Greek word "malakos" and effeminate

[Teke]

I've seen this Greek word "malakos" interpreted many different ways. As effeminate, sodomite, homosexual etc. But it seems to have the same base meaning of "soft". Another similar word is used in the LXX, meaning "man-woman", but is never related in a sexual way in scripture.

So I've come to the conclusion that it must be being used in a metaphorical way in 1 Cor. 6:9. Meaning this relates to the mind and one's thinking, in relation to spiritual truth as opposed to the mind of an idol worshipper, or double minded person.

Thoughts..................

[Knowledge3]

Greek is a heavily condensed form of ancient language that contains whole thoughts and and actions in one word.

[Dewi Sant]

From the Oxford Greek - English Lexicon (7th edition, Liddell and Stotts):

ΜΑΛΑΚΟΣ, η, ον, Lat. mollis, soft, Hom., etc; μ. νειος a fresh-ploughed fallow.....(blah blah blah....it's a really long entry)...II. of things not subject to touch, soft, gentle, θανατος, υπνος Hom.; μαλακως ευδειν to sleep [I]softly....blah blah blah blah, to sum it up, basically it is softness, feebility, effemininty, youth and sleep.


The lexicon entry for that word is massive and I got quickly bored with changing between fonts, italicising etc. Plus, I have a lecture in a few minutes :(

[Teke]

If it is a "condensed form of ancient language that contains whole thoughts and and actions in one word" then why use different words.


I see Greek as a more technical language than English, and that is why English doesn't have some words necessary to convey the Greek words thoughts.


"andreyinon" is another Greek word translated as "effeminate " in English translations of the Greek. (ex. Pro. 18:8, 19:50 )
So "malakos" seems to carry a similar meaning. Both being metaphorical in conveying thoughts, tho not necessarily actions.

[Knowledge3]

If it is a "condensed form of ancient language that contains whole thoughts and and actions in one word" then why use different words.


I see Greek as a more technical language than English, and that is why English doesn't have some words necessary to convey the Greek words thoughts.


"andreyinon" is another Greek word translated as "effeminate " in English translations of the Greek. (ex. Pro. 18:8, 19:50 )
So "malakos" seems to carry a similar meaning. Both being metaphorical in conveying thoughts, tho not necessarily actions.

One symbol in the Greek alphabet with a certain combination of letters fully expresses the word "God."

[Teke]

One symbol in the Greek alphabet with a certain combination of letters fully expresses the word "God."

I have no idea what you mean. Would you care to elaborate?

[Dewi Sant]

Θεος?
Ιχθυς?

[Orthocat]

I've seen this Greek word "malakos" interpreted many different ways. As effeminate, sodomite, homosexual etc. But it seems to have the same base meaning of "soft". Another similar word is used in the LXX, meaning "man-woman", but is never related in a sexual way in scripture.

So I've come to the conclusion that it must be being used in a metaphorical way in 1 Cor. 6:9. Meaning this relates to the mind and one's thinking, in relation to spiritual truth as opposed to the mind of an idol worshipper, or double minded person.

Thoughts..................


Yes, there are some schools of thought now that render 1 Cor. 6:9 as metaphorical only, and that's why we now see some churches falling apart. We want to rationalize any sin out of the scriptures.

I have seen this referred to as the one that is passive in homosexual relations - the "female" of the two.
I have seen it referred to as homosexual relations with a male child.

You would have to read it in the context it is presented also. He is not speaking of anyone's mind, he is talking of active open sins - fornicators, adulterers, extortioners, drunkards, etc.

But in our present society we are now being forced, or being led, to take out any mention of homosexuality being wrong, because it is simply not politically correct to even think that people can't have whatever kind of sex they want, with whomever they want, wherever they want.
(see "Lot" and "Sodom and Gomorrah")

[Teke]

Yes, there are some schools of thought now that render 1 Cor. 6:9 as metaphorical only, and that's why we now see some churches falling apart. We want to rationalize any sin out of the scriptures.

I have seen this referred to as the one that is passive in homosexual relations - the "female" of the two.
I have seen it referred to as homosexual relations with a male child.

You would have to read it in the context it is presented also. He is not speaking of anyone's mind, he is talking of active open sins - fornicators, adulterers, extortioners, drunkards, etc.

But in our present society we are now being forced, or being led, to take out any mention of homosexuality being wrong, because it is simply not politically correct to even think that people can't have whatever kind of sex they want, with whomever they want, wherever they want.
(see "Lot" and "Sodom and Gomorrah")

The whole context of 1 Cor. is the "carnal mind" and it's "enmity" with God. St Paul is addressing them on their carnal thinking.

It would be inconsistent with scripture and the teachings of Christ to interpret the whole of what is related in scripture there literally.
This is not to say I am promoting such lifestyles. But we know as Orthodox that the mind of the heart is where such things begin.

Our Lord never taught in a legalistic way. He condemned no one, as all are invited to the Lambs Supper.

So a literal only interpretation, would be contrary to the teachings of Christ, who forgives those who are in this carnal state (whether mind only, or mind and bodily).
And all the things related in 1 Cor. are also related in the OT as associated with a spiritual condition.

BTW, your Sodom and Gommorah reference is a whole other subject. Which relates to the moral decline of a society. Also related in the OT story of the Levite, his concubine and the men of Gibeah. Judges 19

Where the heart and mind are, the body follows. Which is likely why Jesus never directly teachs on such subjects as this, as He is only concerned with the heart.
The heart of the matter is where healing is needed.:)

As Orthodox, we are to follow in the Neptic tradition.

[icxn]

I've seen this Greek word "malakos" interpreted many different ways. As effeminate, sodomite, homosexual etc. But it seems to have the same base meaning of "soft". Another similar word is used in the LXX, meaning "man-woman", but is never related in a sexual way in scripture.
The word means literally soft but is used to denote those who pamper the body with soft clothing/couches and they themselves are soft (bodied) and are likely to be effeminate, sodomite, and/or homosexual as there is a correlation between these passions and excessive bodily comfort. So in a sense, it is more inclusive than if it just said homosexual, in that it condemns not just the action of sin but the thoughts and little things that lead to those actions as well.

[Teke]

The word means literally soft but is used to denote those who pamper the body with soft clothing/couches and they themselves are soft (bodied) and are likely to be effeminate, sodomite, and/or homosexual as there is a correlation between these passions and excessive bodily comfort. So in a sense, it is more inclusive than if it just said homosexual, in that it condemns not just the action of sin but the thoughts and little things that lead to those actions as well.
I agree.

So in our age would we consider a metrosexual man headed in that direction.
One can see how this could really get out of hand in our filthy hands of jdugement and discernment. Even to the point of infecting us with psychological phobias and prejudices.

I just don't see Christ teaching us on discerning anothers sexuality and by that deciding who enters the kingdom. (entrance to the kingdom is part of the subject of the 1 Cor. verse)

[icxn]

Not others but ourselves. We should always apply what we read in scripture to correct ourselves not to judge others.

[Knowledge3]

I have no idea what you mean. Would you care to elaborate?

The English alphabet is letters that form words to express meaning.

The Greek alphabet is symbols and archaic letters heavily condensed into specific expressions of thought,meaning and verbal action.

Hebrew is even more difficult to learn.

[Orthocat]

The whole context of 1 Cor. is the "carnal mind" and it's "enmity" with God. St Paul is addressing them on their carnal thinking.

It would be inconsistent with scripture and the teachings of Christ to interpret the whole of what is related in scripture there literally.
This is not to say I am promoting such lifestyles. But we know as Orthodox that the mind of the heart is where such things begin.

Our Lord never taught in a legalistic way. He condemned no one, as all are invited to the Lambs Supper.

So a literal only interpretation, would be contrary to the teachings of Christ, who forgives those who are in this carnal state (whether mind only, or mind and bodily).
And all the things related in 1 Cor. are also related in the OT as associated with a spiritual condition.

BTW, your Sodom and Gommorah reference is a whole other subject. Which relates to the moral decline of a society. Also related in the OT story of the Levite, his concubine and the men of Gibeah. Judges 19

Where the heart and mind are, the body follows. Which is likely why Jesus never directly teachs on such subjects as this, as He is only concerned with the heart.
The heart of the matter is where healing is needed.:)

As Orthodox, we are to follow in the Neptic tradition.


All of the things mentioned in 6:9 relate to the moral decline of society.
I'm not sure what you mean by he "condemned" no one, as he many times stated that some peoples fate in the end would be worse than that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
And of course you also have, "whoever causes one of these little ones that believe in me to stumble..." and "Woe to those through whom these offenses come".
You're speaking of One that stated He didn't come to bring peace, but a sword, and that's quite a difference than some views of how He simply wanted to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony with a Coca-cola.

But what was stated in this verse is the outcome of passions. Mainly that of vanity and pride. And yes, that is what is in the heart, I agree. And until we can become dispassionate, we are open to not only thinking but acting out on any of those passions.

I don't know if "metrosexuality" would lead to being effeminate (I state this with "product" in my hair :) ) but it certainly shows pride. See, this type of thought can lead to legalism and pride. How much "stuff" can a man or woman use to look decent to society without being classed as something other than Christian? Should we care how we look to society? Because even the person who purposely does not conform to society in dress and appearance can become prideful in the thought they are non-conforming.

wow, how did I ramble to this? Sorry...

From there to here
From here to there
Funny things are everywhere....

[Orthocat]

I
I just don't see Christ teaching us on discerning anothers sexuality and by that deciding who enters the kingdom. (entrance to the kingdom is part of the subject of the 1 Cor. verse)


No, Paul was telling the Corinthians they needed to clean their act up. He also told them how, if needed, to put someone out of the church if they would not repent of those actions including what is mentioned.

As Orthodox, we know that some are excluded from communion for a time because of a passion they have acted upon. If we continued in some passion, and wanted membership in the Orthodox church, would it be granted? Extortion, adultery, theft? Homosexuality, fornication? Which one should be allowed?

Like it or not, there has to be a form of judgement (not eternal mind you) in the church, otherwise how can we be fit to judge the angels? We do not judge the world, but we do look out for our own, otherwise it becomes an anything goes type of thing like the ********* church.

The problem arises here when arrogance and pride wants to do the judging, or the counseling or correction. See, that's the tricky part, and that's where stumbling comes in.

No, Christ did not teach those things. They (and we) had the prophets. And He did not come to destroy them...