78 Rick Strelan John Lightfoot, had already suggested the Arabic derivation (35) and it was certainly still supported by some at the beginning of the twentieth century (36). This explanation is held largely because the translation, Bar Jesus = Elymas, is believed to be impossible. Bruce states categorically: “Elymas … is probably a Semitic word with a similar meaning to magos; it cannot be an interpretation of ‘Barjesus’” (37). Likewise, Dunn says that Bar Jesus and Elymas have nothing to do with each other. He suggests that maybe Elymas was a nickname, “but if so, its point is too obscure for us” (38). Barrett also thinks it is impossible to translate Bar Jesus as Elymas, because the latter seems not to be a Greek name. He suggests we agree with Bengel who said: “nescio quomodo, synonyma sunt”, but he himself then adds, Failing this, the simplest and probably correct solution is that both names were, in the tradition (or traditions) that Luke used, applied to the man in question, and that Luke assumed that the form that appeared to be Greek must be a translation of the Semitic; cf. 4.36. The assumption is a natural one, though Luke might have reflected that the Latin Paul is not a translation of the Semitic Saul (v. 9) (39). In another attempt to solve this puzzle, some have seized on the alternative reading Etoima" that appears in D and similarly in some Old Latin manuscripts. While Kirsopp Lake favoured this solution, he was well aware of its weakness: “This seems the best suggestion yet made, but the combination of a doubtful reading with a somewhat strained etymology is not quite convincing” (40). More recent scholarship has seen a number of problems with the hypothesis and so has abandoned it (41). There are other variant readings on the name of this man among which are barihsou', barihsou'", barihsou'n, barihsou'an. As Barrett suggests, barihsou' and barihsou'an may be regarded as alternative transliterations of [wvyArb and barihsou'" and barihsou'n may be taken as attempts to improve the grammar (42). All of these suggest the man’s name means ‘son of Jesus/Jeshua’. However, some other variants read, (35) SCHMIEDEL, “Barjesus”, 480. (36) See K. LAKE, The Acts of the Apostles (London 1933) IV, 144. (37) BRUCE, Acts, 249. (38) DUNN, Acts, 176. (39) BARRETT, Acts, I, 615. (40) LAKE, Acts, IV, 144. (41) See BARRETT, Acts, I, 615; and HAENCHEN, Acts, 398, n. 2. (42) BARRETT, Acts, I, 613.