Ευθεωσ Beyond the Temporal Meaning 33 Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me.28 A (co-ordinate) ἀλλά-clause states what Paul really did: I went off to Arabia, and again I returned to Damascus. The second question is: what does εὐθέωσ add to this communication? This adverb εὐθέωσ qualifies the following negative phrases.29 The inver- sion of adverb and negation, which happens in many translations, is abso- lutely wrong. In view of the formation ending —ωσ, εὐθέωσ is an adverb of manner (adverbium qualitatis) from the adjective εὐθύσ = right. The most obvious meaning is: rightly, naturally, as a matter of course. God had already set apart Paul from birth and it was his pleasure to reveal his son in him: naturally he did not confer with flesh and blood.30 Thus also in the case of Galatians 1:16 I conclude that εὐθέωσ is an adverb of quality. The temporal meaning expressed with at once or immediately makes no sense. The inversion οὐκ εὐθέωσ is not permissible because it changes the meaning, and putting the negative phrases between commas or brackets or dashes is also invalid. In Galatians 1:15-17 it is not that Paul is referring to an instantly taken decision, but is referring to a deci- sion taken as a matter of course: evidently Paul did not confer with any human being. A beautiful parallel in accordance with this interpretation is found in Philo, De opificio mundi 10.37 (see above under § 3.4). 6. Supposed pleonasm in Acts 14:8-10 Acts 14:8-10 says: “In Lystra there was a man sitting who could not use his feet and had never walked, for he had been crippled from birth. He listened to Paul as he was speaking. And Paul, looking at him intently and seeing that he had faith to be healed, said in loud voice: ἀνάστηθι ἐπὶ τοὺσ πόδασ σου ὀρθόσ, stand up straight on your feet.” In addition to this, the text of Codex Bezae D.05 continues: καὶ εὐθέωσ παραχρῆμα ἀνήλατο καὶ περιεπάτει.31 This phrase is sometimes understood as a pleonasm, a phenomenon that “consists in the repetition of an idea which 28 For this construction see Gal 1:1: οὐκ ἀπ’ ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ δι’ ἀνθρώπου ἀλλὰ διὰ ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ πατρόσ. The word ἀλλά in verse 17 cannot be neglected. 29 For the order εὐθέωσ οὐ see e.g. Herodian, Historiae VIII 4.6: εὐθέωσ οὐκ ἔδοξε, he rightly did not decide. 30 The same opposition, God over against ‘flesh and blood’, is found in Matt 16:17: ‘for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my father in heaven.’ See also Matt 16:23: ‘for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things.’ 31 See, however, M.-É. Boismard - A. Lamouille, Le Texte Occidental des Actes des Apôtres: Recon­sti­tution et réhabilitation (Synthèse 17, Paris 1984), Tome I, Introduction et textes, 173. I do not under­stand why Boismard rejects the reading καὶ εὐθέωσ παραχρῆμα ἀνήλατο of D d syhmg as part of the so called western text as re­constructed.