John 6:22 (traditional text) -homoioteleuton
ιον ο οχλος ο εστηκως περαν της θαλασσης
ιδων οτι πλοιαριον αλλο ουκ ην εκει ει μη εν
εκεινο εις . ο ενεβησαν . οι. μαθηται. αυτου
και οτι ου συνεισηλθεν τοις μαθηταις αυτου
ο ιησους εις το πλοιαριον αλλα μονοι οι μαθ-
ηται αυτου απηλθον
The day following, when the people which stood
on the other side of the sea saw that there was
none other boat there, if not that one where in
those were entered, namely, His disciples,
and that Jesus went not with His disciples
into the boat, but that his disciples were
gone away alone;
Include Line: : א* (D Grk*), (D corr)
Θ 28 (33 1071 ((1195 1253)) 1216 1230) 700 892 1242 1344 1646 (2148
2174) Byz Maj (Majority of MSS) f13 (it-a/c/d) Syr-c/(p)/h/pal Copt-sa
Arm Geo-l/A/(B) (Chrysostom Cyril)
Omit: P75 א(corr.) A B L W Ψ 063 f1 565 1009 1010 1079 1241 1365 1546 it-aur/(b)/c/f/ff2/l/q/(r1) vg cop-bo/ach2/fay goth Nonnus
Mistakes like starting on the wrong line at left when it is a long one
are so commonplace and trivial that this hardly needs comment. Its
familiar to anyone who has read a book and started again on the wrong
line in the middle of a paragraph.
There is no need for yet another elaborate theory of an imaginary
editor who could invent a long-winded, awkward turn of phrase to bloat
the narrative for no purpose except perchance to fill out a line at the
end of page. Thats what dashes, dots and scribbles are for.
Why yet again did such an (imaginary) expositor pass up the chance to add a theological text of some significance?
Yet Hort denies the obvious, and entrenches this early error into the "Neutral" Text-type (Hort's pure and original invention).
The UBS edition follows Hort, with countless 'modern' versions
in tow, stuffed with useless or nonexistant footnotes, but lacking a