From: Peter Ballard (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Oct 15 1996 - 22:52:15 EDT
I'm a newbie to this group (so sorry if this has come up before)
and I'm only in my second year of studying NT Greek (so sorry if my
understanding is poor). Oh, and this ISN'T a homework assignment!
1 Timothy 2:12
DIDASKEIN DE GUNAIKI OUK EPITRERW OUDE AUTHENTEIN ANDROS
to teach a woman not I permit nor to usurp authority of a man
OK, I know this verse is loaded with controversy and there are many
questions of authorship, whether the command is local or universal,
the meaning of AUTHENTEIN, etc.
I DO NOT WANT TO START DEBATE ON ANY OF THESE ISSUES!
But I want to focus on something that is not often discussed:
ANDROS obviously qualifies AUTHENTEIN.
But does it also qualify DIDASKEIN?
In other words, is Paul saying:
(a) a woman must not teach.
or (b) a woman must not teach a man.
Now I have read "evangelical feminist" theologians (e.g. Catherine and
Richard Kroeger, "I Suffer not a Woman") who go for (a) (because that
shows that the command is restricted to the worship service, as
suggested in 1 Tim 2:8). I am inclined to agree because:
(1) ANDROS is genitive, but DIDASKEIN usually takes an accusative
(e.g. in 2 Timothy 2:2).
(2) ANDROS is far removed from DIDASKEIN (but does that count for
So my question is: is my analysis sound? Or is there a grammatical
reason for allowing (or even preferring) option (b)?
Peter Ballard * Christian * Husband * Father
Adelaide, AUSTRALIA * Electronic Engineer * Baptist
email@example.com * Theology Student * Chess Nut
The answer is Matthew 6:33. What's the question?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:53 EDT