How should it be translated?

[Paidion]

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If anyone φθειριε God’s temple, God will φθειριε him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.(1 Corinthians 3: 16,17)

The first thing to understand is that Paul is not addressing individuals. The word "you" and "are" are both plural in both instances of "you are" (as well as the single word "you"). Paul is addressing the people as a group, who are part of the assembly at Corinth.

So "God's temple" is God's Assembly (or "Church" if you insist). As for the person who φθειριε the Assembly, God will do the same to him, according to Paul. So one would expect that the first clause in 1 Corinthians 3:17, φθειριε would be translated by the same English word. But no, the following translations use two different English words in the translation of φθειριε:

If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy... (King James Version)
If any one corrupt the temple of God, him shall God destroy...(Darby)
But if any man violate the temple of God, him shall God destroy... (Douay)
If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him... (NKJV)
God will destroy anyone who defiles his temple...(Philips)
If any man defileth the temple of God, him shall God destroy...(RWebster)

This is puzzling, is it not? Isn't the meaning of "destroy" quite different from that of "defile" or "corrupt" or "violate"?
Some translators understood the inconsistency of translating the word with two different English words, since the verse itself seems to indicate that God will do the same thing to the offender, as the offender did to the "temple" (i.e. to God's Assembly).
The translators of the following versions render both instances of the word as "destroy":
ASV, Diaglot, EMTV, ESV, LO, NASB, RV, and Williams.

But does the word even mean "destroy"? Let's examine the other 5 instances in which the word is used in the NT. The following is the NKJV rendering of the word:

1 Corinthians 15:33 Do not be deceived: "Evil company corrupts good habits."
2 Corinthians 7:2 Open your hearts to us. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have cheated no one.
2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
Ephesians 4:22 that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts,
Jude 1:10 But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves .
Revelation 19:2 "For true and righteous are His judgments, because He has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication; and He has avenged on her the blood of His servants shed by her."

Like the NKJV, several other translations render the word as the verb "corrupts" (or "corrupt" if the subject is plural).
So why can it not be so translated in the both instances of the verb in 1 Corinthians 3:17?

If anyone corrupts God’s temple, God will corrupt him.

[steve7150]

So why can it not be so translated in the both instances of the verb in 1 Corinthians 3:17?

If anyone corrupts God’s temple, God will corrupt him.






But someone who corrupts the temple is already corrupt spiritually so i don't think corrupting someone physically makes sense therefore what can be done to the corrupter physically, hence the translators picked what made sense to them. Now perhaps they could have left it as God will corrupt the person but it doesn't really communicate anything understandable.

[Paidion]

It may not make sense to you to use "corrupt" in both instances of the word in the same clause, but to me it makes less sense to translate the second instance as "destroy" when the word in all its other occurrences in the New Testament means "corrupt" and NEVER "destroy."

However, the English word "corrupt" can also simply mean "waste" or "ruin" or "spoil."
Here are some versions that translate both instances of the Greek word with the same English word, but not "corrupt." Would these translations make sense to you?

If anyone ruins God’s sanctuary, God will ruin him... (HCSB)
Whoever shall mar the temple of God, God will mar him... (Murdoch)
If any one the sanctuary of God doth waste, him shall God waste...(YLT)

[steve7150]

If anyone ruins God’s sanctuary, God will ruin him... (HCSB)
Whoever shall mar the temple of God, God will mar him... (Murdoch)
If any one the sanctuary of God doth waste, him shall God waste...(YLT)









Yes these make sense but isn't the gist of this that God will punish the evildoer? Also some translators seem to think that the meaning can be somewhat flexible depending on the context of the word usage, do you disagree with their method?

[Paidion]

Yes these make sense but isn't the gist of this that God will punish the evildoer?

It appears to be.

Also some translators seem to think that the meaning can be somewhat flexible depending on the context of the word usage, do you disagree with their method?

I disagree with any method that translates the same word in two different ways in the same sentence, especially when they seem to indicate that God will do to them the same thing they have done to the temple of God (whose temple you [plural] are).
I also disagree with arbitrarily translating a word as "destroy" that never means "destroy" in any other NT instance of its occurence.

[Paidion]

I did a little more investigation, and I found one instance in the Septuagint Apocrypha, in which the word was translated as "destroyed" in all English translations that I checked.

The reference is Wisdom 16:27. The Catholic Douay translated the verse as:

That which could not be destroyed by fire, being warmed with a little sunbeam, soon melted away.

The word in this verse was also rendered as "destroyed" by the translators of the 1769 Oxford Apocrypha, the New English Bible with Apocrypha, and the Orthodox Study Bible.

But I still don't think that in the sentence, "If anyone φθειριε God’s temple, God will φθειριε him" that this justifies translating the second "φθειριε" as "destroy" and the first "φθειριε" as something else.

[jasonmodar]

It would seem to me that by translating φθείρω with 2 different English words you're missing some apparently intentional wordplay that's present in Greek. Paidion already alluded to this but it looks like Paul is making the point that whatever is done to God's temple, the same will be done to that person by God.

[Paidion]

Yes. I think that's Paul's intention, all right.

[Homer]

I think any of the following convey just what Paul meant:

If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy... (King James Version)
If any one corrupt the temple of God, him shall God destroy...(Darby)
But if any man violate the temple of God, him shall God destroy... (Douay)
If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him... (NKJV)
God will destroy anyone who defiles his temple...(Rotherham)
If any man defileth the temple of God, him shall God destroy...(RWebster)

Consider the context (1 Corinthians 3) and the meaning is not difficult. Paul has just compared the church to a field. Some plant and others care for that which has been planted. Then he switches metaphors and compares the church to a building. The ministers labor to build the church but some of the materials are quality and some worthless "hay and straw". In "the day' (judgement) the hay and straw will be katakaesetai, consumed by fire, literally "burn utterly". He then goes on in v.17 to warn of the fate of those who defile, corrupt, or destroy any assembly of God's people. And who deserves a worse fate, the insincere, false convert or the one who corrupts the many?

We see plenty of this today in false leaders who "celebrate" homosexual unions, support abortion, etc., etc.

[Paidion]

Homer, if the translations you posted is what Paul meant, then why did he use the same Greek word for "defile" and "destroy"?

As had been pointed out by several, Paul meant that what the offender did to the temple, God will do the same to him. That's why he used the same Greek word.