For 1 Corinthians 7:36-38, the New American Standard Bible has
It is not uncommon to see this passage cited by those who wish to argue a woman ought never live independently, under her own authority, but must always be under the headship of a husband or a father.
Unfortunately, the NASB translation here is probably not the best. Those familiar with its presentation style know italicized words have been inserted into the text to “smooth it out.” The word “daughter” does not appear in 1 Corinthians 7:36-38, and so one need not necessarily conclude the “man” under discussion is the virgin’s father. Consequently, the Apostle Paul may very well not be discussing the question of when to give one’s daughter in marriage.1 Instead, he is probably addressing the situation of a man who is deciding whether to marry the woman to whom he is engaged.
An extremely literal rendering of the first half of verse 36 would read, “But if someone thinks he is behaving indecently concerning his virgin, if hyperakmos....” Hyperakmos is a compound word, an adjective found only here in all of ancient literature. Grammatically, it could be describing either the man or his virgin. Akme refers to the highest point of something, and in reference to women often meant sexual maturity. Hyper has either a temporal (“beyond”) or an intensive meaning (“exceedingly”). Thus, if this passage was addressed to a father, hyperakmos would be describing his daughter as “getting along in years.” If it were describing a young man contemplating marriage, it would mean “having strong passion.”
The latter understanding is favored by the phrase at the end of verse 36, “Let them marry.” Though the NASB has the singular “Let her marry,” this option has weak support in the Greek manuscripts. The “father interpretation” leans almost entirely on the verb gamizo in verse 38, which elsewhere in the New Testament means “to give in marriage,” as distinguished from gameo, “to marry.” In classical Greek, -izo and -eo verbs were distinctly either transitive or intransitive. By Paul’s day, however, that distinction had broken down, and gameo and gamizo may very well have been synonyms for “to marry.”
The question then becomes which of the two scenarios (father allowing his daughter to marry or a man contemplating marrying his fiancee) Paul was most likely to address. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul is speaking to married and single persons about their marriages and whether they should marry. Leaving aside the verses we are examining, he throughout addresses the actual or prospective husbands and wives directly, always assuming they are immediately responsible for their decisions and conduct. He also very strongly states that those with strong sexual desire ought to marry (1 Cor 7:1-9). Therefore, it would be very strange for him to begin addressing the fathers of virgins when he has previously only addressed the parties to be married themselves. Moreover, he would be contradicting his previous statement in 1 Corinthians 7:9 if he were to say a father has the right to deny marriage to his daughter when she desires to marry and has reached sexual maturity.
Therefore, the English Standard Version seems to have the better translation of 1 Corinthians 7:36-38.
Given that the evidence for the NASB translation is less than compelling, one cannot from this one text build a conclusive argument that a woman must always be under the headship of either a father or a husband. As no other text or compilation of texts proves the case, one must ultimately conclude Scripture does not require that position.
But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgin daughter, if she is past her youth, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let her marry. But he who stands firm in his heart, being under no constraint, but has authority over his own will, and has decided this in his own heart, to keep his own virgin daughter, he will do well. So then both he who gives his own virgin daughter in marriage does well, and he who does not give her in marriage will do better.
It is not uncommon to see this passage cited by those who wish to argue a woman ought never live independently, under her own authority, but must always be under the headship of a husband or a father.
Unfortunately, the NASB translation here is probably not the best. Those familiar with its presentation style know italicized words have been inserted into the text to “smooth it out.” The word “daughter” does not appear in 1 Corinthians 7:36-38, and so one need not necessarily conclude the “man” under discussion is the virgin’s father. Consequently, the Apostle Paul may very well not be discussing the question of when to give one’s daughter in marriage.1 Instead, he is probably addressing the situation of a man who is deciding whether to marry the woman to whom he is engaged.
An extremely literal rendering of the first half of verse 36 would read, “But if someone thinks he is behaving indecently concerning his virgin, if hyperakmos....” Hyperakmos is a compound word, an adjective found only here in all of ancient literature. Grammatically, it could be describing either the man or his virgin. Akme refers to the highest point of something, and in reference to women often meant sexual maturity. Hyper has either a temporal (“beyond”) or an intensive meaning (“exceedingly”). Thus, if this passage was addressed to a father, hyperakmos would be describing his daughter as “getting along in years.” If it were describing a young man contemplating marriage, it would mean “having strong passion.”
The latter understanding is favored by the phrase at the end of verse 36, “Let them marry.” Though the NASB has the singular “Let her marry,” this option has weak support in the Greek manuscripts. The “father interpretation” leans almost entirely on the verb gamizo in verse 38, which elsewhere in the New Testament means “to give in marriage,” as distinguished from gameo, “to marry.” In classical Greek, -izo and -eo verbs were distinctly either transitive or intransitive. By Paul’s day, however, that distinction had broken down, and gameo and gamizo may very well have been synonyms for “to marry.”
The question then becomes which of the two scenarios (father allowing his daughter to marry or a man contemplating marrying his fiancee) Paul was most likely to address. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul is speaking to married and single persons about their marriages and whether they should marry. Leaving aside the verses we are examining, he throughout addresses the actual or prospective husbands and wives directly, always assuming they are immediately responsible for their decisions and conduct. He also very strongly states that those with strong sexual desire ought to marry (1 Cor 7:1-9). Therefore, it would be very strange for him to begin addressing the fathers of virgins when he has previously only addressed the parties to be married themselves. Moreover, he would be contradicting his previous statement in 1 Corinthians 7:9 if he were to say a father has the right to deny marriage to his daughter when she desires to marry and has reached sexual maturity.
Therefore, the English Standard Version seems to have the better translation of 1 Corinthians 7:36-38.
If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes; let them marry- it is no sin. But whoever is firmly established in his heart, being under no necessity but having his desire under control, and has determined this in his heart, to keep her as his betrothed, he will do well. So then he who marries his betrothed does well, and he who refrains from marriage will do even better.If the English Standard Version is correct, then 1 Corinthians 7:36-38 has nothing to say about the headship of fathers over daughters. Even were one to prefer the NASB translation, our text proves only that a woman is under her father’s authority until she marries. It does not prove marriage is the only way by which she may leave her father’s authority.
Given that the evidence for the NASB translation is less than compelling, one cannot from this one text build a conclusive argument that a woman must always be under the headship of either a father or a husband. As no other text or compilation of texts proves the case, one must ultimately conclude Scripture does not require that position.
1 comment:
Thanks for this article. Well done. Have you seen other good articles that address this general question of whether an adult woman must be under the headship of her father until she marries? Feel free to contact me directly at reevesj@auburn.edu.
Post a Comment