From: mjoseph (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 09 1998 - 16:11:57 EST
KAI THiDE HN ADELFH KALOUMENH MARIAM, [hH] KAI PARAKAQESQEISA PROS TOUS
PODAS TOU KURIOU...
UBS 3 prints the relative pronoun in square brackets, indicating "words
whose presence or position in the text is regarded as suspected," but
there are no variants given, and no discussion in Metzger's textual
Alford indicates that the relative pronoun is missing in two 8th-century
uncials, and in the third correction of B and first correction of aleph.
1) Am I right in thinking that with the relative pronoun missing, the
text would read, "(she welcomed Him), and had a sister named Mary, and
(Martha!) was sitting at the feet of the Lord"? This, of course, would
be impossible from the context.
2) If so, that is, if the relative pronoun really must be here, then what
is the meaning of KAI here? It seems to me that the resultant reading
without the KAI, that is, "she had a sister named Mary, who (and) was
sitting at the feet of the Lord" is just fine. What does the KAI add to
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:58 EDT