From: F. Holly Mitchell (mitchell@dobson.ozarks.edu)
Date: Mon Dec 15 1997 - 17:35:35 EST
Jonathan,
Thanks for taking time to respond to my questions!
> So when Paul says he would prefer that young women marry, that is in
> opposition to being enrolled as widows. Those who are enrolled as widows
> seem to be occupying an office similar to that of a nun or a deaconness,
I often find this idea useful in a pastoral context when speaking to
(elderly) widows who feel useless. But is the concept of an "office of
widow" really substantiated by the text, or merely implicated?
> Both Louw & Nida and BAGD state that either men or women can be the subject
> of GAMEW.
Certainly they *can* be, but I think it's quite rare.
> >In the Mt and Lk texts mentioned above, however, I *am* understanding the
> >subjects of GAMOUNTES and EGAMOUN to be male. Are you suggesting the
> >opposite, Jonathan? In that case, what do you do with GAMIZONTES and
> >EGAMIZONTO? Surely we don't have Jesus referring to young men being given
> >in marriage by their mothers in the days of Noah. <g>
>
> *Why* do you assume them to be male? *Why* do you assume that the subject
> of GAMEW is male as a "general rule"?
When GAMEW is paired with GAMIZW, (as they are in these texts), I do
understand GAMEW to refer to the male, and GAMIZW to refer to the female.
The alternative would mean that it is the *sons* who are being given in
marriage.
> The shift from "giving in marriage" to "being given in marriage" also
> does not strike me as very significant -
Perhaps reading the text through the eyes of a woman makes me more aware
of the (albeit subtle) shift in tone. Nonetheless, I am curious as to
whether Jesus was refering to actions taken by a groom and a bride, or
between a groom and his father-in-law.
> the point is that they were caught up with their own lives, completely
> oblivious to the oncoming flood.
Amen! And may we not be found unawake!
God Bless,
Ginger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:38 EDT