[B-Greek] Eph 1,11: EKLHRWQHMEN
Iver Larsen
ialarsen at multitechweb.com
Tue Nov 2 02:41:10 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?
>
[Carl:]> "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 KAI EKLHRWQHMEN PROORISQENTES KATA PROQESIN TOU TA PANTA
> ENERGOUNTOS KATA THN BOULHN TOU QELHMATOS AUTOU ...
> --
>
> Carl W. Conrad
The alternative reading EKLHQHMEN in a few mss is an easier reading and
unlikely to be original, so I'll not comment further on that. It is not even
mentioned in Metzger or the UBS Greek text.
As Carl has said the question is whether it is passive or middle. Most
people consider it passive, and I tend to agree.
The UBS Handbook says: "The idea derives from the Old Testament concept of
the people of Israel being chosen by Yahweh to be his people (compare Deut
9.29; 32.9-10; Psa 74.2). There are those who take the Greek passive
participle here to mean "we have received the lot/portion (from God)," but
it seems better to take it to mean "we were made God's portion/lot." The
:emphasis is that the initiative and action are God's alone: he made us his
people."
F.F.Bruce says: "The NIV renders it "we were . . . chosen." But we are
dealing with a passive form of the verb which means "appoint by lot,"
"allot," "assign," and the passive sense should be brought out unless there
is good reason to the contrary. The reason for the rendering "we were
claimed by God as his portion" (rather than "we were assigned our portion")
is that it is in keeping with OT precedent. In the Song of Moses (Deut.
32:8-9) the nations of the world are assigned to various angelic beings
("the sons of God"), but Yahweh retains Israel as his personal possession:
"for the LORD'S portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage."
So here, believers in Christ are God's chosen people, claimed by him as his
portion or heritage."
The verb KLHROW is used three times in the LXX, 2 times in Isa 17:11 in the
future active, and once in the present passive in 1Sa 14:41.
The related verb KLHRONOMEW (to inherit) is used in the NT when the concept
is that the believers receive an inheritance or share in the (blessings of
the) Kingdom of God. If Paul had intended to talk about believers
inheriting something, I would have expected the much more common verb
KLHRONOMEW. That verb occurs 18 times in the NT, and is used for what
believers will inherit with one exception. In Heb 1:4 it is Jesus who has
inherited a great name.
Therefore, it seems more likely to me that EKLHRWQHMEN is actually passive
and the meaning is then that through Christ we have also/indeed been made
the inheritance/possession of God, i.e. his people.
This view is taken by the NET bible:
"In Christ we too have been claimed as God's own possession."
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list