From: Paul F. Evans (evans@esn.net)
Date: Mon Jan 26 1998 - 17:24:00 EST
Debaters,
We do a great deal of injustice to the language and the text when we
superimpose upon it the modern western social gender struggles of the late
20th century (or any other cultural presupposition for that matter)! The
writers of the NT are removed in time and culture from us and simply don't
think and write in those terms. Choice of voice was almost certainly not
made upon the basis of gender empowerment (the issue of her husband's
treatment of her and the "victim" status of the woman is not in view here).
Jesus certain didn't advocate leniency based upon her unfortunate position,
but based upon the mercy of God extended to all sinners, which is an
underlying theme in John's gospel. And remember the issue in sin is
culpability, which std. Jesus held men and women to equally. Here it true
sexual equality!
Paul F. Evans
Pastor
Thunder Swamp Pentecostal Holiness Church
MT. Olive, NC
WebPage: http://ww2.esn.net/~evans
E-mail: evans@esn.net
----------
> From: F. Holly Mitchell <mitchell@dobson.ozarks.edu>
> To: Carl William Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
> Cc: dd-1@juno.com; b-greek@virginia.edu
> Subject: MOICHEUOMENH
> Date: Monday, January 26, 1998 8:14 PM
>
> bgreekers,
>
> > > My question: How can she be "caught...in the very act" of
> > > being adulterated? What is the significance of being in the
> > > form of the verb? Is this the normal way to speak of a woman
> > > in an adulterous act?
> >
> > I think that MOICEUOMENH should probably be understood here as a middle
> > voice rather than as a passive. To be sure, it is normally active
MOICEUW
> > of both the man and the woman, the implication here is clearly that the
> > woman is no mere victim, and for that reason the middle might be
> > appropriate.
>
> Kittel's dictionary indicates that MOIXAOMAI is typically used passively
> in refering to women in both the NT and the LXX, noting that in marriage,
> the woman has become the possession of her husband (who, by the way is
> not necessarily called to fidelity by the law). I notice also that the
> word 'adulterate' in English means 'to make impure, by adding a
prohibited
> substance'. Thus, the idea that she has become impure, (or has actively
> allowed herself to be adulterated) seems to fit the cognitive model of
> marital possession.
>
> Can you point me to an example of MOIXEUW being used actively in
reference
> to a woman, Carl? (Or do we only assume inclusivity?) I'd *love* to find
> out that I'm wrong!
>
> God Bless,
> Ginger Ferguson
> Univ of the Ozarks
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:00 EDT