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
anything?)
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
pballard@radlogic.com.au * Theology Student * Chess Nut
The answer is Matthew 6:33. What's the question?