οὐδέ in Galatians 3:28
Posted: June 21st, 2013, 6:49 am
οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην, οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος, οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ· πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.
I read this to mean that in Christ, and particularly with salvation and baptism in view, there is no Jew and there is no Greek. One might say that, standing by the pool of baptism, as it were, whatever other identities one may have fade into the background and nothingness in contrast to our identity as Christian believers. This retains the normal function of οὐδέ, that it adds one negation to another.
But some say that it should be read as 'there is no Jew-or-Greek [distinction]'. For example, Philip Payne writes: 'Paul’s meaning is: there is no ‘Jew–Greek’ dichotomy in Christ..'. Although this may make slightly easier sense, it seems to me to be trying to make οὐδέ function like, say, ἤ, as a disjunctive particle, whereas in fact it retains a meaning close to οὐ plus δέ and is very often copulative, adding one negative to another as I said above.
Would be grateful for your insights,
Andrew
I read this to mean that in Christ, and particularly with salvation and baptism in view, there is no Jew and there is no Greek. One might say that, standing by the pool of baptism, as it were, whatever other identities one may have fade into the background and nothingness in contrast to our identity as Christian believers. This retains the normal function of οὐδέ, that it adds one negation to another.
But some say that it should be read as 'there is no Jew-or-Greek [distinction]'. For example, Philip Payne writes: 'Paul’s meaning is: there is no ‘Jew–Greek’ dichotomy in Christ..'. Although this may make slightly easier sense, it seems to me to be trying to make οὐδέ function like, say, ἤ, as a disjunctive particle, whereas in fact it retains a meaning close to οὐ plus δέ and is very often copulative, adding one negative to another as I said above.
Would be grateful for your insights,
Andrew