[B-Greek] Construing 1 Peter 3:7 (was "ASQENESTERWi SKEUEI in 1 Peter 3:7")

Yancy W Smith yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Mon Jul 27 22:51:43 EDT 2009


I would suppose that the danger inherent in not giving honor one's  
wife is, in part, the sort of message that stories of this sort  
embody. On the other hand images like that of these tragic figures  
would not have to evoke all aspects of their "canonical" version to be  
operative in any given context. Allusion does not work that way. On  
the other hand the GUNAIKEIOS/A/ON might substantival and be referring  
to the  GUNAIKEION EIKON as the creation of God, based on Gen 1:27 27  
και εποιησεν ο θεος τον ανθρωπον κατ'  
εικονα θεου εποιησεν αυτον αρσεν και  
θηλυ εποιησεν αυτους.
KAI EPOIHSEN hO QEOS TON ANQRWPON KAT' EIKONA QEOU EPOIHSEN AUTON  
ARSEN KAI QHLU EPOIHSEN AUTOUS.

If the author is drawing upon the imagery of this text, perhaps he is  
thinking of an image of God that is both womanly and manly expressed  
in the marriage of the couple. Not showing honor to the image of God  
hinders the male's prayers. One could compare this concern with the  
one that arises in James 3:9.

On Jul 27, 2009, at 8:43 PM, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 27, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Yancy Smith wrote:
>
>> I would like to suggest some further reasons why (1) σκεύει  
>> τῷ γυναικείῳ SKEUEI TWi GUNAIKEIWi should be construed  
>> with both συνοικοῦντες SUNOIKOUNTES or  
>> ἀπονέμοντες APONEMONTES, and (2) that the meaning of  
>> ὡς ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει τῷ  
>> γυναικείῳ hWS TWi GUNAIKEIWi, is rhetorically complex,  
>> indeed subversive. While it has a negative connotation (beyond dou 
>> bt), yet it implies what was understood as a dangerous factor comm 
>> unicable to the man, or at least a factor which places the male in 
>>  jeapardy. In this case the "weakness" of the "womanly vessel" act 
>> ually puts the husband in a precarious position before God. If he  
>> does not give her appropriate honor as a fellow heir of the gift o 
>> f life, God will not hear his prayers.
>>
>> On (1) there is not a problem with σκεύει τῷ  
>> γυναικείῳ SKEUEI TWi GUNAIKEIWi fulfilling two different  
>> dative roles, because the indirect object of  
>> ἀπονέμοντες is simply a result of ellipsis, which is  
>> common enough. Understood this way, the problem Harold adduces sim 
>> ply vanishes, as does the phrase itself, due to economy of style.
>>
>> On two, I think that some cultural background can help. This use of  
>> the GUNAIKEIOS "power or 'virtue'" of a woman as a feature of  
>> females that place men in danger or disadvantage is found in the  
>> language of Euripides, representing a feature of Medea, who was a  
>> prominent theme in Roman domestic wall art (See _Roman domestic art  
>> and early house churches_ By David L Balch). The visualization of  
>> Medea brought the tragic figure into the world of the first  
>> century, even though the texts of Euripides plays were written  
>> centuries earlier. (The plays continued to be performed and  
>> remembered in the popular oral culture as well). Medea, a deeply  
>> tragic Georgian (from Cholchis) sacrifices her ancestral homeland  
>> for the man she loves only to have that man marry another woman.  
>> The motif of the tragic female also comes up in the frequent  
>> portrayal of Ariadne on Greco-Roman walls. But more to the point,  
>> GUNAIKEIOS 'virtue,' though of the weaker sex, has a liminal,  
>> potentially dangerous quality:
>>
>> Examples:
>> Euripides Trag., Fragmenta
>> Fragment 502, line 5
>> πλοῦτος δ' ἐπακτὸς ἐκ γυναικείων γά 
>> μων
>> ἀνόνητος· αἱ γὰρ διαλύσεις <οὐ>  
>> ῥᾴδιαι.
>> PLOUTOS D' EPAKTOS EK GUNAIKEIWN GAMWN
>> ANONHTOS; hAI GAR DIALUSEIS <OU> RAiDIAI.
>> Wealth acquired from womanly bonds of matrimony
>> Is unprofitable, getting free from them is not easy
>>
>>
>> Euripides Trag., Fragmenta
>> Fragment 653, line 1
>>
>> ὦ παῖδες οἷον φίλτρον ἀνθρώποις φρε 
>> νός
>> κοινὸν γὰρ εἶναι χρῆν γυναικεῖον  
>> λέχος.
>> O children! The desire men have is a charm
>> For it is common to feel a strong need of the womanly bed.
>> (YWS trans.)
>> In the case of Medea, the chorus sings the reversal of the common,  
>> natural order that takes place as she seeks her tragic revenge.
>>
>> Euripides Trag., Medea
>> Line 417
>>
>> {Chorus}: ἄνω ποταμῶν ἱερῶν χωροῦσι παγ 
>> αί,
>> καὶ δίκα καὶ πάντα πάλιν στρέφεται·
>> ἀνδράσι μὲν δόλιαι βουλαί, θεῶν δ'
>> οὐκέτι πίστις ἄραρεν.
>> τὰν δ' ἐμὰν εὔκλειαν ἔχειν βιοτὰν  
>> στρέψουσι φᾶμαι·
>> ἔρχεται τιμὰ γυναικείωι γένει·
>> οὐκέτι δυσκέλαδος φάμα γυναῖκας ἕξ 
>> ει.
>> ANW POTAMWN hIERWN XWROUSI PAGAI,
>> KAI DIKA PANTA PALIN STREFETAI;
>> ANDRASI MEN DOLIAI BOULAI, QEWN D'
>> OUKETI PISTIS ARAREN.
>> TAN D'EMAN EUKLEIAN ECEIN BIOTAN STREYOUSI FAMAI;
>> ERCETAI TIMA GUNAIKEIWN GENEI;
>> OUKETI DUSKELADOS FAMA GUNAIKAS hEXEI.
>> The waters in the sacred rivers
>> are flowing in reverse.
>> And all well-ordered things
>> are once more turning on themselves.
>> Men's plans are now deceitful,
>> their firm trust in the gods is gone.
>> My life is changing—common talk
>> is giving me a better reputation.
>> Honor is coming to the female sex.
>> Slander will no longer injure women.
>> (Ian Johnston, trans.)
>>
>> I think it could be that such a potential reversal is being alluded  
>> to in 1 Peter, a common domestic theme, that serves as a warning to  
>> abusive males. Give appropriate honor to the woman, if not you will  
>> have to reckon with God.
>
> This discussion seems to assume that TWi GUNAIKEIWi is adjectival  
> and attributive to SKEUEI rather than a substantive. That's the way  
> I took it originally and I still think that may be right, but I'm  
> not fully satisfied with either way of taking it.
>
> As little as I think that ASQENESTERWi involves a positive notion,  
> just so little do I believe that something sinister is implied by  
> use of the adjective -- perhaps substantival -- GUNAIKEIWi. I hardly  
> think that the author of 1 Peter had Euripides' Medea in mind when  
> speaking of how men should treat their wives -- the Jason upon whom  
> Medea avenges herself there has abandoned her in favor of a young  
> princess and cannot understand why she is upset with him. There are  
> dangerous women in Greek literature, such as Medea and Clytemnestra,  
> and there are the heroines such as Penelope and Antigone. I really  
> don't believe that sinister connotations have been indelibly  
> imprinted on the adjective GUNAIKEIOS/A/ON by Euripides.
Yancy


More information about the B-Greek mailing list