Meaning of PANTWN hUMWN in 1 Cor 14:18

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Aug 25 12:52:25 EDT 2000


At 11:21 AM -0500 8/25/00, Lynn Trapp wrote:
>Carl,
>Thanks for your helpful response to this post. I would like to further the
>discussion by trying to discover the reason you believe GLWSSAI in Acts 2
>is different from that in 1 Cor. 12-14. Are there instances in other Greek
>literature that show GLWSSAI being used to refer to "ecstatic speech". I
>was under the impression that it always referred to normal human speech.

Briefly. I believe that the glossolalia being talked about in 1 Cor 12-14
is essentially the same as that described in the longer ending of Mark's
gospel (16:17): SHMEIA DE TOIS PISTEUSASIN TAUTA PARAKOLOUQHSEI: EN TWi
ONOMATI MOU DAIMONIA EKBALOUSIN, GLWSSAIS LALHSOUSIN KAINAIS. The GLWSSAI
KAINAI there are not "foreign" languages but "unprecedented and alien"
languages. Moreover I believe that the antithesis upon which the argument
of 1 Cor 12-14 hangs is that between the indulgence by individuals in
private religious communion in a setting of worship where intelligibility
and sharing of experience are essential to the authenticity of worship. In
chap 12 he says that manifestations of the one Spirit are given PROS TO
SUMFERON, which I take to mean that they are not primarily gifts for
private enjoyment. When Paul says in 1 Cor 14:18-19 EUCARISTW TWi QEWi,
PANTWN hUMWN MALLON GLWSSAIS LALW (wherewith this thread began), and then
goes on to say in vs. 19: ALLA EN EKKLHSIAi QELW PENTE LOGOUS TWi NOI MOU
LALHSAI, hINA KAI ALLOUS KATHCHSW,H MURIOUS LOGOUS EN GLWSSHi, I think he
is contrasting five words that are rational and intelligible with countless
words that are unintelligible--the antithetical elements there are NOI and
GLWSSHi. When in chap 13:1 he says EAN TAIS GLWSSAIS TWN ANQRWPWN LALW KAI
TWN AGGELWN, AGAPHN DE MH ECW, GEGONA CALKOS HCWN H KUMBALON ALALAZON, I
think he is referring by GLWSSAIS TWN ANQRWPWN to the rhetorical
accomplishments of which the Corinthians seemed proud though Paul was not
in the opening chapters of 1 Cor, and that by KAI TWN AGGELWN he is
referring to languages that are not human--those utterances that transcend
human speech and that tongue-speakers perhaps are voicing--but unless there
is the loving concern of AGAPH, both the human rhetorical eloquence and the
angelic glossolalia are just noise that is neither musical nor meaningful.

I wouldn't insist that this perspective on the GLWSSAI of 1 Cor 12-14 is
the only one that may be held, but I am not alone in holding it and I do
think it is a reasonable and consistent way of construing the way the
word(s) is/are actually used in these chapters.

-- 

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/attachments/20000825/29dee8cc/attachment.html 


More information about the B-Greek mailing list