# Arguments in favor of 'stature' In Luke 12:25



## KMK (Jun 1, 2010)

I have heard many arguments against the use of 'stature' in Luke 12:25, but was wanting to hear some of the arguments in favor of it.

Matthew Henry doesn't bat an eye at the KJV translation.

Dodderidge seems to accept 'stature' or 'age' and translates it like this: "And moreover, as this care is unnecessary, it will also be unprofitable: for which of you, by taking the most solicitous thought, can add a single cubit, or the least measure or moment, either to his age or stature?"

It would seem to me one argument in favor would be the use of the word 'cubit' which is a measurement of length/hight and not a measurement of time/age.


----------



## KMK (Jun 2, 2010)

Matthew Poole does not bat an eye at the use of 'stature' either.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 2, 2010)

I would agree with you that since it's connected with a measure of length (cubit) that lends credibility to the "stature" translation rather than translating it as "life span" or "age"

When they translate it as "life span" they are forced to translate the measure of length to a measure of time as in "a single hour to his life span."


----------



## KMK (Jun 2, 2010)

larryjf said:


> I would agree with you that since it's connected with a measure of length (cubit) that lends credibility to the "stature" translation rather than translating it as "life span" or "age"
> 
> When they translate it as "life span" they are forced to translate the measure of length to a measure of time as in "a single hour to his life span."


 
Which seems reasonable to me _if_ it were necessary. But is it necessary? Every adult's body has grown a few cubits but not do to any effort of themselves.

The objection to the word 'stature' seems to be a recent development.



> Pseudo-Chrys.: For it is God who day by day works the growth of your body, yourself not feeling it. If then the Providence of God works thus daily in your very body, how shall that same Providence withhold from working in necessaries of life? And if by taking thought you cannot add the smallest part to your body, how shall you by taking thought be altogether saved?
> 
> Aug., Serm. in Mont., ii, 15: Or it may be connected with what follows it; as though He should say, It was not by our care that our body was brought to its present stature; so that we may know that if we desired to add one cubit to it, we should not be able. Leave then the care of clothing that body to Him who made it to grow to its present stature. Both quoted from Catena Aurea by Aquinas


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jun 3, 2010)

Hi Ken,

As Larry said, the use of the Greek word for cubit, _pechus_, would seem to warrant the translation of _helikia_ as stature or height in this instance, while its translation as age in John 9:21, 23 and Hebrews 11:11 is warranted there.

Young, in his Literal Translation has it, cannot "add to his age one cubit", which doesn't make sense.

The translations of _helikia_ as stature or height in Matt 6:27 and Luke 19:3 are also sound.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 3, 2010)

KMK said:


> larryjf said:
> 
> 
> > I would agree with you that since it's connected with a measure of length (cubit) that lends credibility to the "stature" translation rather than translating it as "life span" or "age"
> ...


 
There are interpretive issues that should be considered as well.

If the point is that we can't to the smallest of things, then an hour added to our life would be appropriate since that is a very small thing in relation to the whole of life. In that case adding a cubit to our stature would be less appropriate since that much growth is not really a small thing.

But we must restrict ourselves to interpreting the true text rather than trying to discover the true text around our interpretive biases.


----------

