BDAG, I Tim. 2.12 [and] ἀνήρ?
Posted: May 28th, 2015, 3:25 am
ἀνήρ, ἀνδρός, ὁ (Hom. +, common in all the mngs. known to our lit.) a male person
1 an adult human male, man, husband a in contrast to woman man (Pla., Gorg. 514e; X., Hell. 4, 5, 5 et al.) Mt 14:21; 15:38; Mk 6:44; Lk 9:14; J 1:13; Ac 4:4; 8:3, 12; 1 Cor 11:3, 7ff; Hm 5, 2, 2; 6, 2, 7; 12, 2, 1 al. Hence ἄνδρα γινώσκειν (יָדְעָה אִישׁ Gen 19:8; Judg 11:39) of a woman have sexual intercourse w. a man Lk 1:34 (cp. Just., D. 78, 3 ἀπὸ συνουσίας ἀνδρός). Esp. husband (Hom. et al.; Diod. S. 2, 8, 6; Sir 4:10; Jos., Ant. 18, 149; Ar. 12, 2; fgm. Milne p. 74 ln. 3; Just., A II, 2, 5ff; for this shift from the general to the specific cp. our ‘that’s her man’, ‘my man’) Mt 1:16, 19; Mk 10:2, 12; Lk 2:36; J 4:16ff; Ac 5:9f; Ro 7:2f (Sb 8010, 21 [pap I A. D.] μέχρι οὗ ἐὰν συνέρχωμαι ἑτέρῳ ἀνδρί; PLond V, 1731, 16 [VI A. D.] κολλᾶσθαι ἑτέρῳ ἀνδρί); 1 Cor 7:2ff, 10ff; 14:35; Gal 4:27; Eph 5:22ff; Col 3:18f; 1 Ti 3:2, 12; 5:9; Tit 1:6 (on the four last ref. εἷς 2b, the comm. and JFischer, Weidenauer Studien 1, 1906, 177- 226; comparison w. non- Christian sources in J- BFrey, Signification des termes μονάνδρα et Univira:RSR 20, 1930, 48- 60; GDelling, Pls’ Stellung z. Frau u. Ehe ’31, 136ff; BEaston, Past. Epistles, ’47, 216ff; WSchulze, Kerygma und Dogma [Göttingen] 4, ’58, 287- 300) 2:5; 1 Pt 3:1, 5, 7; Hm 4, 1, 4ff; 1 Cl 6:3; Pol 4:2; AcPl Ha 4, 5. – 1 Ti 2:12 (cp. Ocellus Luc. c. 49:the wife wishes ἄρχειν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς παρὰ τὸν τῆς φύσεως νόμον). Even a bridegroom can be so called (cp. אִישׁ Dt 22:23) ὡς νύμφην κεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς Rv 21. (BDAG)
**Hope I am not breaking any forum rules by asking this question on here (if so, pls. pardon my ignorance ), but here I am honestly confused? Is BDAG above interpreting ἀνήρ in I Tim. 2.12 to only refer to a "husband" - when they have previously identified the "shift from the general to the specific" as containing possessive markings (i.e., possessive pronouns)? There are no such possessive markings in I Tim. 2.12 - why then are they identifying this noun (ἀνήρ) in said verse (2.12) as a "husband"?
**Thank you much in advance (BTW, I really have gleaned from this forum - mostly just reading)!
1 an adult human male, man, husband a in contrast to woman man (Pla., Gorg. 514e; X., Hell. 4, 5, 5 et al.) Mt 14:21; 15:38; Mk 6:44; Lk 9:14; J 1:13; Ac 4:4; 8:3, 12; 1 Cor 11:3, 7ff; Hm 5, 2, 2; 6, 2, 7; 12, 2, 1 al. Hence ἄνδρα γινώσκειν (יָדְעָה אִישׁ Gen 19:8; Judg 11:39) of a woman have sexual intercourse w. a man Lk 1:34 (cp. Just., D. 78, 3 ἀπὸ συνουσίας ἀνδρός). Esp. husband (Hom. et al.; Diod. S. 2, 8, 6; Sir 4:10; Jos., Ant. 18, 149; Ar. 12, 2; fgm. Milne p. 74 ln. 3; Just., A II, 2, 5ff; for this shift from the general to the specific cp. our ‘that’s her man’, ‘my man’) Mt 1:16, 19; Mk 10:2, 12; Lk 2:36; J 4:16ff; Ac 5:9f; Ro 7:2f (Sb 8010, 21 [pap I A. D.] μέχρι οὗ ἐὰν συνέρχωμαι ἑτέρῳ ἀνδρί; PLond V, 1731, 16 [VI A. D.] κολλᾶσθαι ἑτέρῳ ἀνδρί); 1 Cor 7:2ff, 10ff; 14:35; Gal 4:27; Eph 5:22ff; Col 3:18f; 1 Ti 3:2, 12; 5:9; Tit 1:6 (on the four last ref. εἷς 2b, the comm. and JFischer, Weidenauer Studien 1, 1906, 177- 226; comparison w. non- Christian sources in J- BFrey, Signification des termes μονάνδρα et Univira:RSR 20, 1930, 48- 60; GDelling, Pls’ Stellung z. Frau u. Ehe ’31, 136ff; BEaston, Past. Epistles, ’47, 216ff; WSchulze, Kerygma und Dogma [Göttingen] 4, ’58, 287- 300) 2:5; 1 Pt 3:1, 5, 7; Hm 4, 1, 4ff; 1 Cl 6:3; Pol 4:2; AcPl Ha 4, 5. – 1 Ti 2:12 (cp. Ocellus Luc. c. 49:the wife wishes ἄρχειν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς παρὰ τὸν τῆς φύσεως νόμον). Even a bridegroom can be so called (cp. אִישׁ Dt 22:23) ὡς νύμφην κεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς Rv 21. (BDAG)
**Hope I am not breaking any forum rules by asking this question on here (if so, pls. pardon my ignorance ), but here I am honestly confused? Is BDAG above interpreting ἀνήρ in I Tim. 2.12 to only refer to a "husband" - when they have previously identified the "shift from the general to the specific" as containing possessive markings (i.e., possessive pronouns)? There are no such possessive markings in I Tim. 2.12 - why then are they identifying this noun (ἀνήρ) in said verse (2.12) as a "husband"?
**Thank you much in advance (BTW, I really have gleaned from this forum - mostly just reading)!