hOI PERITEMNOMENOI in Gal. 6:13
Mark D. Nanos
nanos at gvi.net
Mon Jan 24 09:59:13 EST 2000
Dear List,
I am seeking help for how to translate and understand hOI
PERITEMNOMENOI, by which Paul identifies those who are advocating the
addressees' circumcision in 6:13.
A list of the prevailing views found in commentaries with a few of my
own additional suggestions for possibilities (#'s 3-5):
1 Present middle causative, thus emphasis on the influencers'
advocacy of circumcision of addressees is the focus: "those who cause
to be circumcised," or "the ones causing receipt of circumcision," or
simply, "the advocates of circumcision."
2 Present middle permissive, which highlights the present sense of
the action with a passive twist, thus it could be translated as
"those who receive circumcision," "those presently getting
circumcised themselves," or "those who let themselves be circumcised."
3 Present middle habitual would signify a temporal habitual force at
work, "those who customarily circumcise," or "those who are
customarily circumcising."
4 Present middle concessive would focus upon the connection by
accentuating the exception that it involves, bringing to bear the
opening OUDE: "even the ones who are circumcised," or "even the ones
who circumcise."
5 Present middle circumstances attendant brings out the action of the
main verb, in this case, the accusation following that focuses upon
the connection between their identity by way of this substantive
participle and the undermining "revelation" that these ones do not
themselves "keep/guard" the Law, thus: "the ones who are
circumcising," or simply "the ones circumcising" do not "keep/guard"
that which they would be expected to thus hold most dear.
6 Present passive, thus emphasizing the influencers own receipt of
circumcision. This may be translated as "the ones who receive
circumcision."
7 Perfect passive, or hOI PERITETMNHMENOI, a variant construction
actually attested in a few important manuscripts (including [P46),
focuses on the condition which results from a previous action, and
would translate "those who have been circumcised," or "those in the
state of circumcision.
Are the above options the only ones that should be sorted through?
And following Carl's observation that passive is a form of middle, so
passive-middle perhaps, what difference might this make?
In this case it does seem that the active middle choice is redundant,
Paul has already said clearly that they "would compel you to be
circumcised," so why the substantive participle here in the next
verse," or is that just why, because it is the already defined
identity?
On the other hand, might not their own identity as circumcised,
perhaps even by choice (i.e., that they are themselves proselytes who
now seek the proselyte conversion of the addressees), be implied in
this participle, so that it is not a restatement of their advocacy as
much as of their culpability, which is what the rest of the verbal
phrase undermines. That is, that in spite of their indebtedness as
circumcised ones to observe the whole Law (5:3), which is living with
the interests of one's neighbor in view (5:14), that their advocacy
of circumcision of the addressees is a violation of this principle,
since it is, in Paul's view, a violation of what is in the best
interests of these gentiles, because it for them render's meaningless
the death of Christ for them as gentiles, representatives of the
Nations. I mean to express no judgement of whether Paul's judgement
of these people or groups is correct or not; I take his interest here
to be a part of a larger rhetorical discussion that would have to be
considered.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
Regards,
Mark D. Nanos
Kansas City
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 3730 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/attachments/20000124/df449bb2/attachment.bin
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list