“`html
A Textual and Grammatical Analysis of Matthew 5:20: The Variant Readings of εαν and αν
This exegetical study of A Textual and Grammatical Analysis of Matthew 5:20: The Variant Readings of εαν and αν is based on a b-greek discussion regarding a textual variant in Matthew 5:20. The discussion highlights a significant textual variant concerning the conditional particle: the form εαν is supported by manuscripts ℵ C O W Θ Σ f13 1500 and is favored by critical editors such as Bover, Greeven, Merk, and Tischendorf (8th edition). In contrast, the form αν is printed by Lachmann, Soden, Tischendorf (7th edition), and Vogels, reflecting its presence in a large majority of manuscripts, including B E G K L M N S U V X Δ Π Φ Ω 047 0211 *Byz* f1.35 33. 565. 1424. 2224. One perspective, represented by Weiss, suggests a mechanical preference for αν, arguing that critics typically favored εαν after a relative pronoun.
The primary exegetical issue in Matthew 5:20 concerns the textual integrity of the verse, specifically the choice between the conditional particles εαν and αν following the conjunction ὅτι. This textual variant raises questions about scribal transmission, editorial preferences, and the precise grammatical nuance intended for the protasis of this third-class condition. While both particles introduce a conditional clause, their usage can sometimes carry subtle differences in indefiniteness or emphasis, prompting scholarly debate on the original reading and its potential implications for interpretation.
Λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ περισσεύσῃ ὑμῶν ἡ δικαιοσύνη πλεῖον τῶν γραμματέων καὶ Φαρισαίων, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν.
(Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT (2010), in alignment with the NA28 and Nestle-Aland critical tradition, adopts the reading ἐὰν for Matthew 5:20.
- While the discussion highlights substantial manuscript support for the variant ἄν, the SBLGNT does not incorporate this variant into its primary text at this specific point, thereby reflecting a critical preference for ἐὰν as the more probable original reading.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
Textual Criticism (NA28): The Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (NA28), consistent with other major critical editions, reads ἐὰν in Matthew 5:20. The apparatus for NA28 confirms the significant variant ἄν. The discussion reveals robust support for both readings: εαν is attested by manuscripts such as ℵ C O W Θ Σ f13 1500 and favored by several notable editors, while αν boasts a broader base of support from numerous manuscripts, including B E G K L M N S U V X Δ Π Φ Ω 047 0211 *Byz* f1.35 33. 565. 1424. 2224. The rationale for preferring εαν may stem from a perceived grammatical consistency, especially after a relative pronoun, as noted by Weiss, or from scribal assimilation to the frequent occurrences of εαν in the surrounding context (e.g., Matthew 7:9, 10). However, Matthew’s own stylistic habits, demonstrated by the use of both constructions even within the same verse (e.g., 5:19, 32), suggest that a rigid grammatical rule may not have consistently governed authorial or scribal choices. This flexibility challenges purely mechanical explanations for variant readings, underscoring the strong viability of αν as a possible original reading.
Lexical Notes:
- BDAG (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature): The entry for ἐάν (often contracted to ἄν or ἤν) notes its primary function as a conditional particle, introducing third-class conditions that express a vivid or general possibility (“if it should happen,” “if perhaps”). In Koine Greek, the distinction between ἄν as a particle of indefiniteness and ἐάν as a conditional conjunction often blurs, with ἐάν sometimes replacing ἄν in contexts where ἄν would traditionally appear (e.g., with relative pronouns or temporal conjunctions). The particle ἄν on its own also marks indefiniteness or possibility, typically in conjunction with other words to form conditional or temporal clauses. In the specific construction ὅτι + subjunctive, both ὅτι ἐὰν and ὅτι ἄν introduce a dependent clause that expresses a condition, making the semantic difference in this context often negligible.
- KITTEL (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament): Volume II, pp. 383-393, discusses the historical development and usage of the particles ἄν, ἐάν, and ἤν. It highlights that in later Greek, particularly Koine, ἐάν increasingly assumed the functions of ἄν in conditional clauses, and the forms became largely interchangeable in many contexts. While ἄν fundamentally conveys a nuance of indefiniteness or contingency (“if ever,” “if perhaps”), and ἐάν often functions as a more straightforward “if,” their employment within a phrase like ὅτι + subjunctive typically serves to introduce a conditional protasis. Therefore, for Matthew 5:20, the choice between εαν and αν is primarily a matter of textual criticism and grammatical preference rather than a significant alteration of the core conditional meaning.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The textual variant between εαν and αν in Matthew 5:20, occurring after the conjunction ὅτι, presents a nuanced point for grammatical and rhetorical analysis. Both particles, when combined with the aorist subjunctive verb (περισσεύσῃ), construct a third-class condition, which expresses a vivid possibility or a general truth (“if it should happen,” or “if ever it happens”). The textual tradition exhibits a split, with significant manuscript support and scholarly preference for both forms, suggesting that the precise distinction may have been subtle or that scribal habits played a role.
Grammatical Analysis: The phrase “ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ περισσεύσῃ” translates as “that if (it should) not abound/exceed.” The use of εαν here is a common way to introduce such a conditional clause. If the reading “ὅτι ἄν μὴ περισσεύσῃ” were adopted, it would similarly introduce a condition. While ἄν can sometimes carry a slightly stronger emphasis on indefiniteness or a more generalized “whenever” in other contexts, its semantic contribution in this specific negative conditional clause is practically indistinguishable from εαν. The primary distinction may lie in perceived grammatical ‘correctness’ (e.g., a preference for εαν after a relative pronoun or conjunction) or in scribal assimilation to other instances of εαν. Matthew’s style, which occasionally employs both constructions even within the same verse (e.g., 5:19, 32), suggests an authorial flexibility that might render a strict grammatical differentiation less critical in this context.
Rhetorical Analysis: Rhetorically, the powerful conditional statement “unless your righteousness exceeds…” retains its absolute and urgent character regardless of the specific particle employed. The apodosis, “οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν” (“you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven”), delivers a definitive and emphatic negative consequence. The choice between εαν and αν does not dilute this emphatic negation or the gravity of the condition. The focus remains squarely on the indispensable requirement for a righteousness that surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, emphasizing the *failure* to meet this condition. Therefore, the rhetorical force of the warning is maintained across both textual variants.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The textual variant between εαν and αν in Matthew 5:20, while critically noted and supported by various manuscript traditions, yields minimal semantic divergence for the overall meaning of the verse. Both particles, in conjunction with the subjunctive mood, effectively establish a strong, third-class condition that is presented as prerequisite for entry into the kingdom of heaven. The preference for εαν in contemporary critical editions likely reflects a judgment based on scribal habits, perceived grammatical patterns, or assimilation, even in the face of robust manuscript support for αν.
Here are three potential translations, offering nuanced approaches while preserving the core message:
- “For I tell you that *unless* your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
This translation aligns with the primary reading of critical editions (**ἐὰν**) and presents a direct, unequivocal condition for entering the kingdom. - “For I declare to you, *if it should be that* your righteousness does not exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.”
This rendering subtly highlights the potential or indefinite aspect that **ἄν** might emphasize, though its practical implication for the conditional statement remains unchanged in conveying a strict requirement. - “Indeed, I say to you: *unless* your righteousness is far greater than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will absolutely not gain entrance into the kingdom of heaven.”
This translation prioritizes the rhetorical force and the definitive nature of the negative apodosis, offering a dynamic equivalent that accentuates the gravity of the warning, independent of the subtle grammatical distinction between the variant particles.
“`