Yes, you are clearly right here. But I wonder if it isn't repeated for emphasis.
There is some confirmation for this idea in Bruce Metzger's Textual
Commentary on the Greek New Testament, where he says "whether it originated
as a primitive error, or ...as one may assume, Paul repeated ETI, perhaps
for the sake of emphasis". I started looking at the variants when I figured
that I'm not the only person who might find that construction confusing. The
variants are interesting here:
Roma 5:6 (GNT) ETI GAR CRISTOS ONTWN hHMWN ASQENWN ETI KATA KAIRON hUPER
ASEBWN APEQANEN.
Variant readings:
1. ETI GAR ... (omit)
2. EI GAR ... (omit)
3. EI DE ... (omit)
4. EI GE ... ETI
5. EI GAR ... ETI
6. EIS TI GAR ... ETI
7. EIS TI GAR ... (omit)
These reading suggest to me that the ETI could logically be used on either
end, and perhaps it was repeated for emphasis here.
Does this idea have merit?
Jonathan
***************************************************************************
Jonathan Robie
POET Software, 3207 Gibson Road, Durham, N.C., 27703
Ph: 919.598.5728 Fax: 919.598.6728
email: jwrobie@mindspring.com, jonathan@poet.com
http://www.poet.com <--- shockwave enabled!
***************************************************************************