ALLHLWN

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Dec 20 00:03:52 EST 2002


>
> The use of ALLHLOUS in Acts 7:26 is remarkable: hINATI ADIKEITE
> ALLHLOUS;  In 7:27 (and in the Exodus passage it's referring to)
> it becomes clear that the ADIKEIN is done by the one to the
> other, and not vice versa: hO DE ADIKWN TON PLHSION ...  What
> ALLHLOUS means is that this ADIKEIN happened within the community.

Well, I think this is going too far. Whereas ALLHLWN does not necessarily
indicate full reciprocity, there must be some mutual engagement. In this
fight, it is clear that one person was in the wrong and was more to blame
than the other party. But I think the use of ALLHLWN indicates that the
wronged party was fighting back to some degree. He was taking part in a
mutual fight. The LXX of Ex 2:13 says DIAPLHKTIZOMENOUS.

> Something similar can be said about Eph. 5:21: hUPOTASSOMENOI
> ALLHLOIS means subordination within the community, namely wifes
> should be subordinate to their husbands, children to their
> parents and slaves to their masters.  Insisting on reciprocity
> (i.e. husbands to wifes, parents to children and masters to
> slaves) because of ALLHLOIS in verse 21 is totally missing the point.
> Gie Vleugels

This is a good point. It would be difficult to suggest reciprocity in the
following passage about wifes  being subordinate to husbands, children to
parents and slaves to masters. There is an authority hierarchy which needs
to be recognized. But reciprocity is not the same as mutuality.

There are other problems with the Eph passage. One is the textual problem in
4:22, where I think the reading of Aleph and A - with hUPOTASSESQWSAN - is
more likely to be original than the UBS/NA text. That is, Let the wives be
submissive to their husbands... or: The wives ought to be submissive to
their husbands...

There is also the problem of whether 5:21 is linked to the preceding verses,
since it has the participle like the preceding verses have. If so, the "one
another" could be a mutual submission to one another within the intended
direct audience, and that direct audience could well be the Christian men in
Ephesus, at least if we interpret the text from the viewpoint of the culture
of the time rather than our own modern culture.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list