Ether 3:9 Textual Variants

Here the reading in the printer’s manuscript and in the 1830 edition seems to be missing the negative word not in the dependent clause. The not was added in the 1837 edition. Although the original manuscript is not fully extant here, it is clear that there was a supralinear insertion at the end of the line (the first word in the supralinear insertion, were, is extant in 𝓞). And if we compare the placement of the supralinear were with where the insert mark for the entire insertion would have been (namely, at the end of the line), there is definitely room for a not in the supralinear insertion. If this analysis is correct, it means that the not was lost when Oliver Cowdery copied the text from 𝓞 into 𝓟. Even so, the 1837 change was very likely made independently of 𝓞 since there is no evidence that 𝓞 was ever consulted in the editing for the 1837 edition.

Thus the 1837 correction that added the expected not was probably the original reading of the text. Elsewhere in the text, the positive “if it (should) so be” is quite common (occurring 44 times). There are only a couple of other cases like the one here in Ether 3:9, and in both cases we get the not:

• Alma 58:36 and if it is not so / behold we fear that there is some faction in the government
• 3 Nephi 23:9 and he saith unto them : were it not so

Thus there is some internal support for the not in Ether 3:9. In fact, for the larger context (especially with the negative never in the preceding clause), the not seems quite necessary:

• Ether 3:9
  • and never has man come before me with such exceeding faith as thou hast for were it not so / ye could not have seen my finger

In other words, without his exceeding faith the brother of Jared would never have seen the Lord’s finger. The critical text will therefore retain the not that was supplied in the 1837 edition.