From: Carl W. Conrad (email@example.com)
Date: Mon May 04 1998 - 21:27:15 EDT
At 7:07 PM -0500 5/4/98, Edgar Foster wrote:
>On pages 132-133 of the New American Commentary (the book of Acts),
>John B. Polhill provides a lucid rationale for the NIV rendering of
>In short, Polhill says that "the Greek is complex and somewhat
>obscure, but the NIV probably renders it as clearly as it can be by
>separating it into two parallel statements."
>As for the question of whose faith healed the man in Acts 3, Polhill
>writes that Luke intentionally left it open. He does say, however,
>that the apostles had faith which antedated the man's healing; the
>restored man was unequivocally filled with faith after the miracle.
>The NA Commentary is published by Broadman Press: Nashville, TN. The
>copyright year on Polhill's commentary is 1992.
Well, that's an interesting note, but I don't find it all that convincing.
I don't think Luke's Greek is at all confusing, but I do think the NIV
version expresses the sense of the Greek adequately. What is perhaps
confusing is that the Greek word-order runs counter to expectations of an
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
firstname.lastname@example.org OR email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:39 EDT