Josep Rius-Camps - Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, «The Variant Readings of the Western Text of the Acts of the Apostles (XXIV) (Acts 17:1–18:23).» filologia-neotestamentaria, Vol. 25 (2012) 119-160 page 138

Vol 25 (2012)

Josep Rius-Camps - Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, «The Variant Readings of the Western Text of the Acts of the Apostles (XXIV) (Acts 17:1–18:23).», Vol. 25 (2012) 119-160

In these final sequences of Part III of the Book of Acts, the second phase of Paul’s missionary journey continues through Macedonia before moving on to Greece where he spends a brief time in Athens before a more extended stay in Corinth. Despite the divine intervention in Philippi in the previous sequence, which focused attention on the evangelisation of the Gentiles, Paul fails to follow this up but reverts to his earlier practice of devoting his energy first and foremost to the Jews in the synagogues. In Athens, his wellknown attempt to speak to the Gentiles meets with little favour; it is only in Corinth, after fierce opposition from the synagogue, that Luke records more successful efforts to include the Gentiles as well as the Jews in his preaching activity.

See more by the same author

Page 138/160
«
‹
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
›

138 Josep Rius-Camps and Jenny Read-Heimerdinger The article before the name of Paul in D05 is expected since he has always been in focus throughout this scene. B03 typically omits the arti- cle before major speeches (Read-Heimerdinger, The Bezan Text, p. 135). The imperfect ἔφη is used to introduce a speech elsewhere in Acts (7:2, Stephen; 10:28, Peter; 10:30, Cornelius; 11:28 D05, Agabus; 19:25 D05, Demetrius). The justification for the imperfect is clear in most instances (Stephen begins a long and complex speech; Peter and Cornelius find themselves in a difficult situation where they express themselves hesi- tantly; Demetrius carefully seeks for a way to persuade his fellow crafts- men of the problem posed by Paul). Here before the Areopagus, where Paul addresses a large Gentile audience whom he has never addressed successfully before, the imperfect expresses aptly his lack of assurance. 17:23 ἀναθεωρῶν (τὰ σεβάσματα) B P74 a DE rell, perspiciens d || διϊστορῶν D*; (ἱστορῶν Clpt). The verb διϊστορέω in D05 is a hapax legomenon of the New Testa- ment, expressing not only a close examination, as ἀναθεωρέω of B03, but also a quest for information (Delebecque, Les deux Actes, p. 108: ‘cherchant à me renseigner sur’). (ἐν ᾧ) ἐπεγέγραπτο B P74 a rell || ἦν (DB) γεγραμμένον D, scriptum erat d. The periphrastic perfect of D05 reflects better the permanence of the inscription than does the pluperfect of B03. ὃ … τοῦτο B D P74 a* A* (81). 1175 pc lat; Or || ὃν … τοῦτον a2 A2 E Ψ 33. 1739 M sy; Cl Aug. The reading of B03/D05 anticipates the neuter τὸ θεῖον of 17:27 D05.29. 17:24 (γῆϛ) ὑπάρχων κύριοϛ B P74 a A E 33. 69. 81. 88. 181. 242. 323. 431. 467c. 522. 614. 915. 927. 945. 1175. 1270. 1739. 1891. 1898. 2298. 2344, 2412 al gig vg; Theoph || κ. ὑπ. D, dominus qui est d H L P 049. 056. 33. 1739 M; Irlat Cl. The position of κύριοϛ following the participle in B03 presents the notion of the lordship of God as new information; its position preceding the participle in D05 stresses rather the causal nature of Paul’s argument, which depends on his audience’s prior acceptance of the lordship of God (‘since he is Lord’). 17:25 ὡϛ (προσδεόμενοϛ) a* 104. 1829. 1838, tamquam d e gig; Irlat || om. B D P74 a2 A E H L P Ψ 049. 056. 33. 1739 M.— (προσδεόμενόϛ) τινοϛ B P74 a (τι DH) rell || om. D* d 1646 pc.