Andrey Romanov, «Through One Lord Only: Theological Interpretation of the Meaning of 'dia', in 1 Cor 8,6», Vol. 96 (2015) 391-415
The present study attempts to clarify the theological meaning of dia, in 1 Cor 8,6. Traditionally the preposition is understood as an indication of a contrast between God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus' role is described as either instrumental or analogous to the role of Jewish Wisdom. The present study questions these interpretations on the basis of the analysis of the structure of the verse. In this author's opinion, dia, here indicates the unique functions of Jesus Christ which make him the co-worker of God the Father in both creation and salvation.
04_Romanov_391_co_415 30/10/15 13:10 Pagina 407
407 THROUGH ONE LORD ONLY 407
III. dia, of God contra dia, of the Lord?
The most striking problem concerning the meaning of dia, in 1
Cor 8,6 is its correlation with the meaning of dia, (also with the
genitive) used by Paul in Rom 11,36a 49 where according to modern
commentators Paul has God in mind. The problem is complicated
by the repetition of all the prepositions in both phrases. The possible
correlation between the phrases, however, is usually disregarded in
the interpretations of 1 Cor 8,6. Sterling is one of the few scholars
who have made an attempt to find an explanation.
As it was already mentioned, in 1 Cor 8,6 Sterling finds the in-
fluence of two philosophical doctrines, namely of Stoicism in the
part devoted to God the Father and of Platonism (with its instru-
mental dia,) in the part devoted to Jesus Christ. But when dia, refers
to God the Father, according to Sterling, its source is purely Stoic;
therefore in Rom 11,36 (and in Heb 2,10) Sterling finds the Stoic
understanding of divine acting (that is, the Stoic dia,) 50 in contrast
to Platonic dia, in 1 Cor 8,6 (and in Heb 1,2). From this it follows
that Paul has in mind two different meanings of dia,: the first one
(in 1 Cor 8,6b) denotes instrumentality, while the second one (in
Rom 11,36) reflects the act of the only active cause, i.e. of God
himself. One may ask, however, what is the actual difference between
Stoic dia, and Platonic dia, in terms of implied functions (especially
in light of the Platonic understanding of instrumental cause as the
manifestation of God’s own mind)? And therefore, does Paul imply
any difference in functions when he uses “Stoic” dia, in Rom 11,36
and “Platonic” dia, in 1 Cor 8,6? Is it indeed Paul’s intention to use
in these two similar phrases the same preposition but with different
meanings?
The prepositional parallel between 1 Cor 8,6 and Rom 11,36 is
discussed by Basil the Great in chapter 5 of his treatise On the Holy
Spirit 51. Concerning 1 Cor 8,6 Basil points out that the difference
49
Rom 11,36a reads as follows: evx auvtou/ kai. diV auvtou/ kai. eivj auvto.n ta.
pa,nta.
50
See STERLING, “Prepositional Metaphysics”, 233, 236.
51
The Greek text and the German translation are presented in: BASILIUS
CAESARIENSIS, De spiritu sancto (Über den Heiligen Geist) (ed. and Germ.
trans. H.-J. SIEBEN) (Fontes Christiani 12; Freiburg 1993); Basil’s discussion
of 1 Cor 8,6 and Rom 11,36 is on pp. 90-93.