Stephen Carlson has an interesting post on Conjectural Emendations on the Sly citing Gal. 5.1 as an example. Carlson notes that whereas most reject Hort's emendation of Ἐπ’ for Τῇ at the head of Gal. 5.1, nonetheless, most translations of Gal. 5.1 commit a "sly" conjectural emendation by translating the clause as if they were adopting Hort's reading. My only qualm is that I think that Τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ fits quite well as a "dative of interest" (see Dan Wallace, GGBB, pp. 142-43). If we take the dative as something like for the benefit of or in the interest of, then it makes good sense as "for the benefit of freedom" or "in the interest of freedom" that "Christ has set us free". In addition, I wonder if the expression is perhaps a contracted version of epi te that Paul uses in Phil. 3.9 to indicate "on the basis" and if that can shed light on Gal. 5.1.
A forum for people with knowledge of the Bible in its original languages to discuss its manuscripts and textual history from the perspective of historic evangelical theology.
- Contributors
- Peter M. Head (ed)
- Tommy Wasserman (ed)
- P. J. Williams, and others
Thanks, Mike. Three quick comments to your thoughtful post:
ReplyDelete(1) Dative of interest is usually with persons, as Wallace's examples show (plus the one personified stomach in 1 Cor 6:13). It's hard to see how a reference to personified freedom works here. Plus, I don't know what the article is doing with this interpretation.
(2) I'm not sure that the English rendering "for freedom" expresses a dative of interest very well. In fact, NET's notes on 5:1 actually states that their "for freedom" means purpose.
(3) I would claim that construing the dative as a contracted epi construction is tantamount to conjecturally emending the text along the line of Hort's proposal. ;-)