|
ADULTERY |
|
Article # 1 THE MEANING OF THE MOICH- ROOT AS ILLUSTRATED IN SECULAR SOURCES One facet of the controversy over divorce and remarriage has to do with the "progress" of the action of adultery. Most Bible students understand adultery as something that can be committed again and again as often as unlawfully married persons engage in the sex act. A few, however, have sought to re-define the term. They make the Lord's statements mean that an unlawfully married person commits adultery only once. And, they scoff at the idea of "living in adultery". The purpose of this series of articles is to illustrate the point that the traditional understanding of adultery is the right one, that adultery is being committed continually by those who are unlawfully married. THE MEANING OF THE MOICH- ROOT Even without a study of the verb tenses, much can be determined about this matter because words often comment on their own grammatical "progress". Words such as "I die" are punctiliar. They must be because, except under the most unusual circumstances, they occur only once. To refer to a process of dying we must say, "I am dying" or use some other device to indicate that the action is durative. And, similarly, "I graduate", etc. We normally assign to such words a punctiliar meaning because of the nature of the action they express. But, then there is "I breathe", necessarily a continuous process. The circumstances surrounding the action of breathing tell us all we need to know. Breathing is continuous because the word means that. Therefore, we would naturally understand it as durative. And, standing midway between these two is that group of words that describe a repetition of single acts. "I drink" refers to a single act that is performed numerous times throughout life. "I blink" expresses, because of the nature of blinking, an intermittent continuance of the momentary action of closing the eyes. So with "I fish", "I write" and most other words. And so, we have three categories: (1) those words that are both punctiliar and solitary (2) those that are intermittently continuous (repetition of a punctiliar act) and (3) those that are continuous and uninterrupted. Adultery falls into the second of these categories. (See Moulton, Proleg. p. 114, "Iterative".) Certain Greek scholars have emphasized the need to consider the action of the word itself with respect to the matter of grammatical progress. They explain that we should base our interpretation of Biblical language first of all on that. The tense will then provide additional explanation that is consistent with the speaker's use of the term. "...We can see this difference in our English. To blink the eye (one time -- JB) is punctiliar, to live linear. Hence it is not enough to learn the force of voice, tense and mode. The real meaning of the verb root has to be considered. In a broad general way the Greek tenses were developed to make plainer the root idea of verbs so that almost any verb might be used either as punctiliar, linear or state of completion." (A.T. Robertson, Short Grammar, p. 287, section 394) (emphasis mine) "...The verb-root plays a large part in the history of the verb. This essential meaning of the word itself antedates the tense development and continues afterwards." (Robertson's large grammar, page 823, section 5) "...The verb itself is the beginning of all." (Ibid.) "...The verb and the context must decide." (Ibid, p. 879 (1) a) See the statements in William Hershey Davis' Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 123-125, sections 305-307 and Moulton, Proleg. p. 110. These statements confirm the thesis of this series of articles that the tense of a verb must be construed in a manner consistent with the meaning of the root. That meaning is gathered from the contexts in which the word is found. Nouns do not have tense, and yet by studying the agent noun, "adulterer" we can learn much about the "progress" of the related verb. Also, the abstract noun, especially when it is put in the plural and "adulteries" are predicated of an individual, points to a progressive activity. See Blass-Debrunner, Grammar, p. 79, sect. 142; Robertson's Large Grammar, page 408, (d); Arndt-Gingrich-Bauer, Lexicon, p. 528, article: moicheia. First, let us consider the agent noun. "An agent noun almost necessarily connotes linear action: there are only a few exceptions, like "murderer", "bankrupt", where the title is generally given in respect of an act committed in the past." (Moulton, Proleg. p. 127) "Adulterer" to the Greeks meant one who made a habit of the act. Aristotle declares that an adulterer is one who both willingly and habitually commits adultery. (Arist. Nich. Eth. 1134a, 19 & 22) He states that a man may have committed adultery once but he should not be called an adulterer (moichos) unless he commits the act repeatedly. To Aristotle an adulterer was a habitual violator. The ecclesiastical writer Basil (Letter CXCIX:39) declares that she who lives with an adulterer (moichos) is an adulteress (moichalis) all the time. The words "all the time" point unquestionably to continuous adultery. (cf. Rom. 7:3) Another example from Epictetus (Book III, ch. III, 11-13). The moichos "uses frail wenches". He is an adulterer for the reason that he persists in his sin, using numerous immoral women for his purposes. And so, the agent noun makes the "progress" of this sin very clear. Each new act is another act of adultery. Now, consider the abstract noun, "adultery". As noted above, where "adulteries" (several acts of adultery) are predicated of a sole individual, it is necessary to understand the word as durative (iterative). Plato (Republic IV 443 A) states that "adulteries" would not be expected from a citizen of noble birth. Unquestionably, each of the acts included in the group, "adulteries", would be called adultery. And, Josephus, who was contemporary with the New Testament writers, gives us the testimony of his age. He states (Ant. XVI 340 & 296) that a certain Syllaeus was proven guilty of moicheia (adultery) not only with Arabian women but with Roman women as well. Section 296 clearly shows that it was his adultery referred to, not that of his women friends. CONCLUSION To understand the "progress" of the MOICH- group, we must first consider the implications of the word itself. Even without the help of tense, the subject is quite clear. Adultery might be committed once only, but it was more often committed habitually. And, where it was committed more than once, each new act of unlawful intercourse was termed adultery. |