"good" or "better"

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue Jun 25 04:42:51 EDT 2002


Dear Ward

As we draw this dialogue to a close, I'd like to express myself in a more
positive way by setting forth how I understand Paul's comments rather than
just opposing your understanding. Our disagreement is not on Greek words or
their meanings, but on how to put a puzzle together from the various pieces,
especially the whole context of chapters 5-7, but trying to exclude if
possible our own theological background presuppositions.

Let me start from one of your comments below:

[Ward:]
> I had not fully grasped that you were interpreting 7:1 as Paul advocating
> celibacy. I acknowledge that this indeed is how some have taken
> the verse.
> I myself cannot see this - especially as in verses 2ff. he disagrees with
> what is said in verse 1 (whatever it means) - and discusses sex
> in marriage (not just marriage as such). Which (I say) indicates that what
is being
> referred to in 7:1 is also sex in marriage. This view (that 7:1 advocates
> celibacy) puts this verse at variance with what then follows. I see what
> follows as Paul's response to a view (from the Corinthians) with which he
> differs - but 7:1-5 is all discussing the same issue. There is nothing in
> 7:2 to suggest that Paul is "changing the subject" when he is now
> championing the role of sex in marriage.

I am used to a method of linguistic analysis and description where one first
gathers all the linguistic data (not necessarily commentators' views), then
sorts the data into groups depending on how much they have in common, and
only at the end make some hypotheses which then have to be tested further.
One element of this method of analysis is lexical cohesion, which means
looking at the same words or roots occurring again and again within a
portion of text.

In gathering the linguistic data I am not ignoring chapters 5-7. Especially
the last part of 6 where Paul strongly admonishes his readers against
PORNEIA (v. 13, 18). I take PORNEIA to refer to a sexual relationship with
anyone who is not one's spouse. This word is used 5 times in 1 Cor, and it
is interesting to see where: 5:1 (twice), 6:13,19; 7:2. The masculine PORNOS
occurs 4 times in 1 Cor (5:9,10,11; 6:9) and the feminine PORNH occurs twice
in 1 Cor (6:15,16). Paul does not mince his words when he says that those
who practice fornication, idolatry, adultery, male prostitution,
homosexuality, theft, greed etc. will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven
(6:9-10). The verb PORNEUW is used in 6:18. So, PORNEIA is clearly a key
topic of chapters 5-7. This topic is referenced as the backdrop for chapter
7 (through the DIA TAS PRONEIAS in v. 2), but otherwise this group of words
do not occur, so the topic in 7 is not PORNEIA as such, but rather an almost
Shakespearian question "to be married or not to be married?", and how
marriage may help some people to avoid PORNEIA. For the sake of
clarification, I understand PORNOS/PORNH to be a person who is practicing
illicit sex whether he/she is married or not, thereby sinning against
his/her own body (and God), whereas MOICEUW refers to breaking the marriage
vow, thereby sinning against his wife/her husband (and God). An unmarried
man doing this is a PORNOS, and a married man doing so is both a PORNOS and
a MOICOS.

Gathering data for an analysis if 7:1 I look at one of the key words which
is KALOS, meaning "praiseworthy, commendable." I think it is significant
that this word occurs only 6 times in 1 Cor and four of these are in chapter
7. It is further significant that there is a lot of lexical cohesion between
the verses where it occurs, 7:1,8,26(twice).

I have earlier mentioned the Semitic overlay structure which makes it a good
practice to look at such verses together because they are like pieces of a
puzzle in the quest to understand the author's mind. I also mentioned the
common practice of hinting at the topic briefly in the introduction to a
section and then giving further details later. (This is not restricted to
Semitic.) So, let us overlay verses 1, 8 and 26:

7:1 KALON ANQRWPWi GUNAIKOS MH hAPTESQAI
- it is commendable for a person(man) not to "touch" a woman

7:8 LEGW DE TOIS AGAMOIS KAI TOIS CHRAIS,
	KALON AUTOIS EAN MEINWSIN hWS KAGW
- it is commendable for them (widowers and widows) if they remain as I did
(i.e. not remarrying)

7:25-26 PERI DE TWN PARQENWN - concerning those who have never been married:
 .....KALON ANQRWPWi TO hOUTWS EINAI
- it is good for a person to be like this (that is unmarried).

What I think Paul is doing in chapter 7 is correcting an extreme position in
Corinth that was an overreaction to and caricature of what Paul had said
himself, namely that it is praiseworthy to abstain from marriage in order to
live for God in a hostile world that is soon coming to its end. He would
never say that everybody MUST do so. Some had drawn the wrong conclusion
that sex as a whole was then bad or unspiritual, and they said that even for
married people it was more spiritual not to have sex. Paul now presents a
balanced picture in chapter 7.
IMO, he first admits in v. 1. something which he repeats in verses 7,8 and
26: that it is praiseworthy to live in celibacy (for various reasons that he
also expounds in the chapter). BUT, it is only for those who have the gift
of celibacy, that is, those who can live like this without being tempted all
the time to fall into PORNEIA. AND, it is no sin for a person who does not
have this specific gift, to marry.

I do see a contrast in the beginning of v. 2 signalled by DE and hinging on
the DIA phrase. It is not a new topic, but a clarification against an
extreme position held by some in Corinth. So, Paul says - in my analysis
where I look at verses 1-2 together with 7-9 and 25ff - Yes, it is
praiseworthy for an [unmarried - either never married or formerly married]
person to live in celibacy, BUT because of the temptation towards PORNEIA
(v. 2a, 5b), those who do not have this gift should marry (v. 9), and those
who ARE married must fulfill their marital obligations (v. 2-5). Also, "to
have his own woman/wife" is equivalent to "sleeping with the woman who is
one's wife" and it is different from "to take a woman/wife", which is the
same as "to marry".

Thanks for the dialogue. It was stimulating and helpful to me.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list