EPISPAOMAI in 1 Cor 7:18
Steven Lo Vullo
slovullo at mac.com
Tue Sep 17 20:01:55 EDT 2002
On Tuesday, September 17, 2002, at 12:51 PM, Charles Savelle wrote:
> Does anyone have any information on the use of the NT hapax EPISPAOMAI
> ("to remove the marks of circumcision") in 1 Cor 7:18. That is, what
> is the origin and background of the term. I haven't been too
> successful in finding much here. Is anyone aware of any detailed
> studies of the term? Thanks in advance for any help that you can
> provide.
>
> I have also have two related questions which go beyond the scope of
> this discussion list so would need to be answered OFF-LINE (directly
> to me). The first question is historical in nature. Is there any
> evidence that early Jewish Christians ever attempted to undo their
> circumcisions?
> The second question is more literary. If early Jewish Christians were
> not typically involved in being uncircumcised, then what is the
> purpose of Paul's reference to what basically would be a non-issue in
> 1 Cor 7:18? At this stage, I am inclined to think that Paul mentions
> it merely for the sake of balancing his argument and illustrating the
> comprehensiveness of the principle which he introduced in the previous
> verse. Any thoughts?
Check out the article on circumcision in the Anchor Bible Dictionary.
Section B. ("Greek and Roman Periods to the Bar Kokhba Revolt") will, I
think, provide some good information. It does seem that Paul would have
been aware of attempts by Jews to surgically conceal circumcision. For
example, 1 Mac 1.15 tells us that some renegade Jews in the time of
Antiochus Epiphanes EPOIHSAN hEAUTOIS AKROBUSTIAS (cf. Jos Ant. 12.241:
THN TWN AIDOIWN PERITOMHN EPEKALUYAN).
I personally doubt that there was a movement of early Jewish Christians
who attempted to undo their circumcision. Unlike in the days of the
Maccabees, when Jews were under extreme pressure by the Gentiles to
conform to Hellenistic ways, the situation in Paul's day was the
reverse, i.e., the Gentiles were under pressure (albeit not the same
quality and degree of pressure) by many Jews to accept circumcision. So
I think your above inclination is on the right track. The exhortation
not to attempt to undo circumcision is probably rhetorical. But the
fact that epispasm had historical precedence that most Jews were aware
of lends a realism to Paul's argument that prevents it from being
conceived as absurd.
============
Steven R. Lo Vullo
Madison, WI
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list