body { font-family: “Palatino Linotype”, “Book Antiqua”, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; }
h1, h2, h3 { font-family: Georgia, serif; }
blockquote { border-left: 3px solid #ccc; margin-left: 1em; padding-left: 1em; }
strong.greek-text { font-family: “Gentium Plus”, “SBL Greek”, “New Athena Unicode”, serif; }
An Exegetical Analysis of καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι in 1 Corinthians 7:36
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι in 1 Corinthians 7:36 is based on a b-greek discussion from December 19th, 2016. The initial query concerns the structural and semantic ambiguities of the clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι within 1 Corinthians 7:36. Specifically, it questions its relationship to surrounding clauses (whether governed by an initial conditional particle or marking an apodosis) and the precise meaning of ὀφείλει (deontic obligation versus epistemic certainty). It further explores the potential subject of ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι and the anaphoric or cataphoric reference of οὕτως, acknowledging the verse’s broader ambiguities regarding the referent of “virgin” (**παρθένον**) and “past her prime” (**ὑπέρακμος**).
The core exegetical challenge lies in discerning the precise grammatical function, semantic force, and referential scope of καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι. This involves resolving ambiguities regarding the subject of ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι, whether οὕτως refers anaphorically or cataphorically, and the implications of various interpretations for the overall meaning of Paul’s advice concerning the “virgin.” The discussion highlights that modern textual editions often punctuate this clause in a way that presumes it is part of the protasis, an assumption that warrants critical examination due to the potential for alternative structural analyses. The social context of the letter, particularly concerning public reading and sensitive pastoral advice, is also considered as a factor influencing potential linguistic indirections or euphemisms in the text.
Εἰ δέ τις ἀσχημονεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν παρθένον αὐτοῦ νομίζει, ἐὰν ᾖ ὑπέρακμος καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι, ὃ θέλει ποιείτω, οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει, γαμείτωσαν. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The wording of the clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι is identical in both Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT (2010).
- Punctuation: Nestle 1904 places a comma after ὑπέρακμος, suggesting the clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι might be closely linked to the preceding conditional phrase or form part of an extended protasis. SBLGNT (2010), mirroring the punctuation of NA27/28, places a comma after ὑπέρακμος *and* after ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι, and a semicolon after οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει. This punctuation in modern editions often leads interpreters to understand καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι as a parallel conditional clause, governed by the initial εἰ. However, it is crucial to recognize that such punctuation is a modern editorial addition and therefore part of the exegetical debate, not an original feature of the Greek text.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes
The NA28 text for 1 Corinthians 7:36 presents no significant word-level variants for the clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι. The words themselves are consistently attested across major manuscripts. As noted above, the primary “textual” issue here relates to modern editorial punctuation rather than ancient manuscript discrepancies. The NA28’s punctuation, by placing commas around the clause, tends to reinforce an interpretation where it functions as an additional condition, closely associated with the preceding **ἐὰν ᾖ ὑπέρακμος**.
Lexical Notes:
- ὀφείλει (from ὀφείλω): BDAG defines this verb as “to be under obligation, be obligated, owe, be bound to.” It encompasses moral, social, or legal obligations. The discussion raises the critical distinction between a deontic sense (“ought to,” indicating obligation) and an epistemic sense (“is bound to happen,” indicating certainty or inevitability). BDAG acknowledges the latter sense, particularly in impersonal constructions, which is relevant to the debate surrounding this clause.
- γίνεσθαι (from γίνομαι): BDAG translates this verb as “to come into being, happen, arise, occur.” In this context, it often implies an impersonal “it happens” or “it should happen.”
- ἀσχημονεῖν (from ἀσχημονέω): BDAG defines this as “to behave improperly, indecorously, or unseemly.” It describes actions that are shameful or inappropriate in a given social context.
- ὑπέρακμος: BDAG provides “past the bloom of youth, past the prime, too old (to marry).” In the context of the discussion, some interpreters consider it to apply to the female (referring to a “used by date” or “socially acceptable biological prime”), while others, such as Winter, propose it could refer to the male as “full of sexual passion.” This ambiguity significantly impacts the interpretation of the entire verse.
- οὕτως: BDAG translates this adverb as “in this manner, thus, so.” Its specific referent in a given clause can be either anaphoric (referring to something preceding) or cataphoric (anticipating something following). Resolving this ambiguity is crucial for understanding the clause’s connection to the broader context.
Translation Variants: Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι presents a complex set of grammatical and rhetorical challenges, primarily centering on its structural relationship, the precise nuance of ὀφείλει, the identity of its implied subject, and the referential scope of οὕτως.
One major point of contention is the structural placement of the clause. Modern punctuation (e.g., NA28, SBLGNT) generally treats it as a coordinate clause, either parallel to **ἐὰν ᾖ ὑπέρακμος** (and thus governed by the initial **εἰ** of v. 36) or as a separate, albeit related, conditional element within the protasis. This reading implies that “if the virgin is past her prime, and thus it ought to happen…”
However, an alternative interpretation, explored by some scholars in the discussion (and noted in older commentaries like Meyer and Alford), proposes that καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι functions as the apodosis of the conditional statement. In this view, καί would take on the sense of “then” or “so then,” introducing the consequence of the preceding conditions. The argument for this structure stems from the difficulty of construing an “obligation” (**ὀφείλει**) within a protasis, especially when Paul’s broader preference leans toward celibacy. If it is part of the apodosis, it would direct the subsequent actions (**ὃ θέλει ποιείτω, οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει, γαμείτωσαν**) as the prescribed outcome.
Further complexity arises from the meaning of ὀφείλει itself. Is it deontic, signifying a social or moral obligation (“it ought to happen” / “it is obligated to happen”)? Or is it epistemic, indicating an inevitable or certain outcome (“it is bound to happen”)? Bruce Winter has advocated for the epistemic reading, translating “and thus is bound to happen,” though this interpretation has been contested by other scholars who emphasize the social contextualization of ὀφείλειν, arguing that a clear distinction between deontic and epistemic may be difficult in such contexts where social expectations heavily influence perceived necessities.
The subject of ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι is also debated. Some interpreters suggest that the subject is the act of marrying the young woman, perhaps implying a pre-existing promise or social expectation. Others propose that it refers back to the “behaving shamefully” (**ἀσχημονεῖν**) mentioned earlier in the verse, suggesting that “such shameful behavior is bound to happen” if the conditions are met. A third possibility, raised in the discussion, is that it refers to the virgin becoming “past her prime,” implying that society expects this natural progression to occur. Finally, an impersonal reading (“it ought to happen”) is favored by some, seen as a rhetorical device for politeness, avoiding directness in a potentially sensitive situation, consistent with ancient communication strategies where explicit naming or detailing was sometimes avoided in “low context” discussions.
The adverb οὕτως adds another layer of ambiguity. If it is anaphoric, it refers to the preceding conditions (i.e., if someone behaves improperly and the virgin is past her prime, then “in this manner” or “under these circumstances,” it ought to happen). If it is cataphoric, it anticipates the subsequent actions (i.e., “it ought to happen in this way”: by him doing what he wants and them marrying). The choice between these significantly alters the logical flow and emphasis of the entire passage.
The rhetorical analysis, particularly concerning politeness theory, suggests that the perceived ambiguity might be intentional. Given that Paul’s letter was intended for public reading in a community aware of the specific individuals and circumstances, the use of impersonal phrasing and less explicit details could serve as a politeness strategy, respecting the privacy and dignity of those involved in a potentially shameful or delicate situation. This perspective suggests that attempting to fully resolve every referential ambiguity might overlook Paul’s communicative intent.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The clause καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι remains one of the most exegetically challenging phrases in 1 Corinthians 7:36 due to its structural flexibility, the semantic range of ὀφείλει, and the ambiguous referents of its implied subject and the adverb οὕτως. While modern textual editions typically punctuate the clause to suggest its inclusion within an extended protasis, an argument can be made for its function as an apodosis, particularly when considering Paul’s broader rhetorical aims and the specific social context. The interplay between deontic obligation and epistemic certainty for ὀφείλει, alongside the choice between anaphoric and cataphoric readings for οὕτως, profoundly shapes the overall meaning. Ultimately, the ambiguity may itself be a feature of Paul’s communication, serving a pastoral or rhetorical purpose in a sensitive matter. The following translations represent distinct interpretive pathways:
- “If anyone thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, should she be past her prime, and thus it is an obligation to act, let him do what he wishes; he does not sin; let them marry.”
This rendition takes καὶ οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι as an additional conditional clause within the protasis, asserting a social or moral obligation to proceed with marriage given the circumstances, especially if the virgin is deemed past her prime. - “If anyone thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, should she be past her prime, then it ought to happen in this way: let him do what he wishes; he does not sin; let them marry.”
This translation interprets the clause as the apodosis of the conditional statement, where οὕτως anticipates the subsequent actions (marrying) as the proper, obligated course of action, introduced by **καί** functioning as “then.” - “If anyone considers himself to be acting shamefully regarding his virgin, particularly if she is past her prime, and this is simply how things must proceed, let him do what he wants; he does not sin; let them marry.”
This option considers ὀφείλει epistemically (“is bound to happen”) and views the clause as an impersonal, polite acknowledgment of an inevitable social expectation or resolution, reflecting the delicate social context and potential for indirect communication.