Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: EPISPAOMAI in 1 Cor 7:18

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Charles Savelle" <chsavelle AT hotmail.com>
  • To: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: EPISPAOMAI in 1 Cor 7:18
  • Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:54:29 +0000


Mark,

Thank you for your prompt and helpful reply. I will see if I can track these sources down at the DTS library tomorrow.

Charles,


From: "Mark D. Nanos" <nanosmd AT comcast.net>
Reply-To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: [corpus-paul] Re: EPISPAOMAI in 1 Cor 7:18
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:19:45 -0500

on 9/17/02 1:02 PM, Charles Savelle at chsavelle AT hotmail.com wrote:

> I have three interrelated questions regarding the use of the NT hapax
> EPISPAOMAI ("to remove the marks of circumcision")in 1 Cor 7:18.
> The first question pertains to the origin and background of the term. I
> haven't been too successful in finding much here. Is anyone aware of any
> detailed studies of the term?

Charles,
I find two studies you may wish to consult:
Robert Hall, "Epispasm and the Dating of Ancient Jewish Writings," Journal
for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 2 (1988) 71-88.
Nisan Rubin, "The Stretching of the Foreskin and the Enactment of Periah,"
(in Hebrew), Zion 54 (1989) 105-17.

These are from Shaye Cohen's very useful book for these kinds of topics: The
Beginnings of Jewishness, U. of California Press, 1999.

> The second question is a little more historical, that is, is there any
> evidence that early Jewish Christians ever attempted to undo their
> circumcisions?

Not of which I am aware. It would be counter-intuitive for the Judean
coalitions, who appear to have valued their Jewish identity "zealously," and
it would be against Pauline teaching, to which you refer.

> The third question is more literary. If early Jewish Christians were not
> typically involved in being uncircumcised, then what is the purpose of
> Paul's reference to what basically would be a non-issue in 1 Cor 7:18? At
> this stage, I am inclined to think that Paul mentions it merely for the sake
> of balancing his argument and illustrating the comprehensiveness of the
> principle which he introduced in the previous verse. Any thoughts?

I would agree that this seems more of a rhetorical point.

Regards,
Mark
--
Mark D. Nanos, Ph.D.
313 NE Landings Dr.
Lee's Summit, MO 64064
USA
nanosmd AT comcast.net



---
You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: chsavelle AT hotmail.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page