Acts 2:23

From: Richard Neil Mendoza (
Date: Tue Aug 10 1999 - 05:38:34 EDT

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

B-Greek home page:
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: []
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
To subscribe, send a message to

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:35 EDT