2 Cor. 3:14

Clwinbery at aol.com Clwinbery at aol.com
Mon Aug 5 17:15:03 EDT 2002


In a message dated 8/5/02 3:08:03 PM, toseland at blueyonder.co.uk writes:


>2 Cor 3:14 

>ALLA EPWRWQH TA NOHMATA AUTWN. AXRI GAR THS SHMERON HMERAS TO AUTO

>KALUMMA EPI TH ANAGNWSEI THS PALAIAS DIAQHKHS MENEI MH 

>ANAKALUPTOMENON, hOTI EN XRISTW KATARGEITAI.

>

>The New Revised Standard Version translates, 'Indeed, to this very

>day, when they hear the reading of the old covenant, that same 

>veil is still there, since only in Christ is it set aside'. 

>

>This is typical, I think, of most translations and interpretations.

>But according to Smyth (section 2728), MH with a participle

>generally encodes a condition, not a statement. So I would like to

> translate,

>

>‘For until this present day, when the old covenant is read that same 

>veil remains, unless it is being lifted; for in Christ it is being 

>rendered ineffectual’. 

>

>This would eliminate the need to read in 'only' in the hOTI clause, 

>and also reduce the apparent redundancy of v. 15. 

>

>Am I missing something?

>

First, I would remind Toseland that we need a full name signature at the end 

of the post.


BDAG indicates that MH with the participle can be conditional, causal, or 

concessive. He gives a number of egs. MH can also be used simply to negate 

the ptc but tends to have the article when so doing.


It seems to me in this context with EPWRWQH TA NOHMATA that the conditional 

does not fit. I think he is saying "since the veil is not removed for it is 

nullified (only) in Christ. This seems to fit better with the overall point 

of the passage.


Carlton Winbery

Louisiana College



More information about the B-Greek mailing list