Paul S Dixon
dixonps at juno.com
Sun Oct 14 18:59:03 EDT 2001
The change from EN to EIS may simply be stylistic or poetic license, as
they say. Aren't there plenty of examples of where the two prepositions
are virtually synonymous? Besides, if John can use AGAPAW and FILEW in
Jn 21 interchangably, why can't he do the same with EN and EIS in Jn 3?
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 23:04:03 -0700 c stirling bartholomew
<cc.constantine at worldnet.att.net> writes:
> Hello Paul and Ted,
> Intriguing question.
> on 10/13/01 7:51 PM, Paul Zellmer wrote:
> > This is the only place in the Gospel of John (and, it appears, the
> rest of
> > the Johannine works) where PISTEUW + EN is found. Elsewhere the
> > is always EIS, or the simple dative is used. So John 3:16 is the
> > case for the book.
> I checked this in John, 1Jn, 2Jn, 3Jn & Apoc and this is the only
> place it
> is found in all of these books.
> B.M. Metzger (Textual Comm. 1st ed.) has a good brief lucid
> discussion of
> this. He points out that John sometimes places an adverbial phrase
> with EN
> before its verb when the phrase is emphatic or metaphorical (Jn
> 5:39, 16:33,
> 1Jn passim). He concludes that EN makes good sense here and explains
> other readings, therefore it should be accepted as the best
> The mss. support for EN isn't all that great, B P75 W(supp).
> reads EIS along with a host of others. Lucifer also reads EIS which
> seem significant to some people.
> > Some translations see this unique use of EN where EIS would be
> expected to
> > cause the prepositional phrase to be attached to the ECH ZWHN
> Yes and and also some commentators including: R.E. Brown, D.A.
> Carson, B.F.
> Westcott, Leon Morris, H.A.W. Meyer. Please forgive me for citing
> commentaries, I realize these guys don't know greek nearly as well
> some some
> folks down on the Lower Columbia River. :-))))
> > But, according
> > to Louw and Nida, the semantic domains of EPI, EIS, and EN appear
> to overlap
> > in the area of markers of content as a means of specifying a
> > referent . . .
> Overlapping semantic domains do not rule out distinct usage in
> contexts. B.M. Metzger suggest that EN + substantive prior to a
> ng as an adverbial is something found in John and 1John. In a case
> like this I would not be inclined to go with Metzger and all the
> other guys
> listed above.
> They could, of course, all be wrong.
> Greetings to all,
> Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
> Three Tree Point
> P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [dixonps at juno.com]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> To subscribe, send a message to
> subscribe-b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu
More information about the B-Greek