From: Steve Puluka (spuluka@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Oct 04 1999 - 06:12:53 EDT
<x-flowed>>From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@speedgate.net>
>I would agree with Paul that the case of a wife who has committed adultery
>is simply excluded from this statement. That seems the most natural way to
>take the reading. MH EPI PORNEIA simply that the case of PORNEIA is
>excluded. A large number of scribes came to this conclusion also. In the
>footnotes of N-A27 B, fam 1, Bohairic Coptic, D, Fam 13, 33, the old Latin,
>Sahidic, Mid. Egyptian, plus some other mss introduced the word PAREKTOS
>into the reading. Someone needs to check and see if this reading was in the
>Stephanus text and the text behind the KJV. What led the KJV to read this
>as Escept could have been a different text.
The Jerusalem Bible renders this verse:
Now I say this to you: the man who divorces his wife-- I am not speaking of
fornication -- and marries another, is guilty of adultery.
Does this capture the sense of exclusion you are speaking of here? I have
to admit that I am having troubling understanding the practical difference
between exclusion and except. Could you elaborate on the distinction?
Steve Puluka
Adult Education Instructor
Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:41 EDT