From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 12 2000 - 07:12:50 EDT
At 2:56 PM -0400 4/11/00, broking wrote:
>Would someone much wiser than I please comment on
>the phrase TOIS DE LOIPOIS as used in 1 Corinthians
>12:7? Does the independent use of the adjective here
>imply the things written to Paul by the Corinthians (v. 1),
>or a new grouping of married couples? What would
>indicate one interpretation above the other?
to which Harold Holmyard has already replied:
At 3:15 PM -0500 4/11/00, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:
> . . .. let me say that the
>context suggests that Paul with TOIS DE LOIPOIS refers to people, and to
>all people except those addressed by Christ. In verse 8 the same verb LEGW
>has a similar dative indirect object, referring to the unmarried and to
>widows. ln verse 10 it is such a dative with PARAGGELLW, but Paul qualifies
>that it is "not I but the Lord" who gives the instructions. He refers to
>Christ's directives about marriage, which the Gospels record. In 1 Cor 7:12
>Paul says that he, not the Lord, speaks to the rest. He immediately gives
>instructions about a marriage where one person is a believer and the other
>an unbeliever. Perhaps the difference between this couple and those
>addressed by Christ in the Gospels is that in Jewish society it was assumed
>that both spouses would be believers. The Jew was only to marry a fellow
>Jew or a woman who would submit to the God of Israel. Thus Paul was
>addressing a situation that Jesus would not have had in mind as He
>instructed Israel about marriage.
The text that I think relevant here:
1 Cor 7:8 LEGW DE TOIS AGAMOIS KAI TAIS CHRAIS, KALON AUTOIS EAN MEINWSIN
hWS KAGW; 9 EI DE OUK EGKRATEUONTAI, GAMHSATWSAN, KREITTON GAR ESTIN
GAMHSAI H PUROUSQAI. 10 TOIS DE GEGAMHKOSIN PARAGGELLW, OUK EGW ALLA hO
KURIOS, GUNAIKA APO ANDROS MH CWRISQHNAI. 11 EAN DE KAI CWRISQHi, MENETW
AGAMOS H TWi ANDRI KATALLAGHTW, -- KAI ANDRA GUNAIKA MH AFIENAI. 12 TOIS DE
LOIPOIS LEGW EGW OUC hO KURIOS: EI TIS ADELFOS GUNAIKA ECEI APISTON KAI
hAUTH SUNEUDOKEI OIKEIN MET' AUTOU, MH AFIETW AUTHN.
I'd see two distinctions being made here: (a) who is being addressed, and
(b) what authority is indicated for the advice offered.
(a) 7:8 He addresses in the dative the two categories of "the unmarried and
the widows," while in 7:10 he addresses those who have married, and I would
assume that the masculine dative plural perfect participle is meant to be
inclusive of both genders since he is talking about sexual relations
between husband and wife from the perspective of both sides and I would
understand him to be speaking to couples who have ceased having sexual
relations with each other--and then in 7:12 he addresses "the rest" (TOIS
LOIPOIS), by which I would understand to be the rest of hOI GEGAMHKOTES
referred to in 7:10, i.e. the married couples who have NOT broken off
sexual relations with each other. And to complete the sequence, in 7:25 he
offers advice regarding unmarried girls: (PERI DE PARQENWN EPITAGHN KURIOU
OUK ECW, GNWMHN DE DIDWMI hWS HLEHMENOS hUPO KURIOU PISTOS EINAI). Although
there may be different interpretations of who is being referred to by these
different terms, I would hold that hOI AGAMOI of 7:8 are unmarried men both
young and widowers, whom he groups with the widows, while 7:25 picks up the
unmarried young women. I'm not really so much concerned with precisely
which categories are referred to in which descriptive term, but that's my
read of the sense of the text. So I would understand TOIS LOIPOIS to
include all other married couples not dealt with in 7:10-11; although one
might argue that he's actually referring to everybody not dealt with in
either 7:8-9 or 7:10-11, the context suggests to me rather that it refers
to the rest of the GEGAMHKOTES.
(b) The other distinction is one of authority: in 7:8 he speaks on his own
authority, suggesting that his own celibate state is worthy of emulation by
the AGAMOI and CHRAI; in 7:10 he speaks on the authority of Christ,
explicitly stating it's not his own dictum but a Dominical saying he's
referring to for his authority; in 7:12 he reverts once more to speaking
for himself only (EGW OUC hO KURIOS). And finally I think he clarifies this
distinction in 7:25 (cited above), where he says that he doesn't have a
Dominical instruction (EPITAGHN KURIOU) but offers advice that he
recommends as worth taking seriously because one who through the compassion
of Christ has become trustworthy. (I take it that the anarthrous KURIOU in
7:25 does refer to Christ--sometimes Paul does use an article with KURIOS
but often he doesn't, and frankly I think that's the way we should view
KURIOU in 2 Thess. 1:12--where I agree with Jason Hare that KURIOS is,
properly speaking, an epithet rather than a proper name, although it seems
to me that Paul uses KURIOS, hO KURIOS, IHSOUS CRISTOS, CRISTOS IHSOUS,
KURIOS IHSOU CRISTOS so interchangeably that any one of these seems to
function essentially as a proper name.
I've touched on too many things here when I really meant to respond only to
Darrell Broking's original question about TOIS LOIPOIS in 1 Cor 7:12. I had
and have no intention of offering a larger interpretation of 1 Cor 7, but
only to show how I understand the categories being severally addressed and
the authority cited by Paul for the advice he gives in the several
exhortations.
--Carl W. Conrad Department of Classics/Washington University One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018 Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649 cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:41:05 EDT