Chrys C. Caragounis, «Parainesis on 'AGIASMO/S' (1 Th 4: 3-8)», Vol. 15 (2002) 133-151
1 Th 4:3-8 (particulary vv.3-6) is full of exegetical problems. Almost all the leading
concepts of the passage present problems of interpretation: pornei/a, skeuo~j,
u(perbei/nein, pleonekte=in, a)delfo/j. On the basis of the two main interpretations of two of them, namely skeuo~j and a)delfo/j, the author rejects the current explanations of the section and claims for a better understading that takes into account to the parameters of the text, the context, the persons addressed, and the historical significance of the bearing terms. According to the writer, Paul has no concrete case of adulterous behavior in mind, but gives a general apostolic exhortation and warns the members of this church (men and women alike) against the dangers of such a behavior.
Parainesis on á¼Î³Î¹Î±Ïƒï¿½ÏŒÏ‚ (1 Th 4: 3-8) 135
5:2, and the Epistle of Barnabas 7:3 – all of them passages which evidence
the sense of ‘body’.
The meaning of ‘wife’, which has no direct support in Greek literature
nor in the NT32, has been based mainly on rabbinic evidence, reference to
a certain OT usage, and Semitic views of sex.33 The evidence for this point
of view has been ably presented by Chr. Maurer, and has been applied to
our passage with sensitivity by Best.
The third meaning hinted at above has been based on Aelian, Nat.
An. 17:11, as well as in a reference to a writer of the I A.D., Antistius34.
In these passages σκεῦος is used in place of αἰδοῖου (pl. αἰδοῖα), that is,
the genitalia. A third passage, 1 Sam (LXX) 21:5, uses σκεῦος to trans-
late Heb. ylk, usually = ‘vessel’35, but here ‘genitals’, though the garbled
translation of the LXX makes it uncertain that its translators perceived
this meaning.
The difficulty with ἀδελφός is not semasiological, but contextual: how
does this brother fit in in this particular context?
II. The Two Basic Interpretations
For the two basic interpretations referred to above a brief presentation
may suffice.
For the interpretation σκεῦος=‘wife’ we may make J. E. Frame our
point of departure. He interprets ἀπέχεσθαι ... ποÏνείας as “That you hold
aloof from fornicationâ€, εἰδέναι ... τὸ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι ... (with a comma
after σκεῦος) is understood as implying two injunctions36: (i) “that each
of you respect his own wife†addressed to married people, and (ii) “that
each of you get his own wife in the spirit of consecration and honourâ€
addressed to unmarried people; á¼Î½ á¼Î³Î¹Î±ÏƒÎ¼á¿· καὶ τιμῇ would refer to holy
and honorable conjugal relations; μὴ á¼Î½ πάθει á¼Ï€Î¹Î¸Ï…μίας etc. would again
refer to one’s relations to his wife: he should treat her “not in the passion
The application of σκεῦος to the woman in 1 Pt 3:7 has no sexual overtones, and
32
is, therefore, no evidence for σκεῦος = ‘woman’. Moreover, her being the ‘weaker’ vessel,
implies that man, too, is thought of as a vessel. In fact, the human person is described as a
vessel: Acts 9:15; Rm 9:22, 23.
See Strack, H.-Billerbeck, P., Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und
33
Midrasch, 5 Vols., München 1926-1928, 1956, rp. 1986 III, 632f.
Anthologia Palatina, 16:243.
34
See also J. Whitton, “A Neglected Meaning for skeuos in 1 Thessalonians 4.4†NTS
35
28 (1982) 142-3.
On this cf. also H. Schlier, “Auslegung des 1 Thessalonicherbriefes (4:1-12)†Bibel und
36
Leben 3 (1962), 243.