88 JUAN MANUEL GRANADOS ROJAS 2. Preparation, restoration or equipping? Looking at the usage of the related verb katartızw in NT may not ¥ give a definitive meaning of katartismov in Eph 4,12, but it can offer ¥ some useful hints to delimit the semantic domain of the noun. The verb katartızw appears 13 times in NT, and its semantic ¥ domain includes: (a) mending nets (Matt 4,21; Mark 1,19), (b) prepara- tion of sacrifices (Heb 10,5), prayers (Matt 21,16), training whether of a person to become a teacher (Luke 6,40), or even “vessels prepared for destruction ” (Rom 9,22) (KJV) (see also Heb 11,3), (c) unity, being united, being of one mind (1 Cor 1,10; 2 Cor 13,11), (d) restoration, im- plying correction (Gal 6,1) or strength (1 Pet 5,10), (e) fullness, com- p l e t i n g (1 T h e s s 3,10; Heb 13,21) 32 . The verb does not have a well-defined content, and none of its possible meanings easily fits the passage of Eph 4,12. Among the above mentioned meanings, the one that would best fit the context of Eph 4,12 is preparation (b), namely, arranging something to achieve a goal. It is still difficult to say if this preparation implies to correct someone (Gal 6,1), to complete someone or something incom- plete (1 Thess 3,10), or rather, training as in the case of training someone to become a teacher (Luke 6,40). In order to resolve the diffi- culty, it is necessary to consider how the word functions within its context. What context should be examined? It has already been mentioned that the prepositional phrase prov ton katartismon twn ag¥wn seems to de- ùù ù ˜ Ωı pend on the verb edwken of the previous verse, but it could function ¶ either as a purpose clause or as an indirect complement indicating a dif- ferent relationship. To clarify its function the text must be analyzed within its unity of thought. III. Structure and train of thought in Eph 4,7-16 The boundaries of the section are confirmed by de in v. 7 and by the ¥ formula toyto oyn legw in v. 17 33. Eph 4,7 switches from the theme of ˜ ® ¥ the unity to the question of the gifts (domata toıv anurwpoiv) and the ¥ ˜ß ¥ gift of Christ (to metron thv dwreav toy Xristoy). The section focuses ù¥ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ See also the cognate noun katartisiv in 2 Cor 13,9. ¥ 32 Lexical repetitions by themselves cannot delimit a syntactic unity, but 33 they can confirm its boundaries. In this sense, the words ekastov and metron ™ ¥ form an “inclusion” in vv. 7, 16. See variants of toyto oyn legw used as a ˜ ® ¥ formula in Rom 11,1.11; 1 Cor 1,12 ; 7,6; and Gal 3,17.