BARNABAN . . . EWS ANTIOCEIAS
clayton stirling bartholomew
c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Mon Jun 15 06:30:07 EDT 1998
Acts 11:25 D* reads:
AKOUSAS DE hOTI SAULOS EISTIN EIS QARSON
EZHLQEN ANAZHTWN AUTON, KAI WS SUNTUCWN
PAREKALESEN ELQEIN EIS ANTIOCEIAN.
J. H. Ropes marks KAI WS in this passage as clearly spurious. I cannot
understand why? Perhaps because a second or third hand of D omits KAI WS, but
as far as I can tell KAI WS makes good sense in this context. Metzger finds no
fault with KAI WS in his commentary. I did a search for KAI WS in Luke/Acts
and found it several places used as a temporal modifier, so what is the
problem according to Ropes? This is asking for some mind reading which I know
is asking a bit much.
--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list