appendix will direct him to almost every thing of importance which has appeared on the subject. The probable result will be, that he will close the examination with a firm belief that the passage is spurious; more especially if he be of opinion that it rather obscures than elucidates the reasoning.		Vv. 7, 8. Τ''ρεῖς εἰσιν of μαρτυροῦντες'' [''ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. Καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ'',] ''τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα· καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν.'' Every one knows of how much controversy this passage has been the subject, and that the words which I have enclosed in brackets are now pretty generally abandoned as spurious. It is foreign from my undertaking to detail the arguments by which this decision has been established; and as little is it my purpose to call in question their justness and solidity. He who would see the controyersy briefly, yet clearly, stated, may consult the Preface to Mr. ''Marsh’s'' Letters to Mr. ''Travis'', and an Appendix to the second volume of Mr. ''Butler's Horæ Biblicæ'': and if he wish to enter more fully into the inquiry, the same Appendix will direct him to almost every thing of importance which has appeared on the subject. The probable result will be, that he will close the examination with a firm belief that the passage is spurious; more especially if he be of opinion that it rather obscures than elucidates the reasoning.

	It has, however, been insisted, that the omission of the rejected passage rather embarrasses the context: Bengel regards the two verses as being connected “adamantinâ cohærentiâ” and yet, it must be allowed, that among the various interpretations there are some which will at least endure the absence of the seventh verse. But the difficulty to which the present undertaking has directed my attention, is of another kind: it respects the Article in ''εἰς τὸ ἕν'' in the final clause of		It has, however, been insisted, that the omission of the rejected passage rather embarrasses the context: Bengel regards the two verses as being connected “adamantinâ cohærentiâ” and yet, it must be allowed, that among the various interpretations there are some which will at least endure the absence of the seventh verse. But the difficulty to which the present undertaking has directed my attention, is of another kind: it respects the Article in ''εἰς τὸ ἕν'' in the final clause of the eighth verse: if the seventh verse had not been spurious, nothing could have been plainer than that TO ''ἕν'' of verse 8, referred to ''ἕν'' of verse 7: as the case now stands, I do not perceive the force or meaning of the Article; and the same difliculty is briefly noticed by ''Wolfius''. In order to prove that this is not merely ''nodum in scirpo quærere'', I think it right to examine, at some length, what are the occasions on which, before εἷς, the Article may be inserted.
	the eighth verse: if the seventh verse had not been spurious,
	nothing could have been plainer than that TO ἕν of verse 8,
	referred to ἕν of verse 7: as the case now stands, I do not ~~per-~~
	~~eeive~~ the force or meaning of the Article; and the same ~~difli-~~

			The Article, when prefixed to εἷς, is not used in any peculiar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the purpose either of ''reference'' or of ''hypothesis''.

	~~442 I. JOHN,~~		(Done to here)


	~~culty is briefly noticed by Wolfius. In order~~ to ~~prove that~~
	~~this is not merely nodum in scirpo querere, 1 think it right to~~
	~~examine, at some length, what are the occasions on which,~~
	~~before cic, the Article may be inserted.~~

	~~The Article, when prefixed to cic, is not used in any pecu-~~
	~~liar manner, but is, as in all other cases, subservient to the~~
	~~purpose either of reference or of hypothesis. _~~

	The passages of the N. 'T.-in-which εἷς or. ἕν occurs with the		The passages of the N. 'T.-in-which εἷς or. ἕν occurs with the

Nick: New page: ''This page is a branch of a lager article, see Johannine Comma'' (This is a work in progress and will contain errors until it is completed) CHAP. V. Vv. 7, 8. Τ''ρεῖς εἰ...

2024-12-10T11:39:41Z

New page: ''This page is a branch of a lager article, see Johannine Comma'' (This is a work in progress and will contain errors until it is completed) CHAP. V. Vv. 7, 8. Τ''ρεῖς εἰ...

Show changes