qodeshlayhvh at juno.com
Fri Aug 17 09:36:52 EDT 2001
MQ. 14:6 says,
GENESIOIS DE GENOMENOIS TOU hHRWiDOU WRCHSATO hH QUGATHR THS hHRWiDIADOS
EN TWi MESWi KAI HRESEN TWi hHRWiDHi
Now I know there is no such thing as a "dative absolute", but this sure
looks like one! I notice that there is considerable textual variation
here. But surely the reading above is the lectio difficilior (or does it
rise to the level of difficilima?) and best explains the origin of the
1) GENESIOIS DE AGOMENOIS -- f1
2) GENESIWN DE AGOMENWN -- W 0106 0136 f13 33 Maj
3) GENESIWN DE GENOMENWN -- C K N theta 565 892 1241 1424 al
GENESIOIS DE GENOMENOIS is supported by aleph B D L Z lect2211
I notice too that the following editions read the same as NA27:
Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Westcott/Hort, Merk, Bover,
NA25 while Griesbach, Wordsworth, Vogels agree with 2 above and von Soden
with 3 above.
The parallel in MK 6:21 retains the dative TOIS GENESIOIS but this has
now become a dative of time referencing the "day" mentioned in the
previous genitive absolute: GENOMENHS hHMERAS EUKAIROU.
What am I missing here?
I apologize if MQ 14:6 has been thoroughly discussed before. I rarely
have time to check the archives.
Yours in His grace,
Richard Ghilardi -- qodeshlayhvh at juno.com
New Haven, CT USA
Nibai kaurno hwaiteis gadriusando in airtha gaswiltith,
silbo ainata aflifnith: ith jabai gaswiltith, manag akran bairith.
More information about the B-Greek