[B-Greek] ASQENESTERWi SKEUEI in 1 Peter 3:7 (was "Re: Gal 4.4"
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Wed Jul 22 11:15:55 EDT 2009
On Jul 22, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Mitch Larramore wrote:
> As a great example, I ran across the other day in the archives the
> famous passage of women being the "weaker vessel." The poster (Mark
> Wilson) suggests that 'weaker' be translated 'more vulnerable.' More
> vulnerable, by the way, was understood in a positive sense, a
> vulnerability that accentuates a woman's femininity. That changed
> the whole way I looked at that passage. (http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2003-May/025342.html
> )
>
> I know I had read 50+ books/articles on that one phrase and had yet
> to find anything that made sense to me, until that post. So, that
> was the driving force behind my asking. If you don't see anything in
> the Greek, that's fine. But perhaps a Mark Wilson is out there who
> has done some serious digging (original research, not checking more
> lexica) on that phrase. I don't feel like I'm wasting anyone's time
> and many times my questions are, in the end, sophomoric and, as it
> turns out, not very helpful, but I just have yet to figure out how
> to know which question is dumb before I ask it :o )
Mark Wilson has not been a list-member for many years. I corresponded
with him frequently off-list and will attest that he had numerous
original ideas. I must say that I think the notion of "vulnerability"
as a positive quality is an extraordinarily original idea. I do note
that there was no response to this message of May 14, 2003. I cite the
chief point:
"I took this "root" idea of "vulnerability" and applied it to a woman.
It seems obvious to me that vulnerable can be both viewed negatively
or positively. I took the positive aspect and applied it to the wife
of which Peter speaks.
"'Give honor to the wife, who is the more vulnerable partner.'
"I don't think Peter is saying that we ought to give honor to the wife
because we can lift a bigger rock than she can. Rather, I think he is
referring to a feminine, godly vulnerability that is so attractive to
the male. It's that beautiful quality of a wife that the husband is
graced to protect."
The text in question is 1 Peter 3:7:
Οἱ ἄνδρες ὁμοίως, συνοικοῦντες κατὰ
γνῶσιν ὡς ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει τῷ
γυναικείῳ, ἀπονέμοντες τιμὴν ὡς
καὶ συγκληρονόμοις χάριτος ζωῆς εἰς
τὸ μὴ ἐγκόπτεσθαι τὰς προσευχὰς
ὑμῶν.
[hOI ANDRES hOMOIWS, SUNOIKOUNTES KATA GNWSIN hWS ASQENESTERWi SKEUEI
TWi GUNAIKEIWi, APONEMONTES TIMHN hWS SUGKLHRONOMOIS ZWHS EIS TO MH
EGKOPTESQAI TAS PROSEUCAS hUMWN.]
I would understand hWS ASQENESTERWi SKEUEI TWi GUNAIKEIWi as
construing with hOMOIWS, SUNOIKOUNTES, and APONEMONTES TIMHN as
construing with hWS SUGKLHRONOMOIS ZWHS. On that understanding honor
is not given because of the "greater infirmity/weakness" but because
wives are "co-heirs of life."
Mark said that he had done considerable research into the usage of the
adjective ASQENHS at the Perseus site and had been particularly
impressed by the association of "vulnerability" with the adjective.
That makes perfectly good sense, but it is a leap, it seems to me, to
attribute a positive value to vulnerability. The vulnerable need
protection, of course, but how is vulnerability something to be valued
in and of itself? Is that really what this text is saying?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list