[B-Greek] Eph 1,11: EKLHRWQHMEN

Remington186 at aol.com Remington186 at aol.com
Mon Nov 1 18:50:22 EST 2004


At 1:49 PM +0100 11/1/04, R.J.C. van Haaften 
wrote:

>By some, the word EKLHRWQHMEN is translated as
>obtained an inheritance, while others prefer
>made an inheritance. What are the arguments on
>both sides?

To which Carl, cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu,
replied, Mon Nov 1 08:04:07 EST 2004,

"made an inheritance" I haven't seen--at least not in English. The question
is whether EKLHRWQHMEN should be understood as passive "have been made
heirs" or middle "have acquired an inheritance." This is in fact the only
instance of KLHROW/KLHROUMAI in the GNT; the probability, in my judgment,
is that the -QH- form here represents the aorist middle. I think that the
middle usage is natural here--as with DECOMAI--and that the verb probably
ought to be lemmatized for the GNT as KLHROUMAI. You might want to look at
BDAG s.v. KLHROW.

TEXT:... EN hWi EKLHRWQHMEN PROORISQENTES KATA PROQESIN TOU TA PANTA 
ENERGOUNTOS KATA THN BOULHN TOU QELHMATOS AUTOU ...
-- 
And Remington replies, 

Dear Jan,

Carl has made here what many, and I, myself, believe to be a scribal fault at 
Eph 1:11: Carl has inadvertently dropped the word KAI [following EN hWi].  
Lachmann sees EKLHRWQHMEN as a scribal error for EKLHQHMEN. Nicoll's, The 
Expositor's Greek Testament, with Dr. S. D. F. Salmond, contributing the exposition 
on Eph., has almost two pages on EKLHRWQHMEN.
The Analytical Greek Lexicon, Zondervan, 9th printing, 1973 [No authorial 
attribution], gives both EKLHQHMEN and EKLHRWQHMEN for Eph. 1:11. EKLHQHMEN, 1 
pers. pl. aor. 1, ind. pass. of KALEW, and EKLHRWQHMEN, 1 pers. pl. aor. 1, ind. 
pass. of KLHROW. EKLHQHMEN in parentheses. 

Regarding, "made an inheritance" I haven't seen", Alford has: "we were … made 
his inheritance" … Weymouth has: "we have been made heirs" … TCNT has: "we 
became God's Heritage" … NWT has: "we were assigned by lot" as an interlinear; 
otherwise: "we were assigned as heirs". NEB has: "we have been given our 
share", RSV makes no note of ELKHRWQHMEN - surprisingly [unless this is a bad 
excerpt]. 

Dr. Salmond [in his nearly two pages] mentions more than Lachmann following 
EKLHQHMEN: "the reading EKLHQHMEN, found in a few uncials and favoured by 
Griesbach, Lachmann, Rückert, may be a gloss from Romans 8:13 or possibly a simple 
case of mistaken transcription due to the faulty eyes of some scribe." Salmond 
also uses the Vulgate 'both' ways, saying, in one instance, "The AV … seems 
to follow the erroneous rendering of the Vulgate, in quo etiam nos" [corrected 
in Aland and Aland's recension] … and, … "may it be that the word has a sense 
somewhat different from either? Some take this latter view, understanding the 
word to mean appointed by lot, or elected by lot, sorte vocati sumus as the 
Vulgate makes it. So Syr., Goth., Chrys., Erasm., Estius, etc." 
The Vulgate: Ephesians 1:11 in quo etiam sorte vocati sumus praedestinati 
secundum propositum eius qui omnia operatur secundum consilium voluntatis suae

Warmest regards,
Remington Mandel
Hemet CA USA



More information about the B-Greek mailing list