Greek issue in Jn. 8:2

David Paul

3986 ὄρθρος (orthros), ου (ou), ὁ (ho): n.masc.; ≡ Str 3722—1. LN 67.187 early morning (Lk 24:1; Ac 5:21+; Jn 8:2 v.r.), for another focus, see next; 2. LN 67.73 daybreak dawn, for verses and another focus, see prior
James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

DBL-G indicates that orthros is a "variant reading", but gives no further detail. NET notes don't mention this issue. Anyone have anything that might shed light on what is being indicated here?

On a different note, the "another focus" between "early morning" and "daybreak/dawn" seems like the difference between "big" and "large".

DMB

I guess, which verse are you alluding to (a varient).

I assume you read LN's note 11, not much difference. In the syriac the word gets generalized even to just 'morning'. But lingistically I'd have thought the distinctions at least semitic, would be significant. In our neck of the woods, dawn and early morning are hours apart, due to high temperatures and work-start.

Rick Brannan

RE: Jn 8:2 as a variant reading, maybe Swanson holds the whole of Jn 7:53-8:11 is a variant (like the endings of Mark)? It is also cited out of order.

Christian Alexander

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1285553#Comment_1285553

A good study is by Gail R. O'Day, "John 7: 53-8: 11: A study in misreading." Journal of Biblical Literature 111, no. 4 (1992): 631-640. In John 8:2-3, the text states: Early in the morning he came to the temple courts again. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. The experts in the law and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught committing adultery. They made her stand in front of them. 

This suggests that Jesus was most likely imparting knowledge in the Gentiles' court. There were numerous important courts within the temple, including the Court of the Priests, the Court of the Women, the Court of Israel, and the Court of the Gentiles. 

For our discussion, John 20 is crucial because of the words "while it was still dark." According to Raymond E. Brown, the book's time period falls between three and six a.m. (Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (13–21): Introduction, Translation, and Notes,ed. William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman, AB (New York: Doubleday, 1970), 980.) The text is nonetheless helpful. It proves that Sunday, the first day of the week, was already recognized before the sun rose. Thus, the day started earlier than the window that runs from three to six in the morning. This blatantly refutes the morning idea and demonstrates that the author of the Gospel of John, at the very least, thought that the day started before sunrise.

Hopefully this helps a bit. 

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1285563#Comment_1285563

Rick Brannan said:

RE: Jn 8:2 as a variant reading, maybe Swanson holds the whole of Jn 7:53-8:11 is a variant (like the endings of Mark)? It is also cited out of order.

Also, The Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT). NA28 Apparatus has a variant at Jn  8.2, but not this word.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1285563#Comment_1285563

Been out of town and out of touch with the internet, so just getting back to this.

I understand your first comment...late appearance and all.

Rick Brannan said:

It is also cited out of order.

Would you explain what you mean here? Thanks.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1285805#Comment_1285805

Dave Hooton said:

NA28 Apparatus has a variant at Jn  8.2, but not this word.

Appreciate the direction to the Apparatus. I realize that should be obvious for a question like this, but I've never used it that much, and I clearly need to read the front matter to get a better sense of the all the alphabet soup that has spilled all over its pages.

I looked at EDNT, and I'm going to assume that Rick's assessment is probably correct...EDNT & Swanson are likely viewing the whole pericope as a variant reading, which I suppose I understand, but not really. Seems like a better term than v.r. should apply in this case.