[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ACTS 5:16 PERI
- To: B-Greek list <b-greek-digest@virginia.edu>
- Subject: ACTS 5:16 PERI
- From: Clayton Bartholomew <c.s.bartholomew@worldnet.att.net>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:26:05 +0000
- Organization: AT&T
I am having some minor difficulties sorting out the first half of Acts 5:16.
Codex Bezae reads . . . PLHQOS TWN PERI POLEWN EIS IEROUSALHM. I read Metzger on this
but he didn't really solve my problem. My question is simple; does PERI in Bezae belong
to TWN POLEWN or to IEROUSALHM. If Codex Bezae had left it PERIX then Metzger's
comment would have solved the problem.
Here is my difficulty. My lexicons show PERI with the accusative having a possible
meaning of *around about* or *near*. They do not show this meaning for PERI with the
genitive. If I am reading Metzger correctly, EIS was inserted into a number of
manuscripts because the scribe saw PERIX as associated with TWN POLEWN. But this
doesn't explain the reading in Bezae does it?
Is it possible that the lexicons (Gingrich and Danker, B.N. Newman) are overly restricting
the semantic domain of PERI with the genitive?
Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point