[B-Greek] Force of KAI in 1 Cor 11:23?

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Feb 18 00:57:35 EST 2011


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl Conrad" <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: "Mark Goodacre" <Goodacre at duke.edu>
Cc: "Biblical Greek Mailing List" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 17. februar 2011 19:25
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Force of KAI in 1 Cor 11:23?


>
> On Feb 17, 2011, at 10:32 AM, Mark Goodacre wrote:
>
>> On 17 February 2011 09:13, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This is an interesting question. After giving it a bit of thought, I'm
>>> thinking that the context in which he presents this 'traditiona" account
>>> of the last supper -- as a basis for scolding the Corinthian believers for
>>> abusing the ritual -- doesn't figure heavily in this "parenthetical"
>>> formulation: that is, he wants them to acknowledge that this is not
>>> something they haven't known about.
>>>
>>> If that's right, then the implicit sense of the hO KAI might be
>>> conveyed as, "This tradition is one that came to ME from the Lord --
>>> and I DID pass it on to YOU" -- i.e. "you have no excuse for
>>> not knowing it."

[Mark:]
>> One of the difficulties here is the terse nature of  Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον
>> ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου (EGW GAR PARELABON APO TOU KURIOU) which appears
>> counter-intuitive given the extreme unlikelihood that Paul was present
>> "on the night he was handed over".  I am wondering if ὃ καί (hO KAI)
>> actually helps us to unpack some of that terse first clause.  If Paul
>> is saying "that which I too passed on to you", then what we are seeing
>> is the implicit presence of the "passing on" also in the first clause.
>> In other words, the sense is "I received from the Lord (when it was
>> passed on to me) what I *also* passed on to you".
>>
>> I think 1 Cor. 15.1,3, which is closely parallel, and deals with the
>> same kind of thing -- conveying of Jesus tradition to the Corinthians
>> -- might help us out:
>>
>> Γνωρίζω δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν, ὃ καὶ
>> παρελάβετε . . .
>>
>> GNWRIZW DE hUMIN, ADELFOI, TO EUAGGELION hO EUHGGELISAMHN hUMIN, hO
>> KAI PARELABETE . . .
>>
>> Παρέδωκα γὰρ ὑμῖν ἐν πρώτοις, ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον, ὅτι Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν . . .
>>
>> PAREDWKA GAR hUMIN EN PRWTOIS, hO KAI PARELABON, hOTI CRISTOS APEQANEN . . .
>>
>> In each case the ὃ καί (hO KAI) unpacks and emphasizes what is
>> implicit in the previous clause, so Paul in 1 Cor. 15.3 also received
>> the tradition that he had handed on to the Corinthians and which they
>> too had, of course, received.  "For I passed on to you as of first
>> importance (implicity: and which you received), that which I *also*
>> received, that Christ died . . ."
>>
>> In other words, it looks to me like Paul uses the KAI to build on what
>> is implicit in the previous clause.

[Carl:]
> On the other hand ...
>
> (a) The phrasing in 1 Cor 11:23 has the emphatic pronoun EGW in the
> main clause; this is absent in 15:3.
>
> (b) In chapter 15 again the tradition is cited as a basis upon wich Paul
> constructs his argument "contra Corinthios" about the reality of the
> resurrection, as earlier about what the ritual Eucharist really means.
>
> (c) Of course Paul cannot claim to have been present with the
> disciples on the night of the betrayal, but he nevertheless claims to
> have received the tradition APO KURIOU. This phrasing reminds me
> of the phrasing of 1 Cor 1:11-12:
>
> Γνωρίζω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν
> ὑπ᾿ ἐμοῦ ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον·  12 οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ
> παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτὸ οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην ἀλλὰ
> δι᾿ ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
>
> [Gal. 1:11 GNWRIZW GAR hUMIN, ADELFOI, TO EUAGGELION
> TO EUAGGELISQEN hUP᾿ EMOU hOTI OUK ESTIN KATA ANQRWPON·
> 12 OUDE GAR EGW PARA ANQRWPOU PARELABON AUTO
> OUTE EDIDACQHN ALLA DI᾿ APOKALUYEWS IHSOU CRISTOU.]
>
> Of course, there's a good deal that has to be read between the lines in
> Gal 1 and some may argue that there's some special pleading here in
> his claim to have an altogether independent revelation of the gospel
> directly from Jesus Christ -- but it does suggest that when he writes,
>
> EGW GAR PARELABON APO TOU KURIOU, hO KAI PAREDWKA
> hUMIN, hOTI hO KURIOS IHSOUS ... ,
>
> he may very well be emphasizing the linkage in this PARADOSIS;
> from the Lord -- to Paul -- to the Corinthians. I still think that the
> emphatic EGW of 11:23 carries its full weight.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

If we look at KAI from a syntactical point of view it may coordinate two 
elements, whether words, phrases, clauses or sentences. But it can also function 
as an adverb, in which case it modifies the word that follows. So, what we need 
to focus on is not hO KAI, but KAI PAREDWKA. Semantically, KAI indicates some 
kind of addition, whatever the syntax is.
It may coordinate subjects as in "You and I did A (together)". Or one can say: 
"You did A, and I, too, did A." Both of these could have KAGW. The event needs 
to refer to the same idea. This is different from "I did A and I also did B." It 
is this last construction we have here: I have not only received something, but 
I have also handed it over to you.

The EGW is emphatic and contrasts the person of Paul with the Corinthians. It 
probably indicates that Paul has higher authority than they have in this matter, 
because he is closer to the source. Yes, Paul was not present at the last 
supper, but not too long after his conversion (3 years), he stayed with Peter 
for 2 weeks (Gal 1:18). Paul did not want to be taught theology by Peter or the 
other apostles. He did not want to be one of their disciples in the usual 
rabbinic fashion, and that is what Gal 1:1 and 11-12 is all about. Paul's gospel 
was much more radical than that of Peter in terms of a break from traditional 
Judaism, which is clear enough from Acts. Paul already had his ph.d. in Judaism, 
studying under Gamaliel, and he used to be a radical Pharisee (Gal 1:14), but 
all of that changed when he met Jesus. He now considered it rubbish (Phil 
3:2-11) - with a typical Jewish hyperbole.

When Paul went to stay with Peter in Jerusalem (Acts 9:26ff), he must have asked 
repeatedly: "What did Jesus say on this or that occasion?" He was looking for 
factual, historical information, not for the theology of the apostles. He was 
undoubtedly told about the words of Jesus at the last supper, so he has the 
words from Jesus, but with an eyewitness link in between: Jesus - Peter - Paul. 
The text does not use hUPO, but APO indicating the ultimate source. After 
getting all the historical information he could get out of Peter, he went to see 
James, the oldest brother of Jesus, probably to hear about Jesus as a child or 
before he started his public ministry.

If we compare 1 Cor 11:23 and 15:3 we see the difference in order:
11:23 I have received what I have also passed on to you, namely that Jesus took 
bread...
15:3 I have passed on to you what I have also received, namely that Christ died 
....

This order indicates that in 11:23 the receiving is relatively more prominent 
than the passing on, and that is why the second part can be seen as somewhat 
parenthetical in both places. In 15:3 the passing on is more prominent than the 
receiving. The focus in 11:23 is on Paul and his understanding of the Eucharist 
as he has received it from the source. Here he is correcting them. The focus in 
15:3 is on the Corinthians and the topic of resurrection which he has already 
talked to them about. Here he is reinforcing what many Greeks in Corinth found 
difficult to believe (not talking about those in Athens - Acts 17:32).

There is an interesting array of adverbial KAI's in 15:1-3:
τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν
TO EUAGGELION hO EUHGGELISAMHN hUMIN
the gospel I evangelized/preached to you

ὃ καὶ παρελάβετε
hO KAI PARELABETE
which you (not only heard) but also received/accepted/took to heart

ἐν ᾧ καὶ ἑστήκατε
EN hWi KAI hESTHKATE
which you (not only took to heart) but also live in/by (now)

δι᾽ οὗ καὶ σῴζεσθε
DI' hOU KAI SWiZESQE
(not only do you stand in it but) by means of this gospel you are also now in 
the process of being saved

The GAR of verse 3 introduces a more detailed explanation of the key historical 
facts regarding the resurrection of Jesus, which Paul already had passed on to 
them, but now wants to remind them of and expand on.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list