The addition of this note in 1527 may be explained by the criticism from Stunica of the annotation

\”et quacrcbant cum occidcre\”. Nov. Test, adds this in the Greek text; A does not offer the translation; B-E: \”et quacrebant illum occidere\”.257 vsque modo Also reading of Nov. Test. A; B-E: \”ad hoc vsque tempus\” (cf. supra, p. 70, 1. 917 sq., ad Ioh. 2, to).257 Cyrillus Discussing this text in Comm. in Ioh. II, 5, Migne PG 73, 345 D – 348 C, Cyril does not lay spécial emphasis on the use of the article; nor does Trapezontius, P 53 v° and 54 r°.260 quod Also the rcading of modem éditions of Vg. and Nov. Test. A; B-E: \”quid\”.264-265 et maiora horum faciet The Moncler reading of Ioh. 14, 12. in Vg. Moncler and Nov. Test. A; B-E: \”et maiora his facict\”. The addition of this note in 1527 may be explained by the criticism from Stunica of the annotation to Ioh. 14, 12,which is apparent from Epist. apolog. adv. Stun. 23, LB IX, 396 FI; v. infra., p. 137, n. 11. 437-438 ad Ioh. Ugg 14, 12.266-271 transiet … transiit The Clementina and Wordsworth-White read: \”transiit\” (Wordsworth-White in the app. erit: \”transit\”); Weber: \”transit\”, and in the app. erit.: \”transiit\”. Nov. Test.: \”transiuit\”.268 Theophylactus In Enarr. in Le. 23, 39-43, Migne PG 123, 1104 C, Theophyl., quoting this verse, writes jxera^épïjxev; Achat Doudoune Oecolampadius, P 140 v°, just as ad Ioh. 5, 24, P 164 v°: \”transiuit\”. \”In supplicium … vitam\” is also borrowed from his translation.272 Cyprianus Quir. II, 28 and 33, CCSL 3, pp. 67 and 128.275-277 Kaî… quoque Tischendorf, Merk and Nestle1* mention xat between aùrtjj and

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.