kaiaponoumenoi D (Ropes)
kataponoumenoi D (NA27)
diaponoumenoi txt (NA27)
The difference amounts to this: Ropes is citing D* and NA27 is citing a
corrector of D but not making it evident in the apparatus. Is this a
common practice in NA27?
Any comments?
Or perhaps Kurt Aland and friends took another look at the manuscript
and decided that there was a cross bar on the iota so read it as a tau
and documented it as the original hand of D.
Has anyone ever suggested that scribe for D had in his vorlage:
kai daponoumenoi
and omitted the d? This is an improbable scenario since D seems prone to
have alternate prepositions in the prefixes of compound verbs. There are
two examples in Acts 4:2.
Any comments?
Another question. Are digital images of Codex Bezae currently
available on the web?
Thanks
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point