[B-Greek] Col 2:11 (was Eph 1:9: Going beyond grammar?)

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Sat Aug 15 04:48:25 EDT 2009


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George F Somsel" <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
To: "Oun Kwon" <kwonbbl at gmail.com>; <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 15. august 2009 06:53
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Eph 1:9: Going beyond grammar?


> Ἐν ᾧ καὶ περιετμήθητε περιτομῇ ἀχειροποιήτῳ ἐν τῇ ἀπεκδύσει τοῦ σώματος τῆς 
> σαρκός, ἐν τῇ περιτομῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ,
> EN hWi KAI PERIETMHQHTE PERITOMHi AXEIROPOIHTWi EN THi APEKDUSEI TOU SWMATOS 
> THS SARKOS EN THi PERITOMHi TOU XRISTOU
>
> Here we see 3 uses of EN + Dat.
>
> 1. EN hWi
> 2. EN THi APEKDUSEI TOU SWMATOS THS SARKOS
> 3. EN THi PERITOMHi TOU XRISTOU
>
> #1 I would understand as indicating relationship or association (BDAG #4)
> #2 is circumstance (BDAG #7)
> #3 is means or instrument (BDAG #5)
>

BDAG #4 is a nice "waste basket" for saying that the connection is obscure. 
Association and relationship is extremely vague and open. I don't think it is 
necessary to number these senses to understand the text, but it may help to 
clarify how we have understood it.

My understanding of these EN phrases is that your #1 is an emphatic anticipation 
of #3 and therefore has the same sense. Paul often uses such short, emphatic 
frontings to underscore that all of this depends on Christ. #3 then unpacks the 
short EN hWI (CRISTWi) to mean EN THi PERITOMHi TOU CRISTOU.

Yours #2 and #3 refer to the same event/concept but describes it in different 
ways. Even the PERITOMHi ACEIROPOIHTWi describes the same event.

The reason I object to "in union with Christ you were circumcised" is that when 
they were uncircumcised they were not in union with Christ. The circumcision 
points to that change of state from uncircumcised to circumcised, the coming 
into union with Christ. CEV corrected this GNB mistake, as it has done a number 
of times.

The main verb in the verse is PERIETMHQHTE. You were "circumcised". The rest of 
the verse tries to explain this metaphorical circumcision. It was not done by 
hands, i.e. not literal. It consists of a removal of the "flesh", and it is the 
spiritual circumcision that came with Christ in contrast to the physical one 
starting with Abraham. I would be happy calling all of these datives 
circumstantial, since they all describe the nature of this "circumcision" of the 
person who comes to have faith in Christ.

I am not going to quote how I have translated the whole verse since that leads 
people to discuss translation philosophy.

Iver Larsen 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list