[B-Greek] 1Cor. 6:11 change of state
Elizabeth Kline
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Wed Feb 17 14:52:52 EST 2010
Yancy,
We are seem to be wandering into forbidden territory for b-greek so I will keep this brief.
On Feb 16, 2010, at 5:13 PM, Yancy Smith wrote:
> APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE, ALLA EDIKAIWQHTE is language that represents a fairly common habilitation process for being joined to or becoming part of a holy NAOS. Let's just suppose that this language is based upon the ceremonial process the image of a god would pass through to become a representative of a god in Corinth: washing, setting apart, and an official determination and infilling by the fiery spirit of the god so that the name of the god would fit the image. The whole thing, of course is metaphorical. In the language and thought commonly associated with NAOI, both implements and integrants must usually go through some process of habilitation in such cases to pass from the common sphere to the sphere of the holy. However, violating the sanctity of that habilitation--the ANAQHMATA, NAOS, hHAGIOI--was possible, and was also punishable by gods and humans.
It sounds to me like you are reading Paul as if he was writing from a pagan cultural framework. He is writing to those who are in such a framework but can we assume that Paul would adopt their paganism as a framework for understanding the gospel he was proclaiming? Some would argue that Acts 17 demonstrates Paul doing that but in the Corinthian letters Paul seems to be openly hostile toward paganism.
> The force of the argument is the incongruity between their status (assumed at this point to be real until they might be deemed--DIKAIOUSQAI--to no longer be a fit or DOKIMOI to represent God), a status Paul preached and that the Corinthians accepted and God approved and the sad state of--at least some--of his audience to live up to the accepted standard of behavior/holiness implied by that status.
I agree with this in general. I would suggest three divisions with Paul's audience; those who are living in a manner that is consistent with APELOUSASQE, ALLA hHGIASQHTE, ALLA EDIKAIWQHTE. Second group, those who Paul is trying to rescue from their sad state. A third group that Paul considers outright enemies, who are having an influence on the second group and are potentially dangerous to the first group.
The problem is determining what language signals (b-greek!) indicate which group is Paul's primary intended audience at any given point. Paul seems to drift between group one, two and three in a fluid manner, which causes cognitive dissonance for readers a great temporal and cultural distance from the original situation. What I am suggesting is, some things in the Corinthian correspondence which appear at a superficial level to be flat out contradictions, can be resolved to some extent by postulating a shift in audience focus. But how do we discover this shift linguistically? What do we look for?
Elizabeth Kline
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list