Acts 2:23

Richard Neil Mendoza pistos at pacbell.net
Tue Aug 10 05:38:34 EDT 1999


I apologize in advance if this has been previously discussed, but in my 
search I haven't encountered this topic.

Recently I contacted Daniel B. Wallace about Acts 2:23 and if he believed 
it contains an example of Granville Sharp's rule.  I had previously 
encounted it as an example of Sharp's rule in one of Kenneth Wuest's books, 
but couldn't find it as an example in any Greek grammar.  When Wallace's 
grammar came out with the most examples of Sharp's rule I was disappointed 
to find Acts 2:23 absent from this section.  Anyways, he informed me that 
he disagrees with Wuest and doesn't believe it to be an example of Sharp's 
rule because it is impersonal construction.  I also noticed elsewhere that 
Stephen Baugh says it is an example of a hendiadys, in which the copula 
substitutes a subordinating clause.  I just don't see this when I read 
BOULE KAI PROGNOSEI (counsel and foreknowledge), two nouns in the same case 
and person connected by KAI.  Can someone tell me why this is a hendiadys 
and not an example of Granville Sharp's rule?

Thank you,

Richard Mendoza
Santa Ana, CA



More information about the B-Greek mailing list