[B-Greek] 2 Cor 3:14b - subject of KATARGEITAI

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Fri May 15 17:28:06 EDT 2009


I spent some time reading 2Cor 3 in USB3 and Robinson-Pierpont over  
the last several days and concluded that Paul was trying to dazzle us  
with his brilliant rhetoric and the result is somewhat less than  
perfectly clear. Perhaps the climax of confusion is reached in verse 10:

2Cor. 3:10 καὶ γὰρ οὐ δεδόξασται τὸ  
δεδοξασμένον ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει  
εἵνεκεν τῆς ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης.

2COR. 3:10 KAI GAR OU DEDOXASTAI TO DEDOXASMENON EN TOUTWi TWi MEREI  
hEINEKEN THS hUPERBALLOUSHS DOXHS.

KAI GAR OU DEDOXASTAI TO DEDOXASMENON is a truly marvelous expression  
and what follows EN TOUTWi ... DOXHS isn't particularly lucid either.  
To really appreciate Paul's ambiguities, avoid the versions. One thing  
is perfectly clear, DOXA ...  marks a theme in this discourse segment  
and for that reason I agree with Donald that Paul uses "KATARGEW in  
all these verses to speak of the glory ..." and on the subject of  
KATARGEW is the "disappearing glory of the Covenant given through  
Moses".

However, having managed to google[1] to M.J.Harris (2Cor 2005 Eerdmans  
pp 290-319) (search strings: "murray j harris"  " the Old Covenant")  
it seems that the argument for KALUMMA as subject is worth  
considering. The text again:


2Cor. 3:13 καὶ οὐ καθάπερ Μωϋσῆς ἐτίθει  
κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ πρὸς  
τὸ μὴ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ  
εἰς τὸ τέλος τοῦ καταργουμένου.  14  
ἀλλὰ ἐπωρώθη τὰ νοήματα αὐτῶν.  
ἄχρι γὰρ τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας τὸ  
αὐτὸ κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναγνώσει τῆς  
παλαιᾶς διαθήκης μένει, μὴ  
ἀνακαλυπτόμενον ὅτι ἐν Χριστῷ  
καταργεῖται·

  2COR. 3:13 KAI OU KAQAPER MWU+SHS ETIQEI KALUMMA EPI TO PROSWPON  
AUTOU PROS TO MH ATENISAI TOUS hUIOUS ISRAHL EIS TO TELOS TOU  
KATARGOUMENOU.  14 ALLA EPWRWQH TA NOHMATA AUTWN. ACRI GAR THS SHMERON  
hHMERAS TO AUTO KALUMMA EPI THi ANAGNWSEI THS PALAIAS DIAQHKHS MENEI,  
MH ANAKALUPTOMENON hOTI EN CRISTWi KATARGEITAI·

Murray argues that KALUMMA is the subject of the most recent finite  
verbs and this would it difficult to supply DOXA ... as subject for  
KATARGEITAI. I would suggest that DOXA ... is implied in 13c   EIS TO  
TELOS TOU KATARGOUMENOU and that  the absence of explicit reference  
here demonstrates that DOXA ... is still active and available.

Two other problems:  What to do with ANAKALUPTOMENON? Is it an  
accusative absolute, if not how does if function? How to read hOTI in   
hOTI EN CRISTWi KATARGEITAI. Should it be hO TI or hOTI? Punctuation  
hO, TI? Perhaps someone else can solve these.

Another quote from Donald Cobb,

>
> Thirdly, it may be interesting to explore the possibility that the  
> ambiguity in the way 14b is expressed may be deliberate--something  
> we would do well to bear in mind in many of Paul's ambiguous  
> statements.

I totally agree.


Elizabeth Kline

[1] The ability to google to a given book is dependent on your  
location in the world. Not all domains are accepted.


On May 15, 2009, at 12:47 AM, Donald COBB wrote:

> Sorry you've had to wait so long to get an answer! 2 Cor 3:14 is not  
> an easy text. I would point out a couple things:
>
> First, leaving to one side the meaning of KATARGEW, the ending of v.  
> 14 can carry two different meanings: μὴ  
> ἀνακαλυπτόμενον ὅτι ἐν Χριστῷ  
> καταργεῖται, MH ANAKALUPTOMENON, hOTI EN CHRISTWi  
> KATARGEITAI.
> - "For up to this present day, the same veil remains on the reading  
> of the Old Covenant, *it is not lifted, because it is (only)  
> abolished in Christ*"
> - "For up to this present day, the same veil remains on the reading  
> of the Old Covenant, *not being unveiled that it disappears/is set  
> aside in Christ*"
>
> In the first understanding, the reference is to the veil, in the  
> second it is to the Old Covenant. According to BDAG, ANAKALUPTW can  
> have as an accusative either the person/thing that is veiled or the  
> veil itself. I.e., the phrase itself is somewhat ambiguous.
>
> Secondly, aside from the "only" that has to supplied (a fairly minor  
> point), I think the "grammatical considerations" concern especially  
> Paul's use of KATARGEW in this chapter. Outside of verse 14, it is  
> found three times, refering each time to the glory of the Old  
> Covenant (especially as it found expression in the glory shining on  
> Moses' face):
>
> 2 Corinthians 3:7 Εἰ δὲ ἡ διακονία τοῦ  
> θανάτου ἐν γράμμασιν ἐντετυπωμένη  
> λίθοις ἐγενήθη ἐν δόξῃ, ὥστε μὴ  
> δύνασθαι ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς  
> Ἰσραὴλ εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον Μωϋσέως  
> διὰ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ  
> τὴν καταργουμένην
> EI DE hH DIAKONIA TOU QANATOU EN GRAMMASIN ENTETUPWMENH LIQOIS  
> EGENHQH EN DOCHi, hWSTE MH DUNASQAI ATENISAI TOUS hUIOUS ISRAHL EIS  
> TO PROSWPON MWUSEWS DIA THN DOCAN TOU PROSWPOU AUTOU THN KATARGOUMENHN
>
> 2 Corinthians 3:11 εἰ γὰρ τὸ καταργούμενον  
> διὰ δόξης, πολλῷ μᾶλλον τὸ μένον  
> ἐν δόξῃ
> EI GAR TO KATARGOUMENON DIA DOCHS, POLLWi MALLON TO MENON EN DOCHi
>
> 2 Corinthians 3:13 καὶ οὐ καθάπερ Μωϋσῆς  
> ἐτίθει κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὸ πρόσωπον  
> αὐτοῦ πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς  
> υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ εἰς τὸ τέλος τοῦ  
> καταργουμένου.
> KAI OU KAQAPER MWUSHS ETIQEI KALUMMA EPI TO PROSWPON AUTOU PROS TO  
> MH ATENISAI TOUS hUIOUS ISRAHL EIS TO TELOS TOU KATARGOUMENOU
>
> Paul uses KATARGEW in all these verses to speak of the glory of the  
> Old Covenant that is disappearing or fading, already in its initial  
> manifestation on Moses' face at Sinai, and he does it to contrast  
> that glory with the greater one that "remains", that of the New  
> Covenant in Christ and of the Spirit. This glory, being greater,  
> eclipses the already disappearing glory of the Covenant given  
> through Moses. In that sense, the παλαιὰ διαθήκη  
> PALAIA DIAQHKH is clearly, to my mind at least, the obvious referant  
> in v. 14.
>
> Thirdly, it may be interesting to explore the possibility that the  
> ambiguity in the way 14b is expressed may be deliberate--something  
> we would do well to bear in mind in many of Paul's ambiguous  
> statements. The "veil" that is on the heart is something that needs  
> to be removed, and that can only be done "in Christ", by the Spirit.  
> Paul seems to be hinting at the idea that there is a veildness that  
> is part and parcel of the Old Covenant, unlike the New Covenant  
> which allows a complete PARRESIA, "openness" (vv. 12, 17), and that  
> material veiling easily shades off into a spiritual veiling or  
> blinding (v. 14a; 4:3-4). If that's the case, it may be that Paul is  
> suggesting that there is in Christ a double "disappearing" or  
> "setting aside", that of the Old Covenant and that of the "veil"  
> which--in one way or another--hides the glory of God that shines in  
> the face of Christ (4:4).









More information about the B-Greek mailing list