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

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Mon Feb 15 16:53:52 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. 
.
On Feb 14, 2010, at 10:11 PM, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:

> 
> hHTE, 2nd person Singular Imperfect Indicative of EIMI (could also by Present
> Indicative)

I assume you mean Present Subjunctive, but following adversative ALLA doesn't play well with a subjunctive.  

> indicates that the persons addressed, that is the Corinthian
> Christians of the letter, had at one time been known to be habitually guilty

Reading KAI TAUTA TINES HTE as "habitually guilty" doesn't sound right to me. If you commit murder you are a murderer. Would Paul allow someone to remain in the Corinthian EKKLHSIAi who only murdered now and then, you know not every day, or even every week but just occasionally bumped someone off ;-) I have heard the "habitually guilty" interpretation of this for half a century from pulpits of various denominations. I no longer think that is a satisfactory treatment of the text which is why I raised the question. 

> of
> the previous mentioned sins (of course, not an exhaustive list). ALLA, but on
> the contrary followed by 3 Aorist verbs, all 2nd person singular Indicatives,
> point to the fact that the Corinthian Christians were no longer practicing the
> above mentioned sins, "you were washed, you were sanctified, you were
> justified."
> 


Then why all the warning about PORNEIA in the following discourse. You don't need a warning if no one is committing these acts. The one way out I see in this dilemma is to have more than one set of addressees in this discourse. At one point Paul is talking to those who are in view by ALLA APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE, at other points he is castigating antinomians who have infiltrated the Corinthian EKKLHSIAN. So you have at least two distinct sets of addressees, the antinomians and those who are threatened by them. Paul warns both groups but does not refer to the antinomians when he says ALLA APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE and so forth.    

What I haven't as yet discovered is a basis in the language of Paul for defending this analysis. 
 
Elizabeth Kline
 






More information about the B-Greek mailing list