82 Trent A. Rogers 13:24, 25: νευει ουν τουτω σιμων πετρος πυθεσθαι τις αν ειη περι ου ειπεν επιπεσω ουν εκεινος ουτως επι το στηθος του ιυ λεγει αυτω κε τις εστι27. The first οὖν, the occurrence in v. 24, does not concern us here, but we must determine the referent of the οὖν in v. 25. One could interpret οὖν continuatively with the translation, “Simon motioned…then that one said (or “leaned back”)”. But v. 25 shows the consequence of Simon’s action rather than continuing the next chronological act. This is a fine distinction and obviously is an interpretive decision by the reader, but v. 25 does seem to convey a logical rather than sequential progression. Two inferential meanings are possible: “Simon motioned…so that one leaned back” or “Simon motioned…so that one asked”28. So what is the logical consequence of Simon’s motioning? Contextual clues lend weight to the latter interpretation. His action of speaking (λέγω) accords with Simon’s request to speak (πυνθάνομαι). Although seven words intervene between οὖν and the main verb and οὖν is positioned adjacent to the participle, the grammar and context demand that we interpret οὖν as a modifica- tion of the main verb. The classification of the uses of οὖν in P66 is identical to that of the Gospel of John in NA27 as the omissions and additions provide us with no additional, distinguishable uses. I provide an outline of the uses and then analyze and provide examples of each use29. 27 “Then Simon Peter motioned to this one to ask Jesus about whom he was speaking. Leaning back on Jesus’ chest, therefore, that one said to him, ‘Lord, who is it’”. Cf. 11:45 where οὖν seems to relate its main verb to the thought of the preceding paragraph and not just the preceding sentence. The original verb, ἀναπίπτω, was changed to ἐπιπίπτω. 28 These translations are obviously truncated. The translations intend to convey the verbal relationships, so some elements are omitted. 29 To these uses, Mantey adds a restrictive use. He can produce only one papyrus and one occurrence in the NT to justify this usage. While the paucity of occurrences should not cause us to discount it altogether, it does question if a more common use does not fit. εἰ οὖν ἐμὲ ζητεῖτε [P66: ζητειται], ἄφετε τούτους ὑπάγειν (John 18:8 Mantey and NA27). Mantey translates, “If you seek only me, let these go”. Mantey’s translation conveys the sense of the construction. An explanation is possible that does not require another category of οὖν. It should be noted that Mantey’s restrictive use would probably fall under the broader category of inferential use. This occurrence can be explained by appealing to the nature of conditional sentences. I have noted that when οὖν occurs in introductory, dependant, and participial clauses, it still conveys the relationship of the main clause of the previous sentence to the main clause of the following sentence. Thus, the protasis (εἰ οὖν ἐμὲ ζητεῖτε) can be judged to be a dependent clause with the οὖν relating the apodosis (ἄφετε τούτους ὑπάγειν) to the previous main clause (ἐγώ εἰμι). The translation of this sequence would then read “I am he. Therefore, let them go, if you seek me”. This also is an inferential use of οὖν.