116 Josep Rius-Camps and Jenny Read-Heimerdinger [BA] 8:4-40 Philip The story of Philip is the first of a series of three portraits (8:4-11.18), through which Luke shows how different ways of thinking were an obsta- cle to the understanding of the radical nature of Jesus’ message, and the nature of God’s intervention to correct them. At the centre of the three- fold structure (9:1-30) is Saul, who will become the main protagonist after ch. 13. On either side stand Philip (8:4-40) and Peter (9.31-11-18). Philip is already known to the hearers of Acts from the first mention of his name among the Seven Hellenists, being the second one named following Stephen. The story of his activity constitutes the first report in Acts of evangelization outside Judaea. Luke uses it to illustrate how the lack of discernment was a problem to the successful spread of the gospel message. There are three elements to the first sequence [BA]: [A] 8:4-13 Philip in Samaria, and Simon Magus [B] 8:14-24 Peter and John in Samaria, and Simon Magus [A’] 8:25-40 Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch Philip’s apparent success in Samaria is presented with particular ref- erence to Simon Magus; when Peter and John come to Samaria, however, the reaction of Simon shows that Philip’s activity had been carried out without discernment; his final preaching to the Ethiopian eunuch, in contrast, results in an unqualified success due, according to some manu- scripts, to the verification he made of the eunuch’s faith before baptizing him. It should be noted that eight folios of Codex Bezae are missing from 8:29b to 10:14b for the Greek text, and from 8:20b to 10:4 for the Latin. Readings for comparison with B03 have to be taken, therefore, from other witnesses that from time to time attest a variant text, either Greek or, more often, the early versions. None, however, vary so consistently or extensively as does Codex Bezae. The uncial E08 cannot be used as a constant basis for comparison since its Greek text is most likely to be a retroversion of the Greek underlying its Latin text, which has the place of honour on the left hand page. Where other witnesses are used for comparison with B03 because D05 is missing, they will be referred to as the ‘Western text’ (WT). The situation is quite different from the practice we have followed rigorously elsewhere of comparing individual MSS and is far from satisfactory, but is unavoidable in the absence of a single MS that consistently attests a variant text.