[B-Greek] 1Cor. 6:11 change of state

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Sun Feb 14 17:16:51 EST 2010


1Cor. 6:11 καὶ ταῦτά τινες ἦτε· ἀλλὰ ἀπελούσασθε, ἀλλὰ ἡγιάσθητε, ἀλλὰ ἐδικαιώθητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ κ.υρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν. 
.
1Cor. 6:11 KAI TAUTA TINES HTE· ALLA APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE, ALLA EDIKAIWQHTE EN TWi ONOMATI TOU KURIOU IHSOU CRISTOU KAI EN TWi PNEUMATI TOU QEOU hHMWN. 
.
This verse follows a vice list or better yet a list of perpetrators associated with various vices. We will call this a vice list for short. This question isn't about the vices. Again; we are NOT interested at this point in the referents or meaning of the individual terms in the vice list. Let's just eliminate that question from the discussion.

In 1Cor. 6:11 Paul addresses a change of state in past time KAI TAUTA TINES HTE. Apparently Paul's addressees at some time in the past had a life that was characterized by one or more of the activities referenced in the vice list in such a manner that they could be referred to by the perpetrator terms used in the vice list. Paul uses three terms to indicate the change of state ALLA APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE, ALLA EDIKAIWQHTE. Then he proceeds to warn his addressees against participation in activities of a similar nature. 

Is it safe to assume that the addressees are the same throughout? In other words is Paul's warning addressed to the same group of people [identical individuals]  referenced in  KAI TAUTA TINES HTE and ALLA APELOUSASQE ... EDIKAIWQHTE? If so, what is the basis for his warning. Are these people continuing to participate in these activities listed in the vice list? If they are continuing to participate why are they no longer considered perpetrators? In other words why the past tense followed by ALLA?  KAI TAUTA TINES HTE ... ALLA APELOUSASQE ... . 

In Paul's mind the change of state represented by ALLA APELOUSASQE ...  is incompatible with participation in the activities represented in vice list. But his warning implies that there are some people among his addressees who have undergone the change of state but still participate. How can this be? We seem to have people who are no longer considered perpetrators but they are still perpetrating. 

I am not looking for a discourse on sanctification. Just trying to understand Paul's logic in this passage. Perhaps Paul's warning is directed at people who are being influenced by perpetrators but are not actually participating, but at risk of being influenced. This would resolve the logical problem. However, the language of the text doesn't seem to allow for that reading. 


Elizabeth Kline
 






More information about the B-Greek mailing list