Criswell Theological Review 3.2 (1989) 373-375
[Copyright © 1989 by
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
HOS 3:1-3-BACKGROUND TO 1 COR
6:19b-20?
GEORGE L. KLEIN
Few Pauline
exhortations are more climactic than 1 Cor
you were
bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body."
The context
of this admonition in chaps 5-7 deals primarily with
proscriptions against sexual immorality and enjoinders to treat mar-
riage as a sacred institution. So, in 6:12-20,
using three metaphors,
Paul argues
that Christians must be free of sexual vice.
The first metaphor is that of
believers as members of the Body of
Christ (vv
12-18). Here Paul makes a clear distinction between the
propriety of
satisfying the body's appetite for food and the licentious
gratification of the body's sexual appetite. Furthermore, the notion of
a body
is developed from merely the corporeal to an expression of
the mystical
relationship the Corinthian believers had to Christ. Thus,
to
practice sexual debauchery is to prostitute the very body of Christ--
a
thought inconceivable to Paul.
With the second metaphor Paul treats
the body as the temple of
the Holy
Spirit (v 19a). Just as defiling the
too is
defiling the temple of the Spirit.
The third metaphor Paul uses is
redemption as a description of a
believer's new
relationship to God (vv 19b-20). This well-known
emblem of
what Christ does for the individual when one first believes
(Gal 3:13;
4:5; et al.) is now applied to his/her sanctification.
The
believer is
freed from the law and the curse accompanying its
disobedience, but s/he is not set free in the sense that a]gora<zw spoke of
releasing slaves
for freedom (e]p ] e]leuqeri<a) in antiquity.1 Instead, the
new
believer was enslaved to righteousness (e]doulw<qhte t^ dikaiosu<n^,
1 F. Biichsel,
"a]gora<zw,"
TDNT 1.125.
374 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
Rom
between Hos 3:1-3 and 1 Cor 6:19b-20.
In chap 3 Hosea tells of his
reconciliation with his wayward wife.2
This
familiar passage recounts the prophet's purchase on the slave
market of
one who was already his wife. Thus, Hosea stood in an
unique
relation to Gomer; he was at once both husband and
master. As
husband he
had expected, but lost, the unique position he held as
husband
(chap 1); however subsequently, as master, he demanded the
faithfulness which was his due by virtue of paying his wife's purchase
price. In
v 3 Hosea commanded Gomer to remain faithful to him
because of
his absolute authority over her. Again, the reason he could
issue such
strong terms to Gomer was that since he had purchased
her,
she was
his possession.
Returning to 1 Corinthians 6, we see
the thematic parallel with Hos
3:1-3. Broadly, there is in both passages an admonition to sexual
fidelity
argued upon similar grounds. More specifically, in both texts
there is
one who is redeemed from slavery to a new and higher
servitude. In
Hosea 3 the prophet redeemed his wife out of a degrading
life to a
life bound by sexual decorum. Similarly in 1 Corinthians 6 the
audience had
been redeemed out of bondage to sin (including
licentiousness) to a life in which sexual sin was unconscionable. Just as
Hosea was
both husband and master, likewise Christ is husband (2
Cor
11:2; Eph
but
lost, his unique position when the Corinthians were unfaithful to
him. As
master though, Christ demanded the loyalty requisite for a
slave (1 Cor
Finally, it must be noted that Paul does not use precisely the
same
terminology as
is found in either the MT or the LXX. 1 Cor
h]gora<sqhte ga>r timh?j whereas the LXX of Hos
3:2 reads e]misqwsa<mhn
e]maut&?. . . . Furthermore, a]gora<zw is nowhere used in the LXX to
translate hrk, the
root of hAr,K;x,vA ("so I bought her," Hos 3:2). If an
allusion
(understood in broad thematic terms) does in fact exist, why
would Paul
refrain from using misqe<w in 1 Cor
regularly used
in the LXX to render hrk and is also present in the NT
(Matt 20:1, 7)? I submit that the reason lies in the multiple nuances of
a]gora<zw. To
be sure, this word does connote the idea of purchasing a
slave as
the preceding example demonstrates.3 However, the following
2 I am
assuming here that the unnamed woman of chap 3 is the same woman as in
chap 1,
namely, Gomer. For an alternate perspective cf. Hans
Walter Wolff, Hosea
(trans. Gary Stansell;
3 Buchsel, "a]gora<zw," TDNT 1.125.
Klein: Hos 3: 1-3 375
meaning
distinguishes this word from misqe<w, for a]gora<zw (and
its
derivatives) is
the usual word for redemption in the NT. Since the
argument in 1
Corinthians 6 hinges upon the fact that the Corinthians
had been
redeemed as well as being bound to righteousness and should
therefore
cease sinning, only a]gora<zw could function in 1 Cor
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
The
www.criswell.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu