Lk 2:32 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Sep 25 16:55:32 εδτ 2002
Lk 2:42: age of Jesus in the Temple (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) Genitive plural non-determinitve Corrected: earlier post indicated Lk 2:49D05 :φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και DOXANNA27: φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν εθνων και DOXANChabert: What justification is there for the usual translation: “a lightfor revelation to the Gentiles” (e.g. νετ), with genitive εθνων regarded asa dative of interest?– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Lk 2:42: age of Jesus in the Temple (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)Genitive plural non-determinitve
Wed Sep 25 19:53:17 εδτ 2002
Genitive plural non-determinitve Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) For George Somsel:>From: Polycarp66 at aol.com>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:46:19 εδτ>In a message dated 9/25/2002 4:57:04 πμ Eastern Daylight Time,>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:> >> >>D05 :φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν>>NA27: φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν εθνων και δοχαν>> >>Chabert: What justification is there for the usual translation: “a light>>for revelation to the Gentiles” (e.g. νετ), with genitive εθνων regarded as>>a dative of interest?>> > > >Lk 2.32 is, of course, a reference to the λχχ of Is 42.6 which is a>translation of the μτ> >ω:):eT.eN:Kf LiB:RiT (fM λ🙂ω.ρ γ.oWYiM> >which literally is>“ι have made you by covenant a people for light of the gentiles”> >Here the construct relation between λ🙂ω.ρ and γ.oWYiM parallels the>relationship between αποκαλυυιν and εθνων. It is not φωσ which is>followed by the genitive (comparable to the construct relation in Hebrew).>αποκαλυυιν has been interjected to define what the function of φωσ is to>be — a light φορ ρεβελατιον. This does not, however, answer the question>of the function of the genitive in this construction but pushes it back>one level to the translator(s) of the λχχ. The translators might have>simply chosen the genitive due to certain similarities between the status>constructus in Hebrew and the genitive in Greek. It does not completely>answer the question of what function the genitive serves in the>construction.> >α. τ. Robertson in his _A Grammar of the Greek New Testament_, pp. 499 ff.>speaks of the ‘objective genitive’. He notes that in Mk 11.22 εχετε>πιστιν θεου is rightly translated “have faith ιν God” though the genitive>does not mean ‘in’. Similarly he notes that in Acts 4.9 επι EUERGESIAi>ανθρωπου ασθενουσ it is a good deed which is done ‘to’ the sick man. “In>Col 2:18, QRHSKEIAi των αγγελων, it is worship ‘paid to’ angels, while εισ>θν hUPAKOUHN του χριστου (2 Cor. 10:5) is obedience ‘to’ Christ.> >Dan Wallace in _Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics_, pp. 116 ff. notes that>the key to the identification of the objective genitive is the ability to>convert a noun having a verbal idea into a verbal form and turn the>genitive into the direct object. He also notes that “α simpler and less>fool-proof method is to supply for the word *of* the words *for, about,>concerning, toward,* or sometimes *against*.”> >In the case at hand we have a noun which has a verbal idea — φωσ>(φωτιζω). It works quite well to convert this to “to enlighten the>gentiles”. The problem is that αποκαλυυισ has been inserted to define the>purpose of the ‘enlightenment.’> >gfsomsel
Genitive plural non-determinitveLk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)
Lk 2:32 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) Glendon Gross gross at xinetd.ath.cx
Thu Sep 26 02:40:47 εδτ 2002
Uses of γαρ Uses of γαρ ι may be out of my depth here, but again ι can’t help noticing a footnotein one of my translations, a νασβ, which lists this verse in all capitals,meaning the footnote implies that the writer is quoting Isaiah 42:6-7,which appears as follows in my λχχ:εγο κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν δικαιοσυνη, και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου,και ενισχυσω σε, και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,εισ φωσ εθνων, ανοιχαι οφθαλμουσ τυφλων, εχαγαγειν εκ δεσμων δεδεμενουσκαι εχ οικου φυλακασ, και καθημενουσ εν σκοτει.Because these are the words of Simeon after having laid eyes on the Christchild, it may have been important for the author of Luke to show thesignificance of the child “to the nations”, since the author of Luke iscoming from such a literary, cosmopolitan perspective. My received textfor Luke 2:32 uses the same word, εθνων.Another possibility (also a footnote in my νασβ) is that Simeon [inLuke’s Eyes] is quoting Isaiah 49:6, where my λχχ readsKAI ειπε μοι, μεγα σοι εστι του κληθηναι σε παιδα μου, του σθσαι τασφυλασ ιακωβ, και θν διασποραν του ισραηλ επιστρεψαι. ιδου δεδωκα σε εισδιαθηκην γενουσ, εισ φωσ εθνων, του ειναι σε εισ σωθριαν hEWS εσχατου θσγησ.Clearly this was a concept that would have appealed to the politicalradicals in Luke’s audience. Those who had the nationalistic fervor wereexpecting this baby to unite the Jewish nation and defeat Rome, were theynot? If so, then it seems an appropriate literary device for the authorof Luke to put these words in Simeon’s mouth, since this is theexplanation for why the old man can now go to his grave in peace. He hasactually seen “εισ φωσ εθνων“. [the light of the nations.] As an old manabout to die, one would expect Simeon to be familiar with the λχχ and ι amsure it would not be surprising to an audience of his contemporaries tohear him quote this scripture, being the religious man that he was. Myfeeling is that the presence of “εθνων” strengthens the idea that Simeonis quoting a prophecy from Isaiah.ι would speculate that if εθνων is omitted in Codex Bezae, then maybeit is omitted because it was added later? Without knowing the backgroundsurrounding Codex Bezae, ι am intrigued by the idea that εθνων may havebeen added later since the κψβ translators used much later manuscripts,dating from the 12th century if ι am not mistaken. Does anyone know ifthere are other manuscripts that agree with Codex Bezae in the omission ofthe word εθνων from Luke 2:32?On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Carl ω. Conrad wrote:> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:55:32 -0400> From: Carl ω. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.metalab.unc.edu>> Cc: “Sylvie Chabert [iso-8859-1] d’Hyères” <laodicy at ifrance.com>> Subject: [] Lk 2:32 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)> > Corrected: earlier post indicated Lk 2:49> > D05 :φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν> NA27: φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν εθνων και δοχαν> > Chabert: What justification is there for the usual translation: “a light> for revelation to the Gentiles” (e.g. νετ), with genitive εθνων regarded as> a dative of interest?> > —> > Carl ω. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)> Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243> cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.com> ωωω: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/> > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: [gross at xinetd.ath.cx]> To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave–145365E at franklin.oit.unc.edu> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > >
Uses of GARUses of γαρ
Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae) Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 26 07:04:44 εδτ 2002
Lk 2:42: age of Jesus in the Temple Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) Englished and submitted for Mme Chabert d’Hyères:Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 08:39:26 +0000From: “σ Chabert d’Hyères” <laodicy at ifrance.com>Reply to George Somsel>>Lk 2:32: – D05 : φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν>> – NA27: φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν εθνων και δοχαν>α. τ. Robertson in his _A Grammar of the Greek New Testament_, pp. 499 ff.>speaks of the ‘objective genitive’. …Similarly he notes that in Acts 4.9επι EUERGESIAi ανθρωπου ασθενουσ it is a good deed which is done ‘to’ thesick man.α propos de EUERGESIAi , βδαγ précise : “with the obj. gen. of the onewho benefits by it (Pla., Leg 850b EUERGESIAi πολεωσ). Luc s’est donc servid’une tournure idiomatique qui ne peut pas rendre compte du génitif EQNWNen Lk 2:32.With regard to EUERGESIAi, βδαγ states: “with the obj. gen. of the one whobenefits by it (Pla., Leg 850b EUERGESIAi πολεωσ). Luke thus employed anidiomatic nuance which cannot account for the genitive εθνων in Lk 2:32.”In>Col 2:18, QRHSKEIAi των αγγελων, it is worship ‘paid to’ angels, while εισ>θν hUPAKOUHN του χριστου (2 Cor. 10:5) is obedience ‘to’ Christ.βδαγ likewise notes QRHSKEIAi with genitive and hUPAKOUHN with genitive.>Dan Wallace in _Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics_, pp. 116 ff. notes that>the key to the identification of the objective genitive is the ability to>convert a noun having a verbal idea into a verbal form and turn the>genitive into the direct object. He also notes that “α simpler and less>fool-proof method is to supply for the word *of* the words *for, about,>concerning, toward,* or sometimes *against*.”> >In the case at hand we have a noun which has a verbal idea — φωσ>(φωτιζω). It works quite well to convert this to “to enlighten the>gentiles”. The problem is that αποκαλυυισ has been inserted to define the>purpose of the ‘enlightenment.’So the problem of εθνων remains. ι think that the term was added with theinitial sentence, that do think about it you think?Thanks for your valuable research,Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères
Lk 2:42: age of Jesus in the TempleLk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)
Thu Sep 26 07:17:24 εδτ 2002
Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) adverbial use of prepositional phrase in Luke 23:43? An obvious correctionAt 7:04 αμ -0400 9/26/02, Carl ω. Conrad wrote:>Englished and submitted for Mme Chabert d’Hyères:>So the problem of εθνων remains. ι think that the term was added with the>initial sentence, that do think about it you think?This should be: “So the problem of εθνων remains. ι think that the term wasadded with the initial sentence, what do you think about it?– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)adverbial use of prepositional phrase in Luke 23:43?
Thu Sep 26 10:03:47 εδτ 2002
adverbial use of prepositional phrase in Luke 23:43? Mark 2:28 (κυριοσ) Forwarded for George Somsel:From: Polycarp66 at aol.comDate: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 09:57:31 EDTIn a message dated 9/26/2002 7:06:20 αμ Eastern Daylight Time,cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu forwards on behalf of Mme Chabert d’Hyèreswho writes:>Reply to George Somsel> >>>Lk 2:32:>– D05 : φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν>>> – NA27: φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν εθνων και δοχαν> >>α. τ. Robertson in his _A Grammar of the Greek New Testament_, pp. 499 ff.>>speaks of the ‘objective genitive’. …Similarly he notes that in Acts 4.9>επι EUERGESIAi ανθρωπου ασθενουσ it is a good deed which is done ‘to’ the>sick man.> >α propos de EUERGESIAi , βδαγ précise : “with the obj. gen. of the one>who benefits by it (Pla., Leg 850b EUERGESIAi πολεωσ). Luc s’est donc servi>d’une tournure idiomatique qui ne peut pas rendre compte du génitif εθνων>en Lk 2:32.> >With regard to EUERGESIAi, βδαγ states: “with the obj. gen. of the one who>benefits by it (Pla., Leg 850b EUERGESIAi πολεωσ). Luke thus employed an>idiomatic nuance which cannot account for the genitive εθνων in Lk 2:32.> >“In>>Col 2:18, QRHSKEIAi των αγγελων, it is worship ‘paid to’ angels, while εισ>>θν hUPAKOUHN του χριστου (2 Cor. 10:5) is obedience ‘to’ Christ.> >βδαγ likewise notes QRHSKEIAi with genitive and hUPAKOUHN with genitive.> >>Dan Wallace in _Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics_, pp. 116 ff. notes that>>the key to the identification of the objective genitive is the ability to>>convert a noun having a verbal idea into a verbal form and turn the>>genitive into the direct object. He also notes that “α simpler and less>>fool-proof method is to supply for the word *of* the words *for, about,>>concerning, toward,* or sometimes *against*.”>> >>In the case at hand we have a noun which has a verbal idea — φωσ>>(φωτιζω). It works quite well to convert this to “to enlighten the>>gentiles”. The problem is that αποκαλυυισ has been inserted to define the>>purpose of the ‘enlightenment.’> >So the problem of εθνων remains. ι think that the term was>added with the initial sentence, what do you think about it?> ι tend to think the question is fairly well settled. εθνων is “the obj.gen. of the one who benefits by it.” It was derived from the use of theLXX translation of Is 42.6EGW κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν DIKAIOSUNHi και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου καιενισχυσω σε και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,** εισ φωσ εθνων **What has been inserted is εισ αποκαλυυιν. ι would understand thisinsertion to function as an explication of the function of φωσ.gfsomselPolycarp66 at aol.com
adverbial use of prepositional phrase in Luke 23:43?Mark 2:28 (κυριοσ)
Fri Sep 27 07:01:54 εδτ 2002
Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue) διακον– For Mme Chabert:Reply to George Somsel.> > ι tend to think the question is fairly well settled. εθνων is “the obj.> gen. of the one who benefits by it.” It was derived from the use of the> λχχ translation of Is 42.6> > εγω κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν DIKAIOSUNHi και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου και> ενισχυσω σε και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,> ** εισ φωσ εθνων **> > What has been inserted is εισ αποκαλυυιν.Except that there is no scriptural evidence for this insertion.Have you looked at the “Canticle” of Symeon in D05, which doesn’t have εθνων?30 hOTI ειδον hOI οφταλμοι μου το σωθριον SOU31 …hO hHTOIMASAS κατα προσωπον παντων των LAWN32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν λαου σου ISRAELYet v. 32 can be understood as outlined thus:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν λαου σου ISRAELSans oublier que Syméon qui était prêtre (il bénissait les personnes dansle Temple) était selon Luc δικαιοσ και ευλαβησ (v25).Don’t forget that Symeon, who was a priest (he blessed people in theTemple), was, in Luke’s words, δικαιοσ και ευλαβησ (v. 25)Sylvie Chabert d’Hyèreshttp://bezae.ifrance.com
Lk 2:49 εν τοισ … (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)διακον–
Fri Sep 27 13:40:14 εδτ 2002
Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae) διακον– From: Polycarp66 at aol.comDate: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 08:50:56 EDTIn a message dated 9/27/2002 7:03:26 αμ Eastern Daylight Time, SylvieChabert d’Hyères writes:>Reply to George Somsel.> >> >> ι tend to think the question is fairly well settled. εθνων is “the obj.>> gen. of the one who benefits by it.” It was derived from the use of the>> λχχ translation of Is 42.6>> >> εγω κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν DIKAIOSUNHi και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου και>> ενισχυσω σε και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,>> ** εισ φωσ εθνων **>> >> What has been inserted is εισ αποκαλυυιν.> >Except that there is no scriptural evidence for this insertion.> >Have you looked at the “Canticle” of Symeon in D05, which doesn’t have εθνων?> >30 hOTI ειδον hOI οφταλμοι μου> το σωθριον σου>31 …hO hHTOIMASAS κατα προσωπον παντων των λαων>32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν> και δοχαν λαου σου ισραελ> >Yet v. 32 can be understood as outlined thus:> >32 φωσ εισ> αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν> λαου σου ισραελ> >Don’t forget that Symeon, who was a priest (he blessed people in the>Temple), was, in Luke’s words, δικαιοσ και ευλαβησ (v. 25)> How can you say that there is no scriptural evidence for the insertion ofEIS αποκαλυυιν when the quotation is from the λχχ of Is 42.6 where εθνων ispresent and εισ αποκαλυυιν is not. The author of the Gospel According toLuke clearly inserted it. ι think he was making a clarification of thepurpose of the φωσ.ι don’t see what Simeon’s righteousness and piety has to do with thequestion. Am ι missing something?gfsomsel
Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae)διακον–
Fri Sep 27 13:38:13 εδτ 2002
διακον– Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae) At 8:50 αμ -0400 9/27/02, Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:>In a message dated 9/27/2002 7:03:26 αμ Eastern Daylight Time, Sylvie>Chabert d’Hyères writes:> >>Reply to George Somsel.>> >>> >>> ι tend to think the question is fairly well settled. εθνων is “the obj.>>> gen. of the one who benefits by it.” It was derived from the use of the>>> λχχ translation of Is 42.6>>> >>> εγω κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν DIKAIOSUNHi και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου και>>> ενισχυσω σε και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,>>> ** εισ φωσ εθνων **>>> >>> What has been inserted is εισ αποκαλυυιν.>> >>Except that there is no scriptural evidence for this insertion.>> >>Have you looked at the “Canticle” of Symeon in D05, which doesn’t have εθνων?>> >>30 hOTI ειδον hOI οφταλμοι μου>> το σωθριον σου>>31 …hO hHTOIMASAS κατα προσωπον παντων των λαων>>32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν>> και δοχαν λαου σου ισραελ>> >>Yet v. 32 can be understood as outlined thus:>> >>32 φωσ εισ>> αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν>> λαου σου ισραελ>> >>Don’t forget that Symeon, who was a priest (he blessed people in the>>Temple), was, in Luke’s words, δικαιοσ και ευλαβησ (v. 25)>> > >How can you say that there is no scriptural evidence for the insertion of>εισ αποκαλυυιν when the quotation is from the λχχ of Is 42.6 where εθνων>is present and εισ αποκαλυυιν is not. The author of the Gospel According>to Luke clearly inserted it. ι think he was making a clarification of the>purpose of the φωσ.>ι don’t see what Simeon’s righteousness and piety has to do with the>question. Am ι missing something?The point which ι think you missed, George, is that Sylvie referred(you/us) to Lk 2:30-32 in Codex Bezae, where εθνων is not present; ι don’tsee any good evidence that the form of the expression, φωσ εισ αποκαλυυινκαι δοχαν λαου σου ισραηλ derives at all from the λχχ ttext of Isaiah 42:6.You seem to be making the assumption that εθνων was in the original text ofLuke and has been omitted by the copyist of Codex Bezae; that may be true,but it would have to be demonstrated first, wouldn’t it?– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
διακον-Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae)
Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae) Glendon Gross gross at xinetd.ath.cx
Sat Sep 28 14:30:58 εδτ 2002
The implied verb in Eph 2:8 συγξεω & συγξυσισ Acts 19:29,32 Gen 11:7,9 The only reason ι had thought that Simeon’s priesthood and pietywould be relevant is that Simeon would have known the scripture fromIsaiah. It probably was second nature to him. It would have been quitenatural for him to have quoted it.ι was speculating that possibly the author of Luke might have put thequote in Simeon’s mouth as a literary device to increase the authority ofthe passage. ι find it difficult to believe that the author of Luke was aneyewitness to the events, although ι suppose that is possible. Theprophetic utterance could have been repeated by witnesses and recordedby the author of Luke. But doesn’t the inclusion of εθνων imply a largerscope of the prophecy than if it is excluded? If so, ι can’t helpwondering if any manuscripts of Luke other than Codex Bezae omit this word.Also, if φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν has been added, then ι find it interesting tonote that this phrase also serves to expand the scope of the prophecy.Incidentally, ι don’t understand my footnote in the νασβ translation thatsays “or resurrection” if the word is αποκαλυυιν.If there is other textual evidence for the omission of εθνων from Luke2:32, then that would seem to strengthen the idea that the word was addedlater, would it not? But if Codex Bezae is the only manuscript that omitsthe word εθνων from Luke 2:32, would it not be more probable to consider it anoversight on the part of the scribe who transcribed Codex Bezae?Glendon GrossAmateur Greek StudentOn Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Carl ω. Conrad wrote:> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:38:13 -0400> From: Carl ω. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.metalab.unc.edu>> Cc: George Somsel <Polycarp66 at aol.com>,> “Sylvie Chabert [iso-8859-1] d’Hyères” <laodicy at ifrance.com>> Subject: [] Re: Lk 2:32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν (Luke in Codex Bezae)> > At 8:50 αμ -0400 9/27/02, Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:> >In a message dated 9/27/2002 7:03:26 αμ Eastern Daylight Time, Sylvie> >Chabert d’Hyères writes:> >> >>Reply to George Somsel.> >>> >>>> >>> ι tend to think the question is fairly well settled. εθνων is “the obj.> >>> gen. of the one who benefits by it.” It was derived from the use of the> >>> λχχ translation of Is 42.6> >>>> >>> εγω κυριοσ hO θεοσ εκαλεσα σε εν DIKAIOSUNHi και κραθσω θσ χειροσ σου και> >>> ενισχυσω σε και εδωκα σε εισ διαθηκην γενουσ,> >>> ** εισ φωσ εθνων **> >>>> >>> What has been inserted is εισ αποκαλυυιν.> >>> >>Except that there is no scriptural evidence for this insertion.> >>> >>Have you looked at the “Canticle” of Symeon in D05, which doesn’t have εθνων?> >>> >>30 hOTI ειδον hOI οφταλμοι μου> >> το σωθριον σου> >>31 …hO hHTOIMASAS κατα προσωπον παντων των λαων> >>32 φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν> >> και δοχαν λαου σου ισραελ> >>> >>Yet v. 32 can be understood as outlined thus:> >>> >>32 φωσ εισ> >> αποκαλυυιν και δοχαν> >> λαου σου ισραελ> >>> >>Don’t forget that Symeon, who was a priest (he blessed people in the> >>Temple), was, in Luke’s words, δικαιοσ και ευλαβησ (v. 25)> >>> >> >How can you say that there is no scriptural evidence for the insertion of> >εισ αποκαλυυιν when the quotation is from the λχχ of Is 42.6 where εθνων> >is present and εισ αποκαλυυιν is not. The author of the Gospel According> >to Luke clearly inserted it. ι think he was making a clarification of the> >purpose of the φωσ.> >ι don’t see what Simeon’s righteousness and piety has to do with the> >question. Am ι missing something?> > The point which ι think you missed, George, is that Sylvie referred> (you/us) to Lk 2:30-32 in Codex Bezae, where εθνων is not present; ι don’t> see any good evidence that the form of the expression, φωσ εισ αποκαλυυιν> και δοχαν λαου σου ισραηλ derives at all from the λχχ ttext of Isaiah 42:6.> You seem to be making the assumption that εθνων was in the original text of> Luke and has been omitted by the copyist of Codex Bezae; that may be true,> but it would have to be demonstrated first, wouldn’t it?> —> > Carl ω. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)> Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243> cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.com> ωωω: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/> > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: [gross at xinetd.ath.cx]> To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave–145365E at franklin.oit.unc.edu> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > >
The implied verb in Eph 2:8SUGCEW & συγξυσισ Acts 19:29,32 Gen 11:7,9