Re: All One?

From: Eric Weiss (
Date: Wed Jun 02 1999 - 14:34:58 EDT

Thanks. My original thought had to do with whether or not Paul's statement in
Galatians 3:28 means that Jesus has indeed gotten his John 17:21ff. prayer
answered. Looking at the fractured/factious state of Christendom, I have
wondered if Jesus would ever get this prayer for oneness or unity answered.
Being "one man" - i.e., the "new man" written about in Ephesians, I believe -
is possibly what Paul has in mind here in Galatians. I'm still not sure if
that's what Jesus was praying for in John 17. In other words, is Galatians the
"fulfillment" of Jesus' John 17 prayer - i.e., in Christ Jesus we ARE the "one"
or "unit" that Jesus prayed for? Or are Jesus and Paul talking about 2
different things?

"Carl W. Conrad" wrote:

> At 1:49 PM -0400 6/2/99, Eric Weiss wrote:
> >Gal. 3:28(b) - PANTES (masc. nom. plural) GAR hUMEIS hEIS (masc. nom.
> >
> >John 17:21(a) - hINA PANTES (masc. nom. plural) hEN (neuter nom. sing.)
> >WSIN ... 17:22(b) - hINA WSIN hEN (neuter nom. sing.) KAQWS hHMEIS hEN
> >(neuter nom. sing.)
> >
> >IS there a difference in meaning here? I.e., does the use of the neuter
> >"one" in John 17 mean something different than the use of the masculine
> >"one" - both used in association with PANTES, a masculine form?
> (1) I think I would understand hEIS Gal 3:28b as a generic masculine
> pronominal numeral in the sense of "a single person." There might
> conceivably be another noun implicit, but if there's any at all, my guess
> is it would be ANQRWPOS.
> (2) In Jn 17:21-2 I'd understand hEN as "a unit," "a single whole thing."
> (3) While there may be instances where such phrasing has an authentic
> semantic distinction, I personally doubt that there is one here. in Gal
> 3:28 the group is a corporate person, the body of Christ; in Jn 17:21f. the
> neuter seems chosen simply because abstractions tend to be put in the
> neuter in Greek as in Latin. Thus the motto on US coins, 'E PLURIBUS UNUM'
> ("from many one"--originally, they say, taken from a recipe for a salad
> dressing!) refers to the corporate unity of the states in the union and
> doesn't imply anything about the real gender of the union itself (which
> Jefferson Davis evidently conceived as feminine when he said of it/her
> (long after the end of the Civil War), ESTO PERPETUA.
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University
> Summer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> WWW:

Eric S. Weiss

--- B-Greek home page: You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [] To unsubscribe, forward this message to To subscribe, send a message to

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:29 EDT