You spend much time asking questions and no time answering them. Nice deflection, and and if that's how you are being guided to answer you need better help.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
It's more revealing what you don't or can't say. You have not once exegeted the text in the Nestle Aland, the one Robertson favors.
It's obviously because it leads you a conclusion that is inconsistent with what you believe.
Or, you are reading into my motives something that simply isn't there. I do not believe your punctuation is correct. Therefore, I don't care to spend the time and I am not going to spend the time balancing the different issues as to arrive at a conclusion. Such is a waste of my time as long as I don't believe it is Scripture. Your refusal to justify this reading solidifies this position all the more. If you don't care enough to argue for this punctation, I need not care enough to exegete it. Therefore, I need only to answer the absurdity of your interpretation. I have nothing against Roberson's interpretation. If you need me to pick one, I choose his. Your's is absurd, his is possible.