John 5:16 - and sought to slay him - “internal evidence” is primary

Steven Avery

Administrator
John 5:16-18 (AV)
And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus,
and sought to slay him,
because he had done these things on the sabbath day.

But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
because he not only had broken the sabbath,
but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
LaParola
http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php?rif1=50&rif2=5:16

1710428208406.png
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator

A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, by the Rev. R. Jamieson, Rev. A. R. Fausset ... and the Rev. David Brown. [With the Text.], Volume 5 (1864)
Jamiesson, Fausset and Brown - JFB
David Brown does John commentary
https://books.google.com/books?id=DF8sIohIX7IC&pg=PA381
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/jfu/john-5.html

1710436422551.png

1710436459014.png


And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him. [This last clause - kai (G2532) ezeetoun (G2212) auton (G846) apokteinai (G615) - is excluded from the text by Tischendorf and Tregelles, on weighty but, as we judge, insufficient authority. Alford does the same, and Lucke, Meyer, and DeWette, approve of the omission, which they regard as a gloss to explain John 5:18 (NAS)

18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

John 5:18. But the word mallon (G3123) - "the more" - which none propose to exclude from the text, presupposes the clause in John 5:16

16
For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on a Sabbath.
John 5:16, and is the strongest argument in favour of it. Lachmann retains the clause.]
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Wikipedia gives the dumb argument

The Jews begin to persecute Jesus (and in some texts, verse 16 adds that they "sought to kill him").[17] H. W. Watkins argues that "the words 'and sought to slay Him' should be omitted: in his view they have been inserted in some manuscripts to explain the first clause of John 5:18 (the Jews sought the more to kill him)",[18] the first of several Jewish threats against him (John 7:1, 7:19–25, 8:37, 8:40 and 10:39).[4]

Watkins, H. W. (1905), Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers on John 5, accessed 5 March 2016

1710436770892.png
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
7. Internal Evidence, concerns readings which are grammatically, logically, geographically, or scientifically impossible, such as in Luke 19:37; 23:45 (impossible 3 hour eclipse of the sun at full moon in Aleph, B, and RV); 24:13; Mark 6:22; II Corinthians 3:3.
Worthy Christian Forums

Burgon examples

https://books.google.com/books?id=fX9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA65
https://archive.org/details/traditionaltexto00burgrich/page/64/mode/2up

Luke 19:37 (AV)
And when he was come nigh,
even now at the descent of the mount of Olives,
the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God
with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen;

http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php?rif1=49&rif2=19:37

1710767932786.png

Thus the reading of ttivratv (masculine or neuter) which is found in Cod. B (St. Luke xix. 37) we reject at once because of its grammatical impossibility as agreeing with bvvdfituiv (feminine

Pickering
Burgon considered that pantwn, the reading of B,D in Luke 19:37 is a grammatical impossibility
1710768165635.png

https://spiritualarchive.org/books/IdentityOfTheNewTestamentText.pdf

See also Pickering
Luke 24:13 (AV)
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus,
which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

Mark 6:22 (AV)
And when the daughter of the said Herodias came in,
and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel,
Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.

Discussion of Griesbach monstrosity
Luke 6:1 (AV)
And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields;
and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands.

Luke 16:9 (AV)
And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness;
that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

1710765122805.png


https://books.google.com/books?id=fX9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA214
https://archive.org/details/traditionaltexto00burgrich/page/214/mode/2up

There are many occasions—as I remarked before,—
where the very logic of the case becomes a powerful
argument. Worthless in and by themselves,—in the face,
I mean, of general testimony,—considerations derived from
the very reason of the thing sometimes vindicate their
right to assist the judgement wherever the evidence is
somewhat evenly balanced. But their cogency is felt to be
altogether overwhelming when, after a careful survey of the
evidence alone, we entertain no doubt whatever as to what
must be the right reading of a place. They seem then to
sweep the field. Such an occasion is presented by St. Luke
xvi. 9,—where our Lord, having shewn what provision the
dishonest steward made against the day when he would
find himself houseless,—the Divine Speaker infers that
something analogous should be done by ourselves with our
own money,—‘ in order ’ (saith He) ‘ that when ye fail, ye
may be received into the everlasting tabernacles.’ The
logical consistency of all this is as exact, as the choice of
terms in the Original is exquisite: the word employed to
designate Man’s departure out of this life (AAi-rjrf), con-
veying the image of one fainting or failing at the end of
his race. It is in fact the word used in the LXX to denote
the peaceful end of Abraham, and of Ishmael, and of Isaac,
and of Jacob'.

Continues


============================================
Also notable

I. We have with us width and depth against the narrowness on their side. They are
conspicuously contracted in the fewness of the witnesses which they deem worthy of
credence. They are restricted as to the period of history which alone they consider to deserve
attention. They are confined with regard to the countries from which their testimony comes.
They would supply Christians with a shortened text, and educate them under a cast-iron
system. We on the contrary champion the many against the few: we welcome all witnesses, and
weigh all testimony: we uphold all the ages against one or two, and all the countries against a
narrow space. We maintain the genuine and all-round Catholicism of real Christendom against
a discarded sectarianism exhumed from the fourth century. If we condemn, it is because the
evidence condemns. We cling to all the precious Words that have come down to us, because
they have been so preserved to our days under verdicts depending upon overwhelming proof.
 
Last edited:
Top