Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:26:15.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I Corinthians vii. 16: Optimistic or Pessimistic?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Sakae Kubo
Sakae Kubo
Affiliation:
Berrien Springs, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Short Studies
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , July 1978 , pp. 539 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 539 note 1 See for example the translation of this passage in AV, RSV and NEB.

page 539 note 2 Phillips, Goodspeed, ASV, New Berkeley, LB, NIV.

page 539 note 3 Moffatt, NEB, JB, TEV, Barclay, Translator's New Testament. Notice that most of the significant modern translations favour the optimistic view.

page 539 note 4 Jeremias, Joachim, ‘Die missionarische Aufgabe in der Mischehe (I Cor. 7: 16)’ in Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann, 2nd rev. ed., BZNW 21 (Berlin: Alfred Töpelmann, 1957), p. 259.Google Scholar

page 539 note 5 Stanley, Arthur P., The Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians (London: John Murray, 1858), p. 112.Google Scholar

page 539 note 6 Calvin, John, Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, trans. Rev. Pringle, John (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1948), 1. 244.Google Scholar

page 539 note 7 Hodge, Charles, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Robert Carter, 1857), p. 120.Google Scholar

page 539 note 8 Chr. Wordsworth, , Commentary on the Holy Bible: Greek New Testament (London: Rivingtons, 1872), p. 105.Google Scholar

page 539 note 9 Findlay, G. G., ‘St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians’, vol. II of the Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. Nicoll, W. Robertson (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1897), pp. 827–8.Google Scholar

page 539 note 10 Lightfoot, J. B., Noteson Epistles of St. Paul from Unpublished Commentaries (London: Macmillan 1904), p. 227.Google Scholar

page 539 note 11 Moffatt, James, ‘The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians’ in The Moffatt New Testament Commentary (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1938), p. 84.Google Scholar

page 540 note 1 See Heinrici, Georg, Kritisch Exegetisches Handbuch über den ersten Brief an die Korinther, 7th improved ed., in Meyers Kommentar über das New Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1888), p. 201Google Scholar, where though he refers to these verses he is still not convinced that this settles the question. The context, he feels, speaks against this interpretation. Besides, such use cannot be proved from the New Testament.

page 540 note 2 Op. cit. pp. 255–8. Weiss, Johannes (Der erste Korintherbrief, 9th ed., in Meyers Kommentar [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1910], p. 183Google Scholar) while acquainted with one of these examples from Epictetus, does not follow the optimistic view.

page 540 note 3 Burchard, Chr., ‘El nach einem Ausdruck des Wissens oder Nichtwissens: Joh 9: 25, Act 19: 2, I Cor. 1: 16; 7, 16’, Z. N. W. 52 (1961), 73–82.Google Scholar

page 540 note 4 The examples from Pseudo-Philo are in Latin.

page 540 note 5 This passage is in the second person but the verb is γıνώσκω instead of οίδα as is the passage from Tobit. It should also be pointed out that this last passage reads σὺ γıνώσκεıς εί without the interrogative pronoun τίς or τί.

page 540 note 6 critical, M. Philonenko's edition of Joseph and Asenath does not contain the example cited by Jeremias or the one added by Burchard, (Joseph et Aséneth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes, Studia Post-Biblica 13 [Leiden: Brill, 1968Google Scholar ]). Burchard relied mainly on three Greek manuscripts which Philonenko considers as inferior (ibid. pp. 3–11).

Burchard also goes beyond Jeremias by concluding that εί never introduces an expression of uncertainty when it is used before or after a clause with a verb of knowing or hearing even without the interrogative pronoun. In such cases, he feels, it is better to translate the εί with ‘that’. He finds three examples of this: John ix. 25, I Cor. i. 16 and Acts xix. 2.

page 540 note 7 See p. 539 n. 3.

page 540 note 8 ‘I Corinthians’, The New Bible Commentary Revised (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1970), p. 1060.Google Scholar

page 540 note 9 ‘I Corinthians’, The Broadman Bible Commentary, ed. Allen, Clifton J. (Nashville, Tenn.; Broad-man Press, 1970), x, 331.Google Scholar

page 540 note 10 ‘I Corinthians’, A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, gen. ed. Fuller, Reginald C., rev. edn (London: Nelson, 1969), p. 1150.Google Scholar

page 540 note 11 A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Harper's New Testament Commentaries (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), p. 167.Google Scholar

page 540 note 12 1 and 2 Corinthians, New Century Bible (London: Oliphants, 1971), p. 70.Google Scholar

page 540 note 13 Conzelmann, Hans, Der erste Brief an die Korinther, Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar über das New Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1969), p. 149Google Scholar; English translation in Hermeneia series (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), p. 124.Google Scholar

page 542 note 1 Kühner, Raphael and Gerth, Bernhard, Ausführliche Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1966), part 2, vol. II, 533Google Scholar had written, ‘El und έάν…ob, werden nur in indirekten Fragen gebraucht, und zwar eigentlich in Doppelfragen, indem sie ein Schwanken zwischen zwei Möglichkeiten bezeichnen; oft aber wird nur ein Glied ausgesprochen, während das andere in dem Geiste des Redenden vorhanden ist…El und έάν, wenn sie allein, ohne folgenden Gegensatz stehen, haben an sich weder bejahende (ob nicht) noch verneinende (ob) Bedeutung; nur aus dem Gedankenzusammenhange ist zu erkennen, nach welcher Seite hin der Sinn neigt.’

page 542 note 2 Op. cit. p. 259.

page 542 note 3 Op. cit. p. 201.

page 542 note 4 Stanley, , op. cit. p. 112.Google Scholar

page 543 note 1 Elliott, J. K. feels that vv. 12–14Google Scholar deal with divorce while v. 15 deals with separation. If this is so, ‘then v. 15 begins a new paragraph and v. 16 belongs with v. 15 to explain why precisely Paul does allow this separation to go unhindered. Therefore both vv. 15 and 16 contrast with vv. 12–14.’ (N.T.S. XIX (1972–1973), 225.)Google Scholar

page 543 note 2 Jeremias, , op. cit. p. 259.Google Scholar

page 544 note 1 Thus Barrett, , op. cit. p. 166Google Scholar, ‘Verse 15c is to be linked with verse 16 (and 14) rather than with 15ab (“which contain a parenthetical limitation” - Lightfoot).’