Sexual Immorality Revisited, Part 2

The exercise of revisiting Paul’s Religious Mind and the meaning of Sexual Immorality has clarified a few things that were right in front of me all along.  I considered again the list of sins that described the former lives of some who were called to faith in Corinth:

1 Corinthians 6:9b, 10 (NET) Table

Parallel Greek

The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. οὔτε πόρνοι (another form of πόρνος) οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ μέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν

Each word preceded by οὔτε, οὐ or οὐχ (a form of οὐ) gives a strong indication that Paul did not consider πόρνοι the one word that included all of the others.  In other words the list is not to be understood as, The πόρνοι: idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers.  I’ve considered this option, by the way, given the shorter list in Ephesians.

Ephesians 5:5 (NET)

Parallel Greek

For you can be confident of this one thing: that no person who is immoral, impure, or greedy (such a person is an idolater) has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. τοῦτο γὰρ ἴστε γινώσκοντες, ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος ἢ ἀκάθαρτος ἢ πλεονέκτης οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ

So I began a subtractive process, trying to determine what πόρνοι did not mean.  As I studied ἀρσενοκοῖται (a form of ἀρσενοκοίτης; translated, practicing homosexuals) the obvious became more clear.  The Greek word ἀρσενοκοίτης is a compound of two words: 1) αρσην, male, and 2) κοίτη, couch, bed.

Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male (ἄρσεν, a form of αρσην) and female,[1] Jesus answered the Pharisees who asked Him about divorce.  The men (ἄρσενες, another form of αρσην) also abandoned natural relations with women, Paul wrote the Roman believers, and were inflamed in their passions for one another.  Men (ἄρσενες, another form of αρσην) committed shameless acts with men (ἄρσεσιν, another form of αρσην) and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[2]  The Greek is a bit more graphic: ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην κατεργαζόμενοι (literally, “male in male this unseemliness performing”).  The writer of Hebrews penned: Marriage must be honored among all and the marriage bed (κοίτη) kept undefiled, for God will judge sexually immoral people (πόρνους, another form of πόρνος) and adulterers (μοιχοὺς, a form of μοιχός).[3]  I can’t imagine one word better than ἀρσενοκοίτης (male marriage bed) to describe You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman.[4]

I combined this with the fact that Paul’s particular usage of πορνεία in 1 Corinthians 5:1 is a fairly clear reference to You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.[5]  And I came to one inescapable conclusion irrespective of whether Paul used πορνεία because he thought it meant anything and everything that was not sex between one man and one woman or because it was the only word he had had to use when he arrived in Corinth, constrained by his reliance on James’ abbreviated version of the law:

James’ abbreviated version of the law

…to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood…

Acts 15:20 (NET) Table

ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) καὶ |τοῦ| πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος
…that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality…

Acts 15:29a (NET) Table

ἀπέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνικτῶν καὶ πορνείας (a form of πορνεία)

The inescapable conclusion is: in the letter called 1 Corinthians Paul taught Levitical law (as knowledge of sin not as a path of salvation) to Gentiles (1 Timothy 1:8-10 NET).

But we know that the law is good if someone uses it legitimately, realizing that law is not intended for a righteous person, but for lawless and rebellious people, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, sexually immoral people (πόρνοις, another form of πόρνος), practicing homosexuals (ἀρσενοκοίταις, another form of ἀρσενοκοίτης), kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching.

Gone was any pretense to be concerned about nothing among [them] except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.[6]  More importantly, perhaps, the pretense of not placing on the neck of the [Gentile] disciples a yoke that neither [Peter’s] ancestors nor [his contemporaries had] been able to bear[7] was utterly gone from Paul’s thinking.  That yoke would not be borne by the works of the flesh.  That is true.  But it would not be shirked either.  The yoke would be borne by the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe,[8] the fruit of the Spirit, the love [that] is the fulfillment of the law.[9]  Jesus said (Matthew 11:28-30; 5:17-20 NET):

Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.  For my yoke is easy to bear, and my load is not hard to carry.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them.  I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place.  So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever obeys them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.  For I tell you, unless your righteousness goes beyond that of the experts in the law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Do we then nullify the law through faith? Paul asked rhetorically.  Absolutely not!  Instead we uphold the law.[10]  Have I just made the case for πορνεία as a violation of Leviticus 18 or 20?  But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful [πορνείας, a form of πορνεία]) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.[11]  I don’t think so.

I might have made that case.  I have a philosophical bent to my mind; I am a legalist in theory and in practice.  Why not see Matthew 5:32 as Jesus’ instruction to governor-priests and as vindication or exoneration of Ezra the priest?  Ancient Roman legislators had articulated concepts of lawful connubium.  The priests and bishops Constantine left to govern Rome when he abandoned it for Byzantium heard Jesus’ words as Roman law.  Wouldn’t Jesus follow Roman law?  It’s certainly more in line with the way my mind works.  Until, that is, I heard yehôvâh in the prophet Malachi (2:14b, 15a, 16 NET):

The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) is testifying against you on behalf of the wife you married when you were young, to whom you have become unfaithful even though she is your companion and wife by law [Table].  No one who has even a small portion of the Spirit in him does this [Table]

“I hate divorce,” says the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of Israel, “and the one who is guilty of violence,” says the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) who rules over all. “Pay attention to your conscience, and do not be unfaithful” [Table].

This is the intellectual and spiritual equivalent of a ratchet, and I cannot go back.  Now I hear, For God has consigned (συνέκλεισεν, a form of συγκλείω) all people to disobedience (ἀπείθειαν, a form of ἀπείθεια; literally, disbelief) so that he may show mercy to them all.[12]  We are all like fish caught in a net of disobedience.  Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under (ἐν; literally, in) the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable (ὑπόδικος; literally, under sentence, under judgment) to God.[13]

Ezra was exactly where yehôvâh wanted him to be when he said: O Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) God of Israel, you are righteous, for we are left as a remnant this day.  Indeed, we stand before you in our guilt.  However, because of this guilt no one can really stand before you.[14]  Who knows what would have happened if Ezra had stayed there, waiting on yehôvâh, instead of chasing after Shecaniah’s get-righteous-quick scheme (Ezra 10:2-4 NET).

Then Shecaniah son of Jehiel, from the descendants of Elam, addressed Ezra: “We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the local peoples.  Nonetheless, there is still hope for Israel in this regard [Table].  Therefore let us enact a covenant with our God to send away all these women and their offspring, in keeping with your counsel, my lord, and that of those who respect the commandments of our God.  And let it be done according to the law [Table].  Get up, for this matter concerns you.  We are with you, so be strong and act decisively [Table]!”

I want to make this as clear as I possibly can.  If a man has married the wrong sort of woman he cannot redeem himself in God’s eyes, he cannot make himself righteous again, by divorcing her and sending their children away.  The religious mind encourages us to change our own behavior, to conform us to some image of righteousness derived from the law (or some lesser doctrine) by that religious mind.  The mind of Christ speaks to the wriggling soul caught in a net of disbelief, saying, Stop your striving (râphâh, הרפו) and recognize (yâdaʽ, ודעו) that I am God!  I will be exalted over the nations!  I will be exalted over the earth![15]  Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all be born from above.’[16]

I don’t live in Rome in the first half of the fourth century.  I don’t hear Jesus speaking to Roman legislators about external controls.  I hear Him speaking to the ἐκκλησία, those called by God the Father through Jesus Christ to be led by his Holy Spirit.  For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.[17]  For this and other reasons I still hear Jesus’ use of πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) in Matthew 5:32 and πορνείᾳ in Matthew 19:9 as a reference to the same πορνεῦσαι (a form of πορνεύω, e.g., sexualized worship) He condemned in Revelation 2:20 (NET):

But I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching deceives my servants to commit sexual immorality (πορνεῦσαι) and to eat food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα, a form of εἰδωλόθυτον).

Such sexualized worship was the bane of Israel’s descendents from the beginning of their existence as a nation: So do not be idolaters (εἰδωλολάτραι, a form of εἰδωλολάτρης), as some of them were.  As it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.”  And let us not be immoral (πορνεύωμεν, another form of πορνεύω), as some of them were (ἐπόρνευσαν, another form of πορνεύω), and twenty-three thousand died in a single day.[18]  Rather than thinking of it as an abbreviated version of the law it would be far more charitable to assume that sexualized worship was what James had in mind at the Jerusalem Council:

Jesus (NET)

Parallel Greek James (NET)

Parallel Greek

…to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols…

Revelation 2:20b

πορνεῦσαι καὶ φαγεῖν εἰδωλόθυτα …to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood…

Acts 15:20 Table

ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) καὶ |τοῦ| πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος
…that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality…

Acts 15:29a

ἀπέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων (another form of εἰδωλόθυτον) καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνικτῶν καὶ πορνείας (a form of πορνεία)

I want to substitute a more literal understanding of ὁμολογεῖ (a form of ὁμολογέω) translated confesses and confess respectively in 1 John 4:1-3 (NET):

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.  By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that [speaks the same as] Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not [speak the same as] Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

To that extent that the religious mind encourages us to reform our own behavior rather than to rely on the fruit of the Holy Spirit, it is the spirit of antichrist no matter how well-intentioned the mouthpiece. Suspicious of the Gospel I tried to be good first to prove that I was, failing that, I tried because “God will get you if you don’t watch out.”  My fear was flight from rather than toward God.  And yet, in that dark foreboding I became most aware of His forgiveness and patience.  Paul put it this way for Timothy (1 Timothy 1:15, 16 NET):

This saying is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance: “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” – and I am the worst of them!  But here is why I was treated with mercy: so that in me as the worst, Christ Jesus could demonstrate his utmost patience, as an example for those who are going to believe in him for eternal life [Table].

Amanda Bynes delivers one of the funniest and most poignant lines in the movie Easy A: “Jesus tells us to love everyone.  I mean, even the whores and the homosexuals, but it’s just so hard.  It’s so hard because they keep doing it over and over again.”  An attitude of forgiveness toward others flows from the love that comes from the Holy Spirit.  Still, Jesus said, the one who is forgiven little loves little.[19] One who is forgiven much is forgiven often for the same offense, sometimes many more than seven times a day.  And that experience is far more persuasive than any threat (Matthew 18:34, 35 NET):

And in anger his lord turned him over to the prison guards to torture [the unforgiving slave] until he repaid all he owed.  So also my heavenly Father will do to you, if each of you does not forgive your brother from your heart.

In that sacred space of loving forgiveness the truth began to dawn on me that not only the desire and effort were God’s but the fulfillment of his desire and his effort was his as well, the kingdom, the power and the glory.  I’ll substitute the same literal understanding I used above for ὁμολογήσῃς (another form of ὁμολογέω) translated confess, and ὁμολογεῖται (another form of ὁμολογέω) translated confesses in Romans 10:9, 10 (NET):

…if you [speak the same as Jesus] with your mouth that Jesus is Lord[20] [e.g., yehôvâh as opposed to a Lord or Sir] and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For with the heart one believes and thus has righteousness [πιστεύεται εἰς δικαιοσύνην; literally, “believes unto righteousness”] and with the mouth one [speaks the same as Jesus] and thus has salvation [ὁμολογεῖται εἰς σωτηρίαν; literally, “speaks the same as Jesus unto salvation”].

 


[1] Matthew 19:4 (NET) Table

[2] Romans 1:27 (NET) Table

[3] Hebrews 13:4 (NET)

[4] Leviticus 18:22a (NET) Table

[5] Leviticus 18:8 (NET) Table

[6] 1 Corinthians 2:2 (NET) Table

[7] Acts 15:10 (NET)

[8] Romans 3:22 (NET)

[9] Romans 13:10b (NET)

[10] Romans 3:31 (NET)

[11] Matthew 5:32b (NAB) Table

[12] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[13] Romans 3:19 (NET)

[14] Ezra 9:15 (NET)

[15] Psalm 46:10 (NET)

[16] John 3:7 (NET)

[17] Romans 8:14 (NET)

[18] 1 Corinthians 10:7, 8 (NET)

[19] Luke 7:47b (NET)

[20] NET note 10: Or “the Lord.” The Greek construction, along with the quotation from Joel 2:32 in v. 13 (in which the same “Lord” seems to be in view) suggests that κύριον (kurion) is to be taken as “the Lord,” that is, Yahweh. Cf. D. B. Wallace, “The Semantics and Exegetical Significance of the Object-Complement Construction in the New Testament,” GTJ 6 (1985): 91-112.

My Reasons and My Reason, Part 7

I am persuaded that the primary meaning of πορνεία in the New Testament refers to ancient idolatrous worship practices.  It can be stretched to mean adultery in general (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7 NET Table):

For this is God’s will: that you become holy, that you keep away from πορνείας (a form of πορνεία), that each of you know how to possess his own body in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion like the Gentiles who do not know God.  In this matter no one should violate the rights of his brother or take advantage of him, because the Lord is the avenger in all these cases, as we also told you earlier and warned you solemnly.  For God did not call us to impurity (ἀκαθαρσία) but in holiness.

At least I hope Paul meant that one should not violate the rights of his brother by committing adultery with his wife, rather than that he should simply pass by her at a cultic festival (though I admit that ἀκαθαρσία sounds a lot like demonic worship here).  Paul may have used πορνεία to mean the list of sins found in Leviticus 18:6-23 (1 Corinthians 5:1 NET):

It is actually reported that πορνεία exists among you, the kind of πορνεία that is not permitted even among the Gentiles, so that someone is cohabiting with (ἔχειν, a form of ἔχω) his father’s wife.

If the man’s father was alive this is simply another instance where Paul used πορνεία for adultery.  (Remember πορνεία was almost the only word Paul had for sin as long as he accepted the gutting of the law at the Jerusalem Council.)  If the man’s father was dead πορνεία meant: You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness[1] or, A man may not marry his father’s former wife and in this way dishonor his father.[2]

In contemporary Greek πορνεία translates as prostitution in the headline Παιδική πορνεία.  If I select “Translate this Page” Παιδική πορνεία is rendered “Child prostitution.”

The one thing I am persuaded now that πορνεία does not mean in the New Testament is what two teenagers might do in the backseat of a Chevy on a Friday night.  They are not committing πορνεία but marriage by performing the only wedding ceremony yehôvâh ʼĕlôhı̂ym ever created, authorized or honored: If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged and has sexual relations with her, he must surely endow her to be his wife.  If her father refuses to give her to him, he must pay money for the bride price of virgins.[3]

When I was young it angered me that God gave such undue authority to an autocratic father.  Now that I know Him better and have lived with, and loved, a daughter, though the autocratic father may always be a possible type, I think the point was to give that authority to the one most attuned to his daughter’s heart on the matter in an uncomfortable social situation.  One reason for rejecting this law is the embarrassment a contemporary person feels over its companion legislation (Deuteronomy 22:28, 29 NET):

Suppose a man comes across a virgin who is not engaged and overpowers and rapes her and they are discovered [Table].  The man who has raped her must pay her father fifty shekels of silver and she must become his wife because he has violated her; he may never divorce her as long as he lives [Table].

A scene in the movie “Fury” cast this legislation in a different light.  In April 1945, days from the end of the war in Europe, First Sergeant Collier—Wardaddy—an American tank commander, spies a woman peeking down at them from an upstairs window in the German town they have just conquered.  Wardaddy calls to Norman, Private Ellison, and the two men, armed with machine guns, head inside and up the stairs.  I have every reason to assume that Wardaddy is continuing Norman’s indoctrination into the ways of war.

Norman, a clerk trained to type 60 words per minute, was assigned to Wardaddy’s tank crew as a replacement assistant driver.  His failure and refusal to pull the trigger endangers the rest of his crew and everyone around him.  Wardaddy has already forced him to kill a German prisoner in a macabre hand-over-hand imitation of a mother teaching a child to form letters with a crayon.  I can only imagine what new lesson Wardaddy has in store for him, though the two German women have no illusions that they are anything to their armed invaders but spoils of war.

Wardaddy puts down his weapon, and tells Norman to do likewise, once he has determined that the two women are the only occupants of the apartment.  It’s a clear sign to the women, beautiful young Emma and her older cousin, that they may survive their ordeal if they comply with Wardaddy’s wishes.

Wardaddy wishes to wash with hot water, shave and eat a fried egg.  Norman plays a piece of sheet music at the piano.  Emma, delighted, sings the song and turns the page for him.  She stops when she notices the scars on Wardaddy’s back.

“She’s a good clean girl,” Wardaddy says to Norman.  “If you don’t take her in that bedroom, I will.”

Emma doesn’t need a translator to know what’s expected of her.  Given the opportunity to choose her rapist, she leads her young accompanist into the bedroom.  Norman retrieves his machine gun on the way.  Emma’s older cousin attempts to follow them, whether to intervene or to serve as a substitute is unclear.  Wardaddy stops her with a gesture and a word in German:

“No.  They’re young and they’re alive.”

As a rapist Norman is patient and gentle as a lover.  He and Emma, representing the human beings least degraded by war, exit that bedroom as husband and wife.  They know it.  Wardaddy knows it.  And so does Emma’s older cousin.  As they sit down to a wedding feast of fried eggs the rest of his tank crew—Coon-Ass, Gordo and Bible—knock at the door, calling for Norman.

Coon-Ass and Gordo have cajoled or coerced a “whore” to “entertain” them, and others, one at a time in the tank downstairs.  They have come to share her with Norman.  I get the impression that if Norman were not already married to Emma, Coon-Ass and Gordo would make it very difficult for him to refuse his share.  But seeing Emma, Coon-Ass in particular, representing the man most degraded by war, wants his share of her.  Now, however, even Coon-Ass isn’t likely to take her without Norman’s acquiescence.

“Don’t touch her!” Norman says with the all the force of a petulant child.

“Anyone touches the girl,” Wardaddy says, putting not only his rank but his personal power and authority on the line, “they get their teeth kicked in.”

Coon-Ass and Gordo are deeply hurt.  Even Bible, though apparently powerful enough in the pecking order to abstain from the women without suffering personal repercussions, is hurt to have been excluded from the wedding feast.  They remind Wardaddy that they have been together, brothers in arms, since the Normandy invasion.  Norman has not.

I suspect that Wardaddy would not have denied his brothers, Coon-Ass and Gordo, if they had gotten to Emma first.  He, as degraded by war as any of them, could not risk his rank, personal power or authority except for Norman’s or, if necessary, his own new bride.

And for those who think it might have been a better film, or Emma might have been a better woman, if she had fought to the death to defend her honor, a stray shell kills her in the next scene.  Norman grieves like a widower, though duty calls and limits his opportunity to do her justice.

If one or both of the teenagers in the Chevy come back Saturday night to perform the same ceremony with different partners, they would be guilty of adultery as long as the other lives.  The point was never to make adultery—or divorce, for that matter—the unpardonable sin.  The point was to get religious people to acknowledge that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.  But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.[4]

Other reasons for rejecting the view of marriage described in the law are 1) that a daughter who acted so precipitously may have robbed her father of a better bride price.  Or, 2) in more contemporary terms she may rob herself of a more lucrative match.  And 3) governing bodies, both secular and religious, want to regulate marriage.

Do they have that right (Matthew 16:19; 18:18 NKJV)?

And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

This certainly sounds like Peter and James had the authority to gut the law.  Were they the only ones?  In the United States of America a woman is free to couple or uncouple as she pleases because she is “endowed by [her] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…”[5]  I often wonder why the lawyers, legal historians, philosophers and ministers who signed the Declaration of Independence didn’t forsee that the pursuit of personal happiness would come to dominate and define both life and liberty.

I’ve been taught to think like John Miller in his March 7, 2015 response to comments and an essay on happiness on blog.dictionary.com:

Everyone here really doesn’t understand the colonial meaning of the phrase.  Pursuit of happiness referred to the pursuit of holiness or godliness.  It had nothing to do with personal pleasures.  Our founders understood that morality and religion were required for a republic to succeed and in those times when someone pursued happiness it was a pursuit of that which is godly.  Sadly, that’s something very few Americans do these days and will be the source of our nation’s demise.

But the Declaration of Independence did not say “that all men are…endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are” the pursuit of Christ and his righteousness.  It said, “pursuit of Happiness.”  And I think I can say on the authority of Scripture and a bare knowledge of American history that “the pursuit of Christ and his righteousness” would never have gained consensus.

That, I think, is what I witness in both the Jerusalem Council and the Declaration of Independence.  They are prime examples of the achievements of committee work and consensus building.  They happened.  They are there for all to see.  I don’t believe these particular results of either exercise.  They are not my faith.  I think what Jesus meant was that those who trust Him would be led by his Holy Spirit (Matthew 16:19; 18:18 NET):

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.  Whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.

I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.

One of the ways to know what has been bound and released in heaven is to know God’s law, not because one is declared righteous before him by the works of the law but because the law discloses what displeases Him: through the law comes the knowledge of sin.[6]

I should clarify my thoughts on happiness: I had my ticket home.  I was ready to go.  I would have been happy to sit and watch my daughter’s graduation ceremony from college.  But my twenty-three-year-old daughter had a stroke before I arrived.  Then I was happy to sit and watch as she chewed food and swallowed without choking on it.

I am grateful for happiness.  I think it is essential to the ongoing occupation of living here and now.  But I don’t have a clue how to pursue it.  When I’ve tried, the people, achievements, occupations and possessions I thought would make me happy, did not, not any more or any less than the normal ebb and flow of when I had not pursued happiness.  I will pursue Christ and his righteousness instead.

And to the wag who may say I only do that because it makes me happy, I can honestly answer, not always, my friend, at times it is a sad or a painful thing to do.  Still, it has its moments.

[1] Leviticus 18:8 (NET) Table

[2] Deuteronomy 22:30 (NET)

[3] Exodus 22:16, 17 (NET)

[4] Romans 3:23, 24 (NET)

[5] Declaration of Independence

[6] Romans 3:20 (NET)

David’s Forgiveness, Part 10

David’s friend Hushai arrived in the city, just as Absalom was entering Jerusalem.1  Absalom was suspicious of Hushai at first, Do you call this loyalty [See Addendum below] to your friend?  Why didn’t you go with your friend?2  Hushai lied or told such a cleverly concealed truth that Absalom failed to unravel the riddle.  No, I will be loyal to the one whom the Lord, these people, and all the men of Israel have chosen. Moreover, whom should I serve?  Should it not be his son?  Just as I served your father, so I will serve you.3  And so Hushai was established as both a spy and false counselor.

Absalom turned to Ahithophel for advice, What should we do?4 In those days Ahithophel’s advice was considered as valuable as a prophetic revelation.  Both David and Absalom highly regarded the advice of Ahithophel.5  But when he learned that his trusted adviser had defected to Absalom, David had prayed, Make the advice of Ahithophel foolish (sâkal, סַכֶּל), O Lord!6  Samuel defined the word foolish for Saul: Then Samuel said to Saul, “You have made a foolish (sâkal, נִסְכָּ֑לְתָּ) choice! You have not obeyed the commandment that the Lord your God gave you. Had you done that, the Lord would have established your kingdom over Israel forever!”7

Ahithophel replied to Absalom, “Have sex with your father’s concubines whom he left to care for the palace.  All Israel will hear that you have made yourself repulsive to your father.  Then your followers will be motivated to support you.”8  I turned to the Jewish Virtual Library online to see if I could gain some insight how David might have felt about these women.  I still don’t know if they were mistresses or chambermaids he bed a time or two.  But I did find out something about Ahithophel’s advice.

“To lie with a monarch’s concubine was tantamount to usurpation of the throne (II Sam. 3:7; 16:21–22). For this reason Abner took Rizpah (II Sam. 3:7). The same concept stands behind Ahitophel’s advice to Absalom, to ‘go into his father’s concubines’ (16:21)…”9  So Ahithophel’s advice may or may not have been advantageous on the horizontal plane.  Personally, I think it is sort of an open question how Absalom’s followers might have responded.  On the vertical plane, however, Ahithophel advised a usurper of the throne, one not anointed nor chosen by God, to do a foolish thing and disobey one of his commandments10 publicly as his first royal act.

So they pitched a tent for Absalom on the roof, and Absalom had sex with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.11  The Jewish Virtual Library article I quoted disagrees that this was a violation of God’s law regarding a father’s wife (a capital offence, by the way).  “Nor does living with a man as his concubine create a kinship as an impediment to marriage between herself and any of the man’s relatives, or between the man and her relatives, as would be the case if she would be considered to be his wife (Rosh, Resp. no. 32:1; Oẓar ha-Posekim, EH26, n. 3).”12  The problem I see with this analysis is that there is no legislation concerning concubines in the Bible.  The only way to know what a concubine was and what rights or obligations she had was from foreign law.  Both the Assyrian Code and the Code of Hammurapi are referenced as sources for determining the legal status of a concubine in the above mentioned article.

God prophesied to David [See Addendum below], I will take your wives (Septuagintγυναῖκάς, a form of γυνή) and hand them over to your companion.  He will have sexual relations with your wives (Septuagint: γυναικῶν, another form of γυνή) in broad daylight!  Although you have acted in secret, I will do this thing before all Israel, and in broad daylight.13  I am using the Greek here simply because I recognize the Greek alphabet better than the Hebrew.  (In other words, I don’t know Greek a whole lot less than I don’t know Hebrew.)  Both γυναῖκάς and γυναικῶν are plural forms of γυνή.  Both instances are the same Hebrew word, too, according to the concordance.  Both words can be translated wives or women.

In Ephesians 5:28 (NET) γυναικας was translated wives, In the same way husbands ought14 to love their wives (γυναικας) as their own bodies.  In Matthew 14:21 (NET) γυναικων was translated women, Not counting women (γυναικων) and children, there were about five thousand men who ate.  I won’t make an issue of whether 2 Samuel 12:11 should have been translated wives or women, because γυναικὸς in Leviticus 18:8 (NET) [See Addendum below] was translated wife, You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife (Septuagint: γυναικὸς); she is your father’s nakedness, and in Leviticus 20:11 (NET) [See Addendum below], If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife (Septuagint: γυναικὸς), he has exposed his father’s nakedness.  Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.

Again, γυναικὸς is a singular form of gunē (γυνή), and the Hebrew word is also the same according to the concordance.  In Matthew 19:10 (NET) [Table] γυναικος was translated wife, The15 disciples said to him, “If this is the case of a husband with a wife (γυναικος), it is better not to marry!”  In John 4:9 (NET) γυνη and γυναικος were both translated woman, So the Samaritan16 woman (γυνη) said to him, “How can you – a Jew – ask me, a Samaritan17 woman (γυναικος), for water to drink?”18

So whether 2 Samuel 12:11 should have been translated David’s wives or women is immaterial, since the same word, both in Greek and Hebrew, was used in Leviticus 18:8 and 20:11.  Since God was apparently satisfied when Absalom had sex with David’s concubines that Nathan’s prophesy about David’s wives or women was fulfilled, and since the only other way to distinguish David’s concubines from his wives or his women was by foreign law, I am going to assume that the category called concubine referred to a traditional practice that probably should not have been part of the thought of the kingdom of Israel.

That being said, however, it seems very likely that what God called Saul’s wives through Nathan the prophet were perceived by many in Israel as the concubines of David’s father-in-law:19  I gave you your master’s house, and put your master’s wives (Septuagint: γυναῖκάς) into your arms,20 when Nathan confronted David on God’s behalf.  It puts some perspective on Absalom’s willingness to fall in with Ahithophel’s advice.  He wanted his father’s concubines just like his father got his father-in-law’s concubines when David received the kingdom after Saul’s death.  It makes me wonder what Absalom heard of his father’s life.

I assume Absalom was told all the stories about David.  But what he heard seems to have been something less than the sum total of what he was told.  He did not hear for instance that David was chosen (anointed) by God when Saul was rejected for his disobedience to God.  Oh, perhaps he heard it in part.  Maybe he assumed that David was, or should have been, rejected by God when he took Bathsheba and murdered Uriah, or if not then, perhaps when he failed to avenge Tamar, as Absalom himself had done.  He certainly heard that Samuel used sacrifices to God as the cover to anoint David as king while Saul yet lived.  He imitated that scene faithfully, minus of course the sanction of God or the presence of his prophet.  He did not hear how his father David respected the Lord’s chosen or anointed one even after he was rejected by God, or he would have behaved differently toward his father.  In fact, if he had any faith whatsoever in God or his choice, Absalom would not have challenged David at all.

The irony here was, though he was born a son of David, though he did everything he could to imitate David’s career outwardly, Absalom proved to be a man after Saul’s own heart:  So Saul feared David, because the Lord was with him but had departed from Saul.21  And Absalom, like Saul before him, set himself to the task of finding a way to kill David.

 

Addendum: April 28, 2021
I won’t make too much of it since Absalom was speaking, but I was intrigued by loyalty:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
2 Samuel 16:17 (Tanakh) 2 Samuel 16:17 (NET) 2 Reigns 16:17 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:17 (English Elpenor)

And Absalom said to Hushai: ‘Is this thy kindness (חַסְדְּךָ֖) to thy friend? why wentest thou not with thy friend?’ Absalom said to Hushai, “Do you call this loyalty (ḥeseḏ, חסדך) to your friend?  Why didn’t you go with your friend?” And Abessalom said to Chousi, “Is this your mercy (ἔλεός) with your companion?  Why did you not go away with your companion?” And Abessalom said to Chusi, [Is] this thy kindness (ἔλεός) to thy friend? why wentest thou not forth with thy friend?

That kindness and mercy are joined in חַסְדְּךָ֖ (ḥeseḏ) makes perfect sense, though I’m not sure I could have accessed it that concretely.  To hear kindness and mercy as loyalty, or faithfulness, is a minor revolution and a great relief in my thinking.  I am too often tempted that I should be tougher than that.

A comparison of 2 Samuel 12:11 translated from the Hebrew of the Masoretic text and the Greek of the Septuagint follows:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
2 Samuel 12:11 (Tanakh) Table 2 Samuel 12:11 (NET) 2 Reigns 12:11 (NETS)

2 Kings 12:11 (English Elpenor)

Thus saith HaShem: Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives (נָשֶׁ֙יךָ֙) before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives (נָשֶׁ֔יךָ) in the sight of this sun. This is what the Lord has said: ‘I am about to bring disaster on you from inside your own household!  Right before your eyes I will take your wives (‘iššâ, נשיך) and hand them over to your companion.  He will go to bed with your wives (‘iššâ, נשיך) in broad daylight! This is what the Lord says: Behold, I am raising up trouble against you out of your own house, and I will take your wives (γυναῗκάς) before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives (γυναικῶν) before this sun. Thus says the Lord, Behold, I will raise up against thee evil out of thy house, and I will take thy wives (γυναῖκάς) before thine eyes, and will give them to thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives (γυναικῶν) in the sight of this sun.

A comparison of Leviticus 18:8 translated from the Hebrew of the Masoretic text and the Greek of the Septuagint follows:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
Leviticus 18:8 (Tanakh) Leviticus 18:8 (NET) Leviticus 18:8 (NETS)

Leviticus 18:8 (English Elpenor)

The nakedness of thy father’s wife (אֵֽשֶׁת) shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness. You must not have sexual relations with your father’s wife (‘iššâ, אשת); she is your father’s nakedness. You shall not uncover the shame of your father’s wife (γυναικὸς); it is the shame of your father. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s wife (γυναικὸς); it is thy father’s nakedness.

A comparison of Leviticus 20:11 translated from the Hebrew of the Masoretic text and the Greek of the Septuagint follows:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
Leviticus 20:11 (Tanakh) Table Leviticus 20:11 (NET) Leviticus 20:11 (NETS)

Leviticus 20:11 (English Elpenor)

And the man that lieth with his father’s wife (אֵ֣שֶׁת)–he hath uncovered his father’s nakedness–both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. If a man goes to bed with his father’s wife (‘iššâ, אשת), he has exposed his father’s nakedness.  Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. And if anyone lies with his father’s wife (γυναικὸς), he has uncovered his father’s shame; let both of them by death be put to death; they are liable. And if any one should lie with his father’s wife (γυναικὸς), he has uncovered his father’s nakedness: let them both die the death, they are guilty.

Tables comparing 2 Samuel 15:37; 16:17; 16:18; 16:19; 16:20; 16:23; 1 Samuel 13:13; 2 Samuel 16:21; 16:22; Leviticus 18:8 and 1 Samuel 18:12 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and tables comparing 2 Samuel (Reigns, Kings) 15:37; 16:17; 16:18; 16:19; 16:20; 16:23; 1 Samuel (Reigns, Kings) 13:13; 2 Samuel (Reigns, Kings) 16:21; 16:22; Leviticus 18:8 and 1 Samuel (Reigns, Kings) 18:12 in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor), and tables comparing Ephesians 5:28 and John 4:9 in the NET and KJV follow.

2 Samuel 15:37 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 15:37 (KJV)

2 Samuel 15:37 (NET)

So Hushai David’s friend came into the city; and Absalom was at the point of coming into Jerusalem. So Hushai David’s friend came into the city, and Absalom came into Jerusalem. So David’s friend Hushai arrived in the city, just as Absalom was entering Jerusalem.

2 Samuel 15:37 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 15:37 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Χουσι ὁ ἑταῗρος Δαυιδ εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ Αβεσσαλωμ εἰσεπορεύετο εἰς Ιερουσαλημ καὶ εἰσῆλθε Χουσὶ ὁ ἑταῖρος Δαυὶδ εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ᾿Αβεσσαλὼμ ἄρτι εἰσεπορεύετο εἰς ῾Ιερουσαλήμ

2 Reigns 15:37 (NETS)

2 Kings 15:37 (English Elpenor)

And Chousi, the companion of Dauid, entered into the city, and Abessalom was going into Ierousalem. So Chusi the friend of David went into the city, and Abessalom was lately gone into Jerusalem.

2 Samuel 16:17 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:17 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:17 (NET)

And Absalom said to Hushai: ‘Is this thy kindness to thy friend? why wentest thou not with thy friend?’ And Absalom said to Hushai, Is this thy kindness to thy friend? why wentest thou not with thy friend? Absalom said to Hushai, “Do you call this loyalty to your friend?  Why didn’t you go with your friend?”

2 Samuel 16:17 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:17 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν Αβεσσαλωμ πρὸς Χουσι τοῦτο τὸ ἔλεός σου μετὰ τοῦ ἑταίρου σου ἵνα τί οὐκ ἀπῆλθες μετὰ τοῦ ἑταίρου σου καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Αβεσσαλὼμ πρὸς Χουσί· τοῦτο τὸ ἔλεός σου μετὰ τοῦ ἑταίρου σου; ἱνατί οὐκ ἀπῆλθες μετὰ τοῦ ἑταίρου σου

2 Reigns 16:17 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:17 (English Elpenor)

And Abessalom said to Chousi, “Is this your mercy with your companion?  Why did you not go away with your companion?” And Abessalom said to Chusi, [Is] this thy kindness to thy friend? why wentest thou not forth with thy friend?

2 Samuel 16:18 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:18 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:18 (NET)

And Hushai said unto Absalom: ‘Nay; but whom HaShem, and this people, and all the men of Israel have chosen, his will I be, and with him will I abide. And Hushai said unto Absalom, Nay; but whom the LORD, and this people, and all the men of Israel, choose, his will I be, and with him will I abide. Hushai replied to Absalom, “No, I will be loyal to the one whom the Lord, these people, and all the men of Israel have chosen.

2 Samuel 16:18 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:18 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν Χουσι πρὸς Αβεσσαλωμ οὐχί ἀλλὰ κατόπισθεν οὗ ἐξελέξατο κύριος καὶ ὁ λαὸς οὗτος καὶ πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ισραηλ αὐτῷ ἔσομαι καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ καθήσομαι καὶ εἶπε Χουσὶ πρὸς ᾿Αβεσσαλώμ· οὐχί, ἀλλὰ κατόπισθεν οὗ ἐξελέξατο Κύριος καὶ ὁ λαὸς οὗτος καὶ πᾶς ἀνὴρ ᾿Ισραήλ, αὐτῷ ἔσομαι καὶ μετὰ αὐτοῦ καθήσομαι

2 Reigns 16:18 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:18 (English Elpenor)

And Chousi said to Abessalom, “No, but hereafter he whom the Lord and this people and every man of Israel have chosen, his I will be, and with him I will sit. And Chusi said to Abessalom, Nay, but following whom the Lord, and this people, and all Israel have chosen,– his will I be, and with him I will dwell.

2 Samuel 16:19 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:19 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:19 (NET)

And again, whom should I serve? should I not serve in the presence of his son? as I have served in thy father’s presence, so will I be in thy presence.’ And again, whom should I serve? should I not serve in the presence of his son? as I have served in thy father’s presence, so will I be in thy presence. Moreover, whom should I serve?  Should it not be his son?  Just as I served your father, so I will serve you.”

2 Samuel 16:19 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:19 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ τὸ δεύτερον τίνι ἐγὼ δουλεύσω οὐχὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ καθάπερ ἐδούλευσα ἐνώπιον τοῦ πατρός σου οὕτως ἔσομαι ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ τὸ δεύτερον, τίνι ἐγὼ δουλεύσω; οὐχὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ; καθάπερ ἐδούλευσα ἐνώπιον τοῦ πατρός σου, οὕτως ἔσομαι ἐνώπιόν σου

2 Reigns 16:19 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:19 (English Elpenor)

And secondly, to whom will I be subject?  Is it not in the presence of his son?  Just as I was subject in the presence of your father, so I will be in your presence.” And again, whom shall I serve? should I not in the presence of his son? As I served in the sight of thy father, so will I be in thy presence.

2 Samuel 16:20 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:20 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:20 (NET)

Then said Absalom to Ahithophel: ‘Give your counsel what we shall do.’ Then said Absalom to Ahithophel, Give counsel among you what we shall do. Then Absalom said to Ahithophel, “Give us your advice.  What should we do?”

2 Samuel 16:20 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:20 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν Αβεσσαλωμ πρὸς Αχιτοφελ φέρετε ἑαυτοῗς βουλὴν τί ποιήσωμεν καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Αβεσσαλὼμ πρὸς ᾿Αχιτόφελ· φέρετε ἑαυτοῖς βουλὴν τί ποιήσωμεν

2 Reigns 16:20 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:20 (English Elpenor)

And Abessalom said to Achitophel, “Bring forth counsel among yourselves, what we should do.” And Abessalom said to Achitophel, Deliberate among yourselves concerning what we should do.

2 Samuel 16:23 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:23 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:23 (NET)

Now the counsel of Ahithophel, which he counselled in those days, was as if a man inquired of the word of G-d; so was all the counsel of Ahithophel both with David and with Absalom. And the counsel of Ahithophel, which he counselled in those days, was as if a man had enquired at the oracle of God: so was all the counsel of Ahithophel both with David and with Absalom. In those days Ahithophel’s advice was considered as valuable as a prophetic revelation.  Both David and Absalom highly regarded the advice of Ahithophel.

2 Samuel 16:23 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:23 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἡ βουλὴ Αχιτοφελ ἣν ἐβουλεύσατο ἐν ταῗς ἡμέραις ταῗς πρώταις ὃν τρόπον ἐπερωτήσῃ ἐν λόγῳ τοῦ θεοῦ οὕτως πᾶσα ἡ βουλὴ τοῦ Αχιτοφελ καί γε τῷ Δαυιδ καί γε τῷ Αβεσσαλωμ καὶ ἡ βουλὴ ᾿Αχιτόφελ, ἣν ἐβουλεύσατο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταῖς πρώταις, ὃν τρόπον ἐπερωτήσῃ τις ἐν λόγῳ τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὕτως πᾶσα ἡ βουλὴ τοῦ ᾿Αχιτόφελ καί γε τῷ Δαυὶδ καί γε τῷ ᾿Αβεσσαλώμ

2 Reigns 16:23 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:23 (English Elpenor)

And the counsel of Achitophel, which he counseled in the former days, was as if one were to inquire by a word of God; so was all the counsel of Achitophel, and indeed to Dauid and indeed to Abessalom. And the counsel of Achitophel, which he counseled in former days, [was] as if one should enquire of the word of God: so [was] all the counsel of Achitophel both to David and also to Abessalom.

1 Samuel 13:13 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 13:13 (KJV)

1 Samuel 13:13 (NET)

And Samuel said to Saul: ‘Thou hast done foolishly; thou hast not kept the commandment of HaShem thy G-d, which He commanded thee; for now would HaShem have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever. And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the LORD thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the LORD have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever. Then Samuel said to Saul, “You have made a foolish choice!  You have not obeyed the commandment that the Lord your God gave you.  Had you done that, the Lord would have established your kingdom over Israel forever.

1 Samuel 13:13 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 13:13 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν Σαμουηλ πρὸς Σαουλ μεματαίωταί σοι ὅτι οὐκ ἐφύλαξας τὴν ἐντολήν μου ἣν ἐνετείλατό σοι κύριος ὡς νῦν ἡτοίμασεν κύριος τὴν βασιλείαν σου ἕως αἰῶνος ἐπὶ Ισραηλ καὶ εἶπε Σαμουὴλ πρὸς Σαούλ· μεματαίωταί σοι, ὅτι οὐκ ἐφύλαξας τὴν ἐντολήν μου, ἣν ἐνετείλατό σοι Κύριος, ὡς νῦν ἡτοίμασε Κύριος τὴν βασιλείαν σου ἐπὶ ᾿Ισραὴλ ἕως αἰῶνος

1 Reigns 13:13 (NETS)

1 Kings 13:13 (English Elpenor)

And Samouel said to Saoul, “You have done foolishly, for you did did not keep my commandment, which the Lord commanded you.  As just now the Lord prepared your kingdom over Israel forever, And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly; for thou hast not kept my command, which the Lord commanded thee, as now the Lord would have confirmed thy kingdom over Israel for ever.

2 Samuel 16:21 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:21 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:21 (NET)

And Ahithophel said unto Absalom: ‘Go in unto thy father’s concubines, that he hath left to keep the house; and all Israel will hear that thou art abhorred of thy father; then will the hands of all that are with thee be strong.’ And Ahithophel said unto Absalom, Go in unto thy father’s concubines, which he hath left to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that thou art abhorred of thy father: then shall the hands of all that are with thee be strong. Ahithophel replied to Absalom, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to care for the palace.  All Israel will hear that you have made yourself repulsive to your father.  Then your followers will be motivated to support you.”

2 Samuel 16:21 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:21 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν Αχιτοφελ πρὸς Αβεσσαλωμ εἴσελθε πρὸς τὰς παλλακὰς τοῦ πατρός σου ἃς κατέλιπεν φυλάσσειν τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκούσεται πᾶς Ισραηλ ὅτι κατῄσχυνας τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ ἐνισχύσουσιν αἱ χεῗρες πάντων τῶν μετὰ σοῦ καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Αχιτόφελ πρὸς ᾿Αβεσσαλώμ· εἴσελθε πρὸς τὰς παλλακὰς τοῦ πατρός σου, ἃς κατέλιπε φυλάσσειν τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀκούσεται πᾶς ᾿Ισραὴλ ὅτι κατῄσχυνας τὸν πατέρα σου, καὶ ἐνισχύσουσιν αἱ χεῖρες πάντων τῶν μετὰ σοῦ

2 Reigns 16:21 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:21 (English Elpenor)

And Achitophel said to Abessalom, “Go in to the concubines of your father, whom he left behind to keep his house, and all Israel will hear that you put your father to shame, and the hands of all who are with you will be strengthened.” And Achitophel said to Abessalom, Go in to thy father’s concubines, whom he left to keep his house; and all Israel shall hear that thou hast dishonoured thy father; and the hands of all that are with thee shall be strengthened.

2 Samuel 16:22 (Tanakh)

2 Samuel 16:22 (KJV)

2 Samuel 16:22 (NET)

So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.– So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel. So they pitched a tent for Absalom on the roof, and Absalom slept with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.

2 Samuel 16:22 (Septuagint BLB)

2 Kings 16:22 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἔπηξαν τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ Αβεσσαλωμ ἐπὶ τὸ δῶμα καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Αβεσσαλωμ πρὸς τὰς παλλακὰς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ κατ᾽ ὀφθαλμοὺς παντὸς Ισραηλ καὶ ἔπηξαν τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ ᾿Αβεσσαλὼμ ἐπὶ τὸ δῶμα, καὶ εἰσῆλθεν ᾿Αβεσσαλὼμ πρὸς τὰς παλλακὰς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ κατ’ ὀφθαλμοὺς παντὸς ᾿Ισραήλ

2 Reigns 16:22 (NETS)

2 Kings 16:22 (English Elpenor)

And they pitched the tent for Abessalom upon the roof, and Abessalom went in to the concubines of his father in the sight of all Israel. And they pitched a tent for Abessalom on the roof, and Abessalom went in to his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.

Leviticus 18:8 (Tanakh)

Leviticus 18:8 (KJV)

Leviticus 18:8 (NET)

The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness. The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness. You must not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.

Leviticus 18:8 (Septuagint BLB)

Leviticus 18:8 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις ἀσχημοσύνη πατρός σού ἐστιν ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις, ἀσχημοσύνη πατρὸς σού ἐστιν

Leviticus 18:8 (NETS)

Leviticus 18:8 (English Elpenor)

You shall not uncover the shame of your father’s wife; it is the shame of your father. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s wife; it is thy father’s nakedness.

1 Samuel 18:12 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 18:12 (KJV)

1 Samuel 18:12 (NET)

And Saul was afraid of David, because HaShem was with him, and was departed from Saul. And Saul was afraid of David, because the LORD was with him, and was departed from Saul. So Saul feared David, because the Lord was with David but had departed from Saul.

1 Samuel 18:12 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 18:12 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἐφοβήθη Σαουλ ἀπὸ προσώπου Δαυιδ καὶ ἐφοβήθη Σαοὺλ ἀπὸ προσώπου Δαυίδ

1 Reigns 18:12 (NETS)

1 Kings 18:12 (English Elpenor)

And Saoul was afraid from before Dauid, And Saul was alarmed on account of David.

Ephesians 5:28 (NET)

Ephesians 5:28 (KJV)

In the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies.  He who loves his wife loves himself. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.  He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

NET Parallel Greek

Stephanus Textus Receptus

Byzantine Majority Text

οὕτως ὀφείλουσιν [καὶ] οἱ ἄνδρες ἀγαπᾶν τὰς ἑαυτῶν γυναῖκας ὡς τὰ ἑαυτῶν σώματα. ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα ἑαυτὸν ἀγαπᾷ ουτως οφειλουσιν οι ανδρες αγαπαν τας εαυτων γυναικας ως τα εαυτων σωματα ο αγαπων την εαυτου γυναικα εαυτον αγαπα ουτως οφειλουσιν οι ανδρες αγαπαν τας εαυτων γυναικας ως τα εαυτων σωματα ο αγαπων την εαυτου γυναικα εαυτον αγαπα

John 4:9 (NET)

John 4:9 (KJV)

So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you—a Jew—ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans.) Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

NET Parallel Greek

Stephanus Textus Receptus

Byzantine Majority Text

λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ Σαμαρῖτις· πῶς σὺ Ἰουδαῖος ὢν παρ᾿ ἐμοῦ πεῖν αἰτεῖς γυναικὸς Σαμαρίτιδος οὔσης; |(οὐ γὰρ συγχρῶνται Ἰουδαῖοι Σαμαρίταις.)| λεγει ουν αυτω η γυνη η σαμαρειτις πως συ ιουδαιος ων παρ εμου πιειν αιτεις ουσης γυναικος σαμαρειτιδος ου γαρ συγχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαρειταις λεγει ουν αυτω η γυνη η σαμαρειτις πως συ ιουδαιος ων παρ εμου πιειν αιτεις ουσης γυναικος σαμαρειτιδος ου γαρ συγχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαρειταις

1 2 Samuel 15:37 (NET)

2 2 Samuel 16:17 (NET)

3 2 Samuel 16:18, 19 (NET)  See: David’s command to Hushai, 2 Samuel 15:34 (NET).

4 2 Samuel 16:20b (NET)

5 2 Samuel 16:23 (NET)

6 2 Samuel 15:31 (NET) Table

7 1 Samuel 13:13 (NET)

8 2 Samuel 16:21 (NET)

11 2 Samuel 16:22 (NET)

13 2 Samuel 12:11 (NET) Table

14 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had καὶ (possibly also) following ought.  The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

15 The Stephanus Textus Receptus, Byzantine Majority Text and NA28 had αὐτοῦ (KJV: His) here.  The NET parallel Greek text did not.

20 2 Samuel 12:8 (NET) Table

21 1 Samuel 18:12 (NET)

What is Sexual Immorality?

For a long time I thought I understood exactly what sexual immorality (πορνεία) in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (NET) [Table] meant.

It is actually reported that sexual immorality (πορνεία) exists among you, the kind of immorality (πορνεία) that is not permitted even among the Gentiles, so that someone is cohabiting (ἔχειν, a form of ἔχω) with his father’s wife.

I assumed that father’s wife meant not the son’s mother.  So I assumed this wife was at least the father’s second, probably younger than he, maybe even closer to the son’s age.  The son and the father’s new young wife became attracted to one another.  Either she divorced the father and married the son or simply ran off with the son.  The Greek word translated cohabiting is ἔχειν (ἔχω, to hold) and might mean either (along with a host of other forms of possession or ownership usually translated to have).

For all I know this is exactly what it means, but some confusion and uncertainty set in as I began to wonder what πορνεία itself meant, especially when I began to suspect that it had something to do with “idolatrous worship (including its drunken sexual practices).”  My religious mind says, “Look, I’ve got the rule: ‘Don’t mess around with your father’s wife.’  I’m satisfied with that.  Don’t confuse me.”  I’ve obviously become suspicious of my religious mind.  So in the spirit of expanding the context a bit and knowing the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom [He] sent1 I’m going to explore some of my confusion.

The sin scenario I described above is adultery (μοιχεία) plain and simple.  Why call it πορνεία?  But I had assumed that the father was still alive.  What if the father was already deceased?

You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.

Leviticus 18:8 (NET)

If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness.  Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.

Leviticus 20:11 (NET)

This is the strongest indication I know that πορνεία meant a violation of Leviticus 18 and 20 to Jesus, Paul and the New Testament writers.  But why would there be such an arbitrary limit?  Why didn’t πορνεία mean immorality in general, any and every violation of God’s law?  That led me inexorably to the conclusion that though πορνεία may have connoted violations of Leviticus 18 and 20 in Jewish minds (strictly speaking Paul was descended from Benjamin not Judah), its underlying denotation in Greek was the sexuality of ancient (and not so ancient) religious worship.

This form of religious worship was still practiced openly in Corinth.  In Corinth the πόρνη, the female devotee of this manner of worship, still lived in all her honor and glory.  And I think it is safe to say that though this form of worship wasn’t mandatory, it was still a good way to advance one’s business and political ambitions (not to mention satisfying a thirst for wine, women and song).  With that in mind I want to look at the next chapter of 1 Corinthians.  I’m quoting 1 Corinthians 6:12-20 (NET), except that I’m not translating words from the πόρνος word group.

“All things are lawful for me” – but not everything is beneficial.  “All things are lawful for me” – but I will not be controlled by anything.  “Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both.”  The body is not for [πορνείᾳ], but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.  Now God indeed raised the Lord and he will raise us by his power.  Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?  Should I take the members of Christ and make them members of a [πόρνης, a form of πόρνη]?  Never!  Or do you not know that anyone who is united with a [πόρνῃ] is one body with her?  For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”  But the one united with the Lord is one spirit with him.  Flee [πορνείαν, a form of πορνείᾳ]!  “Every sin a person commits is outside of the body” – but [πορνεύων, a form of πορνεύω] sins against his own body.  Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?  For you were bought at a price.  Therefore glorify God with your body.2

While it is probably true that the body is not for an everyday-run-of-the-mill prostitute, I think the thrust of Paul’s message above (I should say “no pun intended,” but I can’t say for sure) was the cultic variety.  Members of Christ should not also become members of other gods (or goddesses).

The phrases in quotes above are thought to be Corinthian slogans (notes 10, 11) by the translators of the NET.  That may be true, but I still believe that, All things are lawful for me but not everything is beneficial is Paul’s take home message from the Jerusalem Council.  I seriously doubt that James took home the same message.  And I believe that Paul was beginning to struggle with it a bit here.

At the time of the Jerusalem Council God had apparently only called Gentiles who were Jewish converts, God fearers or people who had attached themselves to Jewish synagogues in some fashion.  In Corinth He also called, The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards,3 the verbally abusive, and swindlers.4  And He had given them his Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 1:4-9 NET).

I always thank my God for you because of the grace of God that was given to you in Christ Jesus.  For you were made rich in every way in him, in all your speech and in every kind of knowledge – just as the testimony about Christ has been confirmed among you – so that you do not lack any spiritual gift as you wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.  He will also strengthen you to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.  God is faithful, by whom you were called into fellowship with his son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Apparently some of them were having difficulty shedding their former sins.  What’s a former Pharisee to do?  Paul singled out one man who had his father’s wife, and made an example of him.  I’ve considered that perhaps this man had (ἔχειν, a form of ἔχω) his father’s wife in a more commercial sense, that he was pimping her somehow as a temple prostitute.  But it feels like I’m reaching.  Paul was quite careful in 1 Corinthians 7:2 (NET) to clarify the vagaries of ἐχέτω (another form of ἔχω).

But because of immoralities (πορνείας, a form of πορνεία), each man should have relations with (ἐχέτω, another form of ἔχω) his own wife and each woman with (ἐχέτω, another form of ἔχω) her own husband.

The translators added the words relations with for clarity.  In Greek it reads more like, each man should have his own wife and each woman should have her own husband.  Out of context like this it is a clear command that all in Corinth should marry.  But Paul introduced this statement with 1 Corinthians 7:1 (NET).

It is good (καλὸν, a form of καλός) for a man not to have sexual relations (ἅπτεσθαι, a form of ἅπτω) with a woman.

So he clarified the meaning of ἔχω (ἐχέτω) in this case and kept its use from becoming an unintended prohibition against celibacy.  Surely some clarification or elaboration on ἔχω (ἔχειν) was in order if Paul meant to communicate that a man was pimping his father’s wife as a temple prostitute, unless the meaning of πορνεία so clearly and exclusively referenced such activity that no other meaning would have been considered.  And I am still a long way from accepting that idea.  I consider 1 Thessalonians 4:1-5 (NET):

Finally5 then, brothers and sisters, we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that6 as you received instruction from us about how you must live and please God (as you are in fact living)7 that you do so more and more.  For you know what commands we gave you through the Lord Jesus.  For this is God’s will: that you become holy, that you keep away from [πορνείας], that each of you know how to possess his own body in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion like the Gentiles who do not know God.

So far so good.  I’m willing to accept that Paul was writing about abstaining from idolatrous worship (including its drunken sexual practices).  But wait, Paul continued (1 Thessalonians 4:6-8 NET):

In this matter no one should violate the rights of his brother or take advantage of him, because the8 Lord is the avenger in all these cases, as we also told you earlier9 and warned you solemnly.  For God did not call us to impurity but in holiness.  Consequently the one who rejects this is not rejecting human authority but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.10

I don’t know if believing women in the first century could be compelled against their wills11 to serve in Thessalonica as cult prostitutes or not.  I would hope if that were the case that Paul’s words would have had more fight in them.  He probably wouldn’t have said, “Lock and load, brothers!”  I doubt that Paul would consider having the brothers go all Simeon and Levi12 on the town of Thessalonica was the best way to present the Gospel.  But he might have suggested that a brother should get to her first, buy her and take her home to her husband, rather than the comparatively wimpy admonition not to violate the rights of his brother or take advantage of the situation!

So, though Paul used the word πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) in 1 Thessalonians 4:3, I sincerely hope he meant simple adultery, (μοιχεία).  And its usage here persuades me that πορνεία could mean μοιχεία.

 

Addendum: April 6, 2019

Tables comparing Leviticus 18:8; 20:11 and Genesis 2:24 in the Tanakh and NET, and the tables comparing Leviticus 18:8; 20:11 and Genesis 2:24 in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor) follow.  Following those are tables comparing 1 Corinthians 6:20; 6:10; 7:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 4:6 and 4:8 in the NET and KJV.

Leviticus 18:8 (Tanakh) Leviticus 18:8 (NET)
The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness. You must not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.
Leviticus 18:8 (Septuagint BLB) Leviticus 18:8 (Septuagint Elpenor)
ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις ἀσχημοσύνη πατρός σού ἐστιν ἀσχημοσύνην γυναικὸς πατρός σου οὐκ ἀποκαλύψεις, ἀσχημοσύνη πατρὸς σού ἐστιν.
Leviticus 18:8 (NETS) Leviticus 18:8 (English Elpenor)
You shall not uncover the shame of your father’s wife; it is the shame of your father. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s wife; it is thy father’s nakedness.
Leviticus 20:11 (Tanakh) Leviticus 20:11 (NET)
And the man that lieth with his father’s wife–he hath uncovered his father’s nakedness–both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. If a man goes to bed with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness.  Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.
Leviticus 20:11 (Septuagint BLB) Leviticus 20:11 (Septuagint Elpenor)
ἐάν τις κοιμηθῇ μετὰ γυναικὸς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἀσχημοσύνην τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψεν θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν ἀμφότεροι ἔνοχοί εἰσιν καὶ ἐάν τις κοιμηθῇ μετὰ γυναικὸς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, ἀσχημοσύνην τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἀπεκάλυψε, θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν, ἀμφότεροι ἔνοχοί εἰσι.
Leviticus 20:11 (NETS) Leviticus 20:11 (English Elpenor)
And if anyone lies with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s shame; let both of them by death be put to death; they are liable. And if any one should lie with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s nakedness: let them both die the death, they are guilty.
Genesis 2:24 (Tanakh) Genesis 2:24 (KJV)
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Genesis 2:24 (Septuagint BLB) Genesis 2:24 (Septuagint Elpenor)
ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῗκα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν.
Genesis 2:24 (NETS) Genesis 2:24 (English Elpenor)
Therefore a man will leave his father and mother and will be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
1 Corinthians 6:20 (NET) 1 Corinthians 6:20 (KJV)
For you were bought at a price.  Therefore glorify God with your body. For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
ἠγοράσθητε γὰρ τιμῆς· δοξάσατε δὴ τὸν θεὸν ἐν τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν ηγορασθητε γαρ τιμης δοξασατε δη τον θεον εν τω σωματι υμων και εν τω πνευματι υμων ατινα εστιν του θεου ηγορασθητε γαρ τιμης δοξασατε δη τον θεον εν τω σωματι υμων και εν τω πνευματι υμων ατινα εστιν του θεου
1 Corinthians 6:10 (NET) 1 Corinthians 6:10 (KJV)
thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ μέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν ουτε κλεπται ουτε πλεονεκται ουτε μεθυσοι ου λοιδοροι ουχ αρπαγες βασιλειαν θεου ου κληρονομησουσιν ουτε πλεονεκται ουτε κλεπται ουτε μεθυσοι ου λοιδοροι ουχ αρπαγες βασιλειαν θεου ου κληρονομησουσιν
1 Corinthians 7:1 (NET) 1 Corinthians 7:1 (KJV)
Now with regard to the issues you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
Περὶ δὲ ὧν ἐγράψατε, καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι περι δε ων εγραψατε μοι καλον ανθρωπω γυναικος μη απτεσθαι περι δε ων εγραψατε μοι καλον ανθρωπω γυναικος μη απτεσθαι
1 Thessalonians 4:1 (NET) 1 Thessalonians 4:1 (KJV)
Finally then, brothers and sisters, we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received instruction from us about how you must live and please God (as you are in fact living) that you do so more and more. Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
Λοιπὸν |οὖν|, ἀδελφοί, ἐρωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ, |ἵνα| καθὼς παρελάβετε παρ᾿ ἡμῶν τὸ πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν καὶ ἀρέσκειν θεῷ (καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε) ἵνα περισσεύητε μᾶλλον το λοιπον ουν αδελφοι ερωτωμεν υμας και παρακαλουμεν εν κυριω ιησου καθως παρελαβετε παρ ημων το πως δει υμας περιπατειν και αρεσκειν θεω ινα περισσευητε μαλλον το λοιπον ουν αδελφοι ερωτωμεν υμας και παρακαλουμεν εν κυριω ιησου καθως παρελαβετε παρ ημων το πως δει υμας περιπατειν και αρεσκειν θεω ινα περισσευητε μαλλον
1 Thessalonians 4:6 (NET) 1 Thessalonians 4:6 (KJV)
In this matter no one should violate the rights of his brother or take advantage of him, because the Lord is the avenger in all these cases, as we also told you earlier and warned you solemnly. That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν ἐν τῷ πράγματι τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, διότι ἔκδικος κύριος περὶ πάντων τούτων, καθὼς καὶ προείπαμεν ὑμῖν καὶ διεμαρτυράμεθα το μη υπερβαινειν και πλεονεκτειν εν τω πραγματι τον αδελφον αυτου διοτι εκδικος ο κυριος περι παντων τουτων καθως και προειπαμεν υμιν και διεμαρτυραμεθα ο μη υπερβαινειν και πλεονεκτειν εν τω πραγματι τον αδελφον αυτου διοτι εκδικος ο κυριος περι παντων τουτων καθως και προειπομεν υμιν και διεμαρτυραμεθα
1 Thessalonians 4:8 (NET) 1 Thessalonians 4:8 (KJV)
Consequently the one who rejects this is not rejecting human authority but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you. He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit.
NET Parallel Greek Stephanus Textus Receptus Byzantine Majority Text
τοιγαροῦν ὁ ἀθετῶν οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀθετεῖ ἀλλὰ τὸν θεὸν τὸν [καὶ] διδόντα τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγιον εἰς ὑμᾶς τοιγαρουν ο αθετων ουκ ανθρωπον αθετει αλλα τον θεον τον και δοντα το πνευμα αυτου το αγιον εις ημας τοιγαρουν ο αθετων ουκ ανθρωπον αθετει αλλα τον θεον τον και δοντα το πνευμα αυτου το αγιον εις υμας

1 John 17:3 (NET)

2 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had και εν τω πνευματι υμων ατινα εστιν του θεου (KJV: and in your spirit, which are God’s) here.  The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

3 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had οὐ preceding drunkards, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ουτε.

4 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10a (NET)

5 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had the article το preceding Finally (KJV: Furthermore).  The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

7 The phrase καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε (as you are in fact living) in the NET parallel Greek text and NA28 was not in the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text.

8 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had the article ο here.  The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

10 The NET parallel Greek text, NA28 and Byzantine Majority Text had ὑμᾶς here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus had ημας (KJV: unto us).

11 And I must assume against their wills, otherwise this should be addressed to the women rather than the men.

12 Cf. Genesis 34:25.  When Jacob complained to his sons, Simeon and Levi replied, “Should he treat our sister like a common prostitute?” (Genesis 34:31 NET).  Common prostitute was πόρνῃ in the Septuagint.  Their sister Dinah was either raped, or seduced before proper wedding arrangements had been made (Genesis 34:2).