From: Chuck Tripp (ctripp@ptialaska.net)
Date: Tue Apr 10 2001 - 01:42:05 EDT
While we are on the subject of PARQENOS, I ran into something in 1Co 7.36
and 37. Here is the text:
36.EI DE TIS ASCHMONEIN EPI THN PARQENON AUTOU NOMIZEI, EAN iH hUPERAKMOS
DAI hOUTWS OFEILEI GINESQAI, hO QELEI POIEITW, OUC hAMARTENAI, GAMEITWSAN.
37. hOS DE hESTHKEN EN THi KARDIAi AUTOU hEDRAIOS MH ECWN ANAGKHN, EXOUSIAN
DE ECAI PERI TOU IDIOU QELHMATOS KAI TOUTO KEKRIKEN EN THi IDIAi KARKIAi,
THREIN THN hEAUTOU PARQENON, KALWS POIHSEI
The mental picture that I had upon my initial reading of this was situation
where someone is getting a little too physical with PARQENOS AUTOU, or his
girlfriend and Paul advises someone in that circumstance to go ahead and get
married. In v 37 you have some who is able to exercise self control with
respect to PARQENOS AUTOU and Paul advises a person in such circumstances to
remain unmarried.
I noted a couple of odd things with this however. One is the phrase
PARQENOS AUTOU. I find it a bit odd that a PARQENOS connected to AUTOU. I
thought, maybe she is betrothed or maybe simply a term for girlfriend. The
other thing I found odd, was verse 37, where Paul seems to be advising
someone to remain in a relationship with a PARQENOS in a non-married,
non-physical relationship indefinitely. Again we find the phrase PARQENOS
AUTOU.
As it my custom, upon finishing the chapter, I take out the translations
that I have and go over the chapter and to my surprise two translation, the
NIV in their alternate translation, and the NASB, put the two verses in a
father daughter context. TIS in verse 36 and hOS in verse 37 are refering
to a father, with PARQENOS refering to the father's daughter. The KJV and
the primary translation in the NIV pretty much have it as written in the
greek.
Now I can readily that a father daughter relationship would clear up the
PARQENOS AUTOU thing that I found odd, but it sure does not clear up some
other things I see in the passage. For one thing, neither father nor
daughter appear explicitly in the text, so right away, it seems to me an
uphill battle to arrive at that interpretation. Secondly, it seems more
difficult to read ASCHMONEIN EPI THN PARQENON AUTOU from v. 36 and
especially EXOUSIAN DE ECAI PERI TOU IDIOU QELHMATOS in v. 37 in a father
daughter context than in a 'boyfriend-girlfriend' context. It just seems
that the sexual temptation aspect falls out more readily from from what I am
reading. I note also that GAMEITWSAN is plural which again goes with the
boyfriend-girlfriend interpretation.
Anyone have any thoughts or insights that might clarify this one why or the
other? Is Paul advising people to remain in a non-physical, non-married
relationship indefinitely in v. 37. Was there a sense of someone having a
virgin that was 'his.' In a modern context, such an intepretation does not
seem so bizarre, but I don't know if people had girlfriends before getting
married in Corinth at that time. Then against the backdrop of the pagan
practices of that time and place maybe they did. I am curious for any
insights any might have.
Chuck Tripp
Kodiak, Alaska
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:54 EDT