Codex Bezae (D05) Readings #6-9
Polycarp66 at aol.com
Polycarp66 at aol.com
Thu Aug 22 21:24:54 EDT 2002
In a message dated 8/22/2002 8:00:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:
9 - Lk 1:27 NA27/USB4: EMNHSTEUMENHN ANDRI hWi ONOMA IWSHF; D05:
MEMNHSMENHN instead of EMNHSTEUMENHN
Selon D05 Marie était simplement "promise en mariage" ; selon les autres
manuscrits qui reprennent le terme du Dt, elle était "officiellement
fiancée" . Quelles conséquences dégager du choix de l'un ou de l'autre
terme? Autre question: pourquoi le parfait? ["According to D05 Mary was
simply 'promised in marriage'; according to the other MSS which echo the
term from Deuteronomy, she was 'officially engaged.' What follows from the
choice of the one over the other term? Another question: Why the perfect
tense?"]
_____________________________________
Would not MEMNHSMENHN be from MIMNHSKW? I should think that this would
clearly be an error.
gfsomsel
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list