How the word ‘own’ is used in 1 Corinthians 7

The following are observations on the specific Greek words used in the New Testament to describe how a spouse possesses the other. As can be seen in the following verse, different words are used to describe how a man has his ‘own’ wife or a woman her ‘own’ husband.

1Co 7:2  But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own [‘heautou’ G1438/G846] wife and each woman her own [‘idios’ G2398] husband.

The NT is fairly consistent in the usage of these words when used in the context of marriage. ‘heautou’ usually describes how a husband possesses a wife. ‘idios’ usually describes how a wife possesses a husband.

The first observation is that these differences may not be simply semantic. They may point to a substantive difference in the nature of the relationships. This seems to find support in verse 4.

1Co 7:4  For the wife does not have authority over her own [G2398] body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own [G2398] body, but the wife does.

This passages departs from the normal usage for men and employs ‘idios’ to describe how the husband does not have authority over his own body.  Rather, it describes how a spouse’s body becomes shared property – it belongs to both husband and wife – and is no longer exclusively their own.

This leads to a second observation. Perhaps the reason for using differing words is to accommodate the common Jewish custom of polygyny. In this case, a man could have one or more wives but the wife was only permitted to have one husband. This shared ownership – many wives owned one husband – conveyed by the word ‘idios’ can best be described by analogy.

Mat 9:1  And getting into a boat he crossed over and came to his own [G2398] city.

Here ‘idios’ is used to describe Jesus’ own city. But the city is not exclusively Jesus’. It belongs to others as well. In the same, a polygynous marriage sees shared ownership of the husband by one or more wives. 

Conversely, the NT never describes the husband’s wife in this way. The word ‘heautou’ is consistently used which may imply exclusive possession. 

Third, ‘idios’ and ‘heautou’ are used in respect to both genders to describe ownership in general. So the observed distinction is unlikely to purely gender based.

Mat 22:5  But they paid no attention and went off, one to his (idios) farm, another to his business,

Luk 6:44  for each tree is known by its own (idios) fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush.

Joh 1:41  He first found his own (idios) brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ).

Act 7:21  and when he was exposed, Pharaoh’s daughter adopted him and brought him up as her own (heautou) son.

1Th 2:7  But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own (heautou) children.

Finally, these words are used over 450 times in the NT. They do not seem to be used consistently to describe either exclusive or shared ownership in a general sense. For example, Mat 25:14  “For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his (idios) servants and entrusted to them his property.”  Here ‘idios’ could not suggest shared ownership since a slave does not have two masters. Or, Luk 12:47  “And that servant who knew his (heautou) master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating.” Here ‘heautou’ probably does not convey exclusive ownership since the master may have several servants.

However, what is noteworthy is that the way these words are used with respect to husband and wife is consistent. This difference supports the belief that the Lord places different expectations on the man and the woman in the context of marriage and also remarriage.

PS: I know almost nothing about Greek so there could be a perfectly simple and alternative explanation as to why these patterns exist.