[B-Greek] Rom. 1:13

Antti V J Mustakallio amustaka at cc.helsinki.fi
Tue Mar 15 07:50:45 EST 2005


Dear members of the list,

In his essay "For I am not Ashamed of the Gospel (Rom. 1.16): The Gospel 
and the First Readers of Romans" (In Gospel in Paul. Studies on 
Corinthians, Galatians and Romans for Richard Longenecker, eds L. Ann 
Jervis and Peter Richardson. 254-287. JSNTSup 108. Sheffield: Sheffield 
Academy Press 1994) Steve Mason proposed a reading of Rom. 1:13 that has 
bothered my mind lately. The Greek text goes as follows:

OU QELÔ DE HYMAS AGNOEIN, ADELFOI, hOTI POLLAKIS PROEQEMENÊN ELQEIN PROS 
HYMAS, KAI EKÔLYQÊN AXRI TOU DEURO, HINA TINA KARPON SXÔ KAI EN HYMIN 
KAQÔS KAI EN TOIS LOIPOIS EQNESIN

The translation in NRSV is a good example of how this verse has usually 
been understood:

"I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that I have often intended to 
come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap 
some harvest among you as I have among the rest of the Gentiles"

That is, Paul compares "you" and "the rest of the Gentiles", and "the rest 
of the Gentiles" refers to those among whom Paul has already work in the 
Eastern Mediterranean.

Mason's proposal (p. 270) is quite different. He is of the opinion that 
TOIS LOIPOIS EQNESIN should be translated "the remainder of the Gentiles" 
- not just "the rest" - because the basic meaning of LOIPOS is 
"remaining". According to his view, "the remainder of the Gentiles" does 
not mean the Gentiles in the east but those Gentiles among whom Paul will 
work in west, Spain. The idea would be as follows: "He will harvest some 
fruit both among the Judean-Christians of Rome, in passing, and then 
continue the mission for which he was called among the western Gentiles." 
Mason gives the following translation: "I do not want you to be ignorant, 
brothers, that I have often intended to come to you - and have been 
prevented from doing so until now - in order that I might have some fruit 
among you, just as also among the remainder of the Gentiles."

I think that there are some details that support Mason's reading: there is 
only one verb, SXÔ, in the clause, and KAI ... KAI -structure. A big 
question to me is that can KAQÔS really be so flexible.

I would be happy to know what kind of opinions members of this list have 
on Mason's suggestion. Is it grammatically defensible?

Sincerely,

Antti Mustakallio
PhD student
Department of Biblical Studies
University of Helsinki
Finland




More information about the B-Greek mailing list