Col2:17b-2:18a τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβε

How do I work out the meaning of a Greek text? How can I best understand the forms and vocabulary in this particular text?
Forum rules
This is a beginner's forum - see the Koine Greek forum for more advanced discussion of Greek texts. Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up.

Re: Col2:17b-2:18a τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβ

Postby Stephen Carlson » January 30th, 2013, 8:34 am

timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:I'm wondering if Romans 5:14 is relevant here to the use of the present tense ἐστιν:
αλλ εβασιλευσεν ο θανατος απο αδαμ μεχρι μωσεως και επι τους μη αμαρτησαντας επι τω ομοιωματι της παραβασεως αδαμ ος εστιν τυπος του μελλοντος

Paul uses the present tense to describe Adam, who must be a past, not present, figure in Paul's mind. And, assuming Christ is the referent of του μελλοντος here, Paul's reference is to Christ as a historical figure, not to one who will appear in the future.


Here, the shift in perspective time is pretty clear for supporting a future-in-the-past reading of μέλλω.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke)
Post-Doctoral Fellow, Faculty of Theology, Uppsala
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1809
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Uppsala University

Re: Col2:17b-2:18a τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβ

Postby Jason Hare » January 30th, 2013, 8:43 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:I'm wondering if Romans 5:14 is relevant here to the use of the present tense ἐστιν:
αλλ εβασιλευσεν ο θανατος απο αδαμ μεχρι μωσεως και επι τους μη αμαρτησαντας επι τω ομοιωματι της παραβασεως αδαμ ος εστιν τυπος του μελλοντος

Paul uses the present tense to describe Adam, who must be a past, not present, figure in Paul's mind. And, assuming Christ is the referent of του μελλοντος here, Paul's reference is to Christ as a historical figure, not to one who will appear in the future.


Here, the shift in perspective time is pretty clear for supporting a future-in-the-past reading of μέλλω.


So, ἅ ἐστιν σκιὰ τῶν μελλόντων is future because of the tense of ἐστίν, while ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος is certainly future-in-the-past because of the context? The structure and the ideas are so similar in the two verses. It seems odd that this understanding of Colossians has been ruled out for whatever reason, even though it is the meaning of the context for sure - that the festivals and such were a shadow that was pointing to "coming things" that would be the reality - that is, the things concerning Jesus.
Jason A. Hare
Rehovot, Israel
Jason Hare
 
Posts: 378
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Rehovot, Israel

Re: Col2:17b-2:18a τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβ

Postby Stephen Carlson » January 30th, 2013, 8:53 am

Jason Hare wrote:So, ἅ ἐστιν σκιὰ τῶν μελλόντων is future because of the tense of ἐστίν, while ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος is certainly future-in-the-past because of the context? The structure and the ideas are so similar in the two verses. It seems odd that this understanding of Colossians has been ruled out for whatever reason, even though it is the meaning of the context for sure - that the festivals and such were a shadow that was pointing to "coming things" that would be the reality - that is, the things concerning Jesus.


Not quite. I have been arguing that the context of Col 2 is present--the present judging of present behavior. The festivals and food laws are an important, on-going part in the writer's current, present reality. In Rom 5, on the other hand, Adam is still dead.

Normally, I would like to see some fairly clear indication in the context to shift the perspective time. Your proposal requires two shifts, from the present to the past between μὴ ... κρινέτω and ἅ ἐστιν and then back from the past to the present between ἅ ἐστιν and τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. I think before we multiply entities (here, shifts in perspective time) and run afoul of Occam's Razor, I think the simpler reading should first be ruled out.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke)
Post-Doctoral Fellow, Faculty of Theology, Uppsala
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1809
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Uppsala University

Re: Col2:17b-2:18a τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβ

Postby Marc Possoff » February 2nd, 2013, 12:55 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Jason Hare wrote:So, ἅ ἐστιν σκιὰ τῶν μελλόντων is future because of the tense of ἐστίν, while ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος is certainly future-in-the-past because of the context? The structure and the ideas are so similar in the two verses. It seems odd that this understanding of Colossians has been ruled out for whatever reason, even though it is the meaning of the context for sure - that the festivals and such were a shadow that was pointing to "coming things" that would be the reality - that is, the things concerning Jesus.


Not quite. I have been arguing that the context of Col 2 is present--the present judging of present behavior. The festivals and food laws are an important, on-going part in the writer's current, present reality. In Rom 5, on the other hand, Adam is still dead.

Normally, I would like to see some fairly clear indication in the context to shift the perspective time. Your proposal requires two shifts, from the present to the past between μὴ ... κρινέτω and ἅ ἐστιν and then back from the past to the present between ἅ ἐστιν and τὸ δὲ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. I think before we multiply entities (here, shifts in perspective time) and run afoul of Occam's Razor, I think the simpler reading should first be ruled out.


Does the text indicate that the festivals and food laws which you suggest are a present reality are 'things of the past'? To get more clarity.
Marc Possoff
 
Posts: 17
Joined: January 24th, 2013, 2:31 pm

Previous

Return to What does this text mean?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest