From: Lynn Trapp (rltrapp@bluebunny.com)
Date: Fri Aug 25 2000 - 12:21:16 EDT
<x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:34 EDT
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>[b-greek] Re: Meaning of PANTWN hUMWN in 1 Cor 14:18</TITLE>
<STYLE type=text/css>BLOCKQUOTE {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-TOP: 0px
}
DL {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-TOP: 0px
}
UL {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-TOP: 0px
}
OL {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-TOP: 0px
}
LI {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN-TOP: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=344361816-25082000>Carl,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=344361816-25082000>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. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=344361816-25082000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=344361816-25082000>Thanks
in advance for you enlightenment.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=344361816-25082000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=344361816-25082000>Lynn :-)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=344361816-25082000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Carl W. Conrad
[mailto:cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 25, 2000
6:22 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Biblical Greek<BR><B>Cc:</B> Biblical
Greek<BR><B>Subject:</B> [b-greek] Re: Meaning of PANTWN hUMWN in 1 Cor
14:18<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV>At 11:37 PM +0000 8/24/00, Mark Wilson wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>>>This raises a different question than I was asking, but still
appropriate.<BR>>>Does MALLON refer to the comparative number of
languages/tongues that Paul<BR>>>and the Corinthians speak or the
comparative number of occasions or times<BR>>>that they speak in
tongues?<BR>><BR>><BR>>Again, I do not see any reason to restrict the
usage here. Do you?<BR>><BR>>Since God had called Paul to the unique
role as apostle to the Gentiles<BR>>(plural), it would seem beyond likely
that Paul spoke BOTH more (Gentile)<BR>>languages and on more occasions
than those who had this gift in Corinth.<BR>><BR>>(I personally do not
use "tongues" since it seems archaic to me. I would<BR>>consider using
"tongues" if I were conversing with a native American
Indian,<BR>>however.)<BR>></DIV>
<DIV>>I mean no disrepect, but why do you ask?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I noted yesterday, perhaps all too briefly, that I see no relationship
between Acts 2 and the discussion of GLWSSAI in 1 Cor 12-14; I think the
confusion is between two very different senses of GLWSSH for (1) an
intelligible human language (in Acts 2, where Luke seems to envision a
reversal of the dispersion of humanity into diverse language-speaking ethnic
groups in the Genesis Babel story--and I understand Acts 2 as a proleptic
narrative assertion that the gospel, heard in every human language, will
restore the primal unity of humanity) and (2) ecstatic speech that is
unintelligible by itself and requires an interpreter--and in 1 Cor 14 Paul
insists that this glossolalia ought not to be undertaken in worship without
interpreters being present to make the sense of what is 'babbled' intelligible
to others. Here's Louw & Nida:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#007700>33.2 GLWSSA, HS f: a language, with the possible
implication of its distinctive form - 'language, dialect, speech.' HRXANTO
LALEIN hETERAIS GLWSSAIS 'they began to talk in other languages' Ac 2:4. The
miracle described in Ac 2:4 may have been a miracle of speaking or a miracle
of hearing, but at any rate people understood fully, and therefore it seems
appropriate in this context to speak of 'languages' in contrast with 1Cor
14:2, in which case people required an interpreter if they were to receive the
presumed content of the speech (see 33.3).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#007700><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#007700>33.3 GLWSSA, HS f: an utterance having the form of
language but requiring an inspired interpreter for an understanding of the
content - 'ecstatic language, tongue, ecstatic speech.' hO GAR LALWN GLWSSHi
OUK ANQRWPOIS LALEI ALLA QEWi×- 'he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to
people but to God' 1Cor 14:2. Most scholars assume that the phenomena
described in Ac 2:4 (see 33.2) and in 1Cor 14:2 are significantly different in
that in one instance people understood in their own regional language or
dialect and in the other instance an interpreter was required. It is for that
reason that many interpret glw×ssa in 1Cor 14:2 as ecstatic speech, which was
also an element in Hellenistic religions and constituted a symbol of divine
inspiration.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#007700><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#007700>And again I would argue that MALLON PANTWN hUMWN
in</FONT> 1 Cor 14:18 (EUCARISTW TWi QEWi PANTWN hUMWN MALLON GLOSSAIS
LALW)<FONT color=#007700> must mean "I thank God that I speak ecstatically
more than all of you." It's not at all a matter of speaking more different
languages but of speaking a language that is not ordinary human language at
all--and personally I think that this assertion of Paul is probably sarcastic,
as I think many of Paul's statements in this letter to Corinthians who are so
proud of their private mystical experience are sarcastic. I don't wish to
argue that question, because it really doesn't have to do with the Greek text
as such but with the general interpretation of 1 Corinthians, but it IS a
strange statement for Paul to make in a context where he seems to be trying to
discourage glossolalia as a key element in worship.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>-- <BR><BR>Carl W. Conrad<BR>Department of Classics/Washington
University<BR>One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314)
935-4018<BR>Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314)
726-5649<BR>cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu <BR>WWW:
http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>