Philip Arend wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 5:28 amThe LXX usage is a good place to research. So, if Paul meant unclean, he did not use LXX vocabulary. Next step, looking at a research tool to look further at NT usage. Here is a relevant snippet from Silva's NIDNTTE:
...[snip long quote]...
Thus by the time of the NT it appears that this was a common usage.
Indeed some interesting comments from Silva. Note what he says concerning the Mark passages: "what defiles a person is not
dirt or anything
external but the thoughts of the heart." The "unclean food" laws in Leviticus are nothing to do with dirt or anything external. If one looks at the Mark section (7:1-23), "unclean" as equalling "
ἀκάθαρτος" is not the charge levelled against the disciples, and as Mark interprets in 7:2,
κοινός is
ἀνίπτοις/unwashed, not
ἀκάθαρτος. My question is exactly how far were
κοινός and
ἀκάθαρτος seen as synonymous, rather than something distinct. The passages in Acts seem to differentiate the two, as it's
κοινὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον, not just either
κοινός or
ἀκάθαρτος used, as similar to
φιλέω and
ἀγαπάω in John 21. To me it seems
κοινός is a different category of what is considered "inferior". Even in Heb 10:29, I prefer the Lexham EB's understanding of
κοινὸν ἡγησάμενος as "considers
ordinary" as a meaning much better than say the ESV's "profanes", unless "profanes" here is with the understanding "showing irreverence or contempt", and not "unholy" or "ritualistically impure", and if it was understood as meaning "deems inferior", I don't see much arguing against that.
Jason Hare wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 5:32 am
BDAG specifically lists ritually unclean as the first meaning of
ἀκάθαρτος (notice the accentuation) and pairs it with
κοινός.
This appears to be only in regards to Acts 10:14 etc., which I would say indicates a difference between the two, rather than an accord.
Under κοινός, they also list the meaning of ceremonially impure:
Again, most of this is due to the inclusion of the word in Acts 10, and I think the interpretation using Mark 7:2 and 5 seems to ignore how Mark explains how he's using the word in the Gospel. Notice how there's very little non-NT related references for the use of the word as indicating something "ceremonially impure"? Compare that to BDAG's explanation of
κοινός in a "general" sense, and there's quite a difference. LSJ doesn't even cite any non-NT literature for
κοινός as meaning "ceremonially impure".
Has anyone checked the reference from 1 Maccabees?
1 Maccabees 1:62
καὶ πολλοὶ ἐν Ἰσραὴλ ἐκρεμάσθησαν. καὶ ὀχυρώθησαν ἐν αὑτοῖς τοῦ μὴ φαγεῖν κοινά· (Swete)
But many in Israel stood firm and were resolved in their hearts not to eat unclean food. (NRSV)
The 1 Maccabees passage is actually quite pertinent, as it does use quite a few words to describe things certainly considered "ceremonially impure" or "profane" or "defiled":
1 Macc 1:43-
43καὶ πολλοὶ ἀπὸ Ἰσραὴλ ηὐδόκησαν τῇ λατρίᾳ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἕθυσαν τοῖς εἰδώλοις, καὶ ἐβεβήλωσαν τὸ σάββατον... 45καὶ κωλῦσαι ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ θυσίας καὶ σπονδὴν ἐκ τοῦ ἁγιάσματος, καὶ βεβηλῶσαι σάββατα καὶ ἑορτάς, 46καὶ μιᾶναι ἁγίασμα καὶ ἁγίους· 47οἰκοδομῆσαι βωμοὺς καὶ τεμένη καὶ εἴδωλα, καὶ θύειν ὕεια καὶ κτήνη κοινά, 48καὶ ἀφιέναι τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτῶν ἀπεριτμήτους, βδελύξαι τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ἐν παντὶ ἀκαθάρτῳ καὶ βεβηλῶσαι...
62καὶ πολλοὶ ἐν Ἰσραὴλ ἐκρεμάσθησαν. καὶ ὀχυρώθησαν ἐν αὑτοῖς τοῦ μὴ φαγεῖν κοινά· 63καὶ ἐπεδέξαντο ἀποθανεῖν, ἵνα μὴ μιανθῶσιν τοῖς βρώμασιν, καὶ μὴ βεβηλώσουσιν διαθήκην ἁγίαν· καὶ ἀπέθανον... (Swete)
43And many from Israel consented to his service, and they sacrificed to idols and
defiled the Sabbath...
45and to withhold burnt offerings and sacrifice and drink offering from the sanctuary and to
profane Sabbaths and festivals,
46and
to defile the sanctuary and holy things,
47to build altars and shrines and idols and sacrifice pigs and
common animals,
48and to leave their sons uncircumcised, to make repulsive their souls with all
impurity and
profanation...
62 And many in Israel were in suspense and determined among themselves not to eat what was
common.
63And they chose to die so that they might not
be defiled by the food and not
profane the holy covenant, and they died... (LES)
Is this really in any relation to the use of
κοινός in Romans 14:14? I would say not, as the context from Rom 14:1 isn't about eating ceremonially unclean animals and therefore becoming "defiled" or "ritualistically impure", but about whether it's okay to abstain from eating meat or wine (14:21), and not passing judgement on one who says it's okay, and another that it isn't (one may see a more modern take on this: veganism vs non-veganism). There're many other Greek words which could've been employed if ceremonially impure/unclean foods were being considered here as according with the Torah. What would Paul's, presumably more-Gentile, audience have been thinking of when reading/being read his letter? I'd put my money on the difference between what one considered better or inferior eating and drinking diets, rather than ritualistically clean or unclean animals as it pertained to the Torah, or as Philip said it "days or foods which were ceremonially holy or unholy in the Old Testament law".