Lk 2:49 EN TOIS ... (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Sep 25 20:04:58 EDT 2002
For George Somsel:
From: Polycarp66 at aol.com
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:01:49 EDT
>In a message dated 9/25/2002 12:26:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:
>
>>NA27 : OUK HDEITE hOTI EN TOIS TOU PATROS MOU DEI EINAI ME
>>D05, W : OUK OIDATE hOTI EN TOIS TOU PATROS MOU DEI ME EINAI.
>>
>>Chabert: EINAI is put forward in D05 at the end of the clause; this
>>placement implies an existential sense of EINAI; in that case, what reason
>>is there not to consider TOIS a masculine pronoun referring to the persons
>>designated in v 46,i.e. the DIDASKALOI?
>>
>
>
>I may be "putting my foot in it" here, but I think I will agree with you
>that TOIS would seem to refer to DIDASKALWN in v 46 whether or not one
>concedes that EINAI has an existential sense. When reference is made to
>the temple it is EN TWi hIERWi, a singular. TOIS, however, is plural as
>is DIDASKALWN.
>
>Nevertheless, I don't see how an existential sense can be derived from the
>passage regardless of whether one accepts C. Bezae's reading or that of
>NA27. What we have is a phrase consisting of EINAI ME + EN + TOIS
>[DIDASKALOIS]. This would simply indicate where he would be found.
>
>gfsomsel
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list