EPISPAOMAI in 1 Cor 7:18

Steven Lo Vullo slovullo at mac.com
Sun Sep 22 19:20:12 EDT 2002


On Tuesday, September 17, 2002, at 05:36 PM, Richard A. Stauch wrote:

> I think Mark has swerved into it. The whole context helps us understand
> a little more about what Paul means here. Paul seems to be saying that
> God calls a person right where that person is. If one is Jewish, God
> does not intend that person to cease to be Jewish. If God calls one who
> is a Gentile, God does not expect that one to cease to be a Gentile. 
> The
> circumcision, being a work of the flesh, is a sign of Jewishness, not 
> of
> the calling. It seems Paul is going deeper than the mere act of
> circumcision, but to the whole life: If God calls one just as one is,
> then to change who one is mitigates, even negates the calling.

This no doubt contains much truth. But it in no way supports Mark's 
suggestion of circumcision and uncircumcision "parties," nor does it 
support understanding EPISPASQW in the sense of "be drawn away," i.e., 
to a putative "uncircumcised party."

> As for the word itself, this appears to be a compound word (EPI + SPAW;
> on, over + draw, pull [out]). BDAG (EPI, at 7) tells us that it is
> sometimes used to indicate "in addition to". 4 Maccabees 5:2 uses a 
> very
> similar word (EPISPASQAI) in a very similar context, which most of my
> lexica connect to this one, but BDAG disagrees. Here we might think of
> Paul saying "don't add circumcision [as though to change who you were
> when you were called]." God calls one just as one is, so don't think 
> you
> have to change who you are {as though by one's own efforts one can make
> the calling "complete."}

As I understand it, BDAG does not suggest that EPISPASQAI in 4 Macc 5.2 
is a different word from EPISPASQW, only that it does not reflect "this 
special use," i.e., the special use of EPISPAOMAI (EPISPAW in BDAG) in 
1 Cor 7.18 for the undoing of circumcision.

It is not possible to take EPISPASQAI to mean "add circumcision." In 
this case the exhortation MH EPISPASQW would make no sense, seeing that 
it is the already-circumcised to whom it is addressed (PERITETMHMENOS 
TIS EKLHQH, MH EPISPASQW). In this case we would have, "Was anyone at 
the time of his call circumcised? Let him not add circumcision."
============

Steven R. Lo Vullo
Madison, WI




More information about the B-Greek mailing list