Recently was given two books on the subject of women's roles in ministry; both in favor of an expanded and essentially egalitarian position.
I always look specifically for the authors treatment of this text in 1 Timothy when reading material in this vein.
The first book entitled 'Gender and Giftedness' was terribly weak on 1 Tim; stating that beyond saying that women are supposed to learn, we cannot be certain of what Paul intended to say, there is too much cultural difference between us. Totally unacceptable.
The second book was 'Why Not Women', authored by multiple men and published by YWAM (I think). Their interpretation of this text says that Paul was writing to Timothy about a single woman who should not teach or have authority over men; hence the transition from 'women' in v9 to 'a woman/she' in v12 then back to 'women/they' in v15. They propose this as an internal chaiasm in these vs dealing with women. So the prohibitive verses were was written to one woman who was left unnamed in the letter out of a charitable spirit; she'd been teaching heresies surrounding the origin of Christ and so on; but because she was a woman; she had not had the same opportunities to learn the truth as the men who were publicly called out for teaching heresy earlier in the letter. This is why Paul is reinforcing in v9 that in the new church of God; women are equal and deserve equal opportunity to learn; unlike in the synagogue. V15 is a reference then to the women being saved through submissively learning the correct understanding of the messiah's childbirth; which was the point at which they were promoting false teachings. So unlike the first book I was given; this one deals with the whole text and context and actually produces a coherent line of thought; even though i don't think it is correct.
What I am looking for is resources from church history or recent scholarship that deal specifically with this brand of 'one woman' interpretation that is found here. I would be glad to read items for or against it; just so long as they acknowledge it as an interpretation that must be reckoned with.
Personally I know there are problems with this interpretation, primarily that I have not encountered it before and it did not come from a scholarly publisher. In all my reading on this topic this is the first time I have heard it suggested; I've read a lot. The fact that it isn't really on the radar seems to confirm it's a novel reading of the text (what I am trying to confirm by seeking out other writings on the interpretation) I am not at all proficient in Greek but I think there are some flaws on that level, despite the amount of Greek support the author claimed.
Dr Don Carson was kind enough to reply to an email I sent him asking for resources or authors who espouse that position on a scholarly level; he said it was certainly a minority report.
So I'm imagining to find the same thing here; anyone else read/encountered this interpretation?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I always look specifically for the authors treatment of this text in 1 Timothy when reading material in this vein.
The first book entitled 'Gender and Giftedness' was terribly weak on 1 Tim; stating that beyond saying that women are supposed to learn, we cannot be certain of what Paul intended to say, there is too much cultural difference between us. Totally unacceptable.
The second book was 'Why Not Women', authored by multiple men and published by YWAM (I think). Their interpretation of this text says that Paul was writing to Timothy about a single woman who should not teach or have authority over men; hence the transition from 'women' in v9 to 'a woman/she' in v12 then back to 'women/they' in v15. They propose this as an internal chaiasm in these vs dealing with women. So the prohibitive verses were was written to one woman who was left unnamed in the letter out of a charitable spirit; she'd been teaching heresies surrounding the origin of Christ and so on; but because she was a woman; she had not had the same opportunities to learn the truth as the men who were publicly called out for teaching heresy earlier in the letter. This is why Paul is reinforcing in v9 that in the new church of God; women are equal and deserve equal opportunity to learn; unlike in the synagogue. V15 is a reference then to the women being saved through submissively learning the correct understanding of the messiah's childbirth; which was the point at which they were promoting false teachings. So unlike the first book I was given; this one deals with the whole text and context and actually produces a coherent line of thought; even though i don't think it is correct.
What I am looking for is resources from church history or recent scholarship that deal specifically with this brand of 'one woman' interpretation that is found here. I would be glad to read items for or against it; just so long as they acknowledge it as an interpretation that must be reckoned with.
Personally I know there are problems with this interpretation, primarily that I have not encountered it before and it did not come from a scholarly publisher. In all my reading on this topic this is the first time I have heard it suggested; I've read a lot. The fact that it isn't really on the radar seems to confirm it's a novel reading of the text (what I am trying to confirm by seeking out other writings on the interpretation) I am not at all proficient in Greek but I think there are some flaws on that level, despite the amount of Greek support the author claimed.
Dr Don Carson was kind enough to reply to an email I sent him asking for resources or authors who espouse that position on a scholarly level; he said it was certainly a minority report.
So I'm imagining to find the same thing here; anyone else read/encountered this interpretation?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
