From: David L. Moore (dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Thu Jul 18 1996 - 19:42:40 EDT
Theresa J List wrote:
>
> On 18 Jul 96 10:31:26 EDT "KULIKOVSKY, Andrew" <AKULIKOV@baea.com.au>
> writes:
>
> >In I Tim 2:13-15 there is a highly controversial passage and some
> >unusual
> >wording and
> >grammar, especially in v. 15
> >
> >The bit I am most interested in and still a little uncertain about is:
> >SWQHSETAI DE DIA THS TEKNOGONIAS EAN MEINWSIN EN PISTEI
> >..........etc.
> >
>
> >Paul is making a contrast to the way Eve led the race into sin, and
> >how a
> >Christian
> >woman has the privilege of leading the race out of sin by setting a
> >Godly
> >example
> >to her children.
> >
> >I'd appeciate any thoughts on any of this.
>
> PAUL is making a contrast, but a bigger contrast than just Eve vs. other believing women. The contrast is between Adam and men and Eve and women.
> The pattern goes as follows:
>
> 2:8 discusses men
> 2:9-11 discusses women
> 2:12 discusses men and women
> 2:13-14 discusses Adam and Eve
> 2:15 sums up the whole passage by discussing 1)the third person singular
> who will be saved 2) and then the third person plural if they remain ...
>
> SOQHSETAI DE DIA THS TEKNOGONIAS ...
>
> I'm of the school that takes the "THS" as quite significant and the
> SOQHSETAI in the expected NT sense of eternal salvation (why would Paul
> discuss natural health here, instead of eternal salavtion, when this is a
> letter to Timothy about how the church, who's goal is eternal salvastion
> of souls, to be run?) , Thus, "saved (in the Christian sense) through
> the childbirth (the birth of Christ) ... WHO will be saved? HE or SHE?
> Adam or Eve, or the general, he, man, or she, woman will be saved? All
> are exegetically possible.
Assuming that Theresa is understanding Paul's SWQHSETAI here as in
reference to Eve (and possibly others) according to the _sensus plenior_ of
Gen. 3:15, let me point out something that I believe I mentioned when this
verse was discussed on b-greek some months ago.
The use of the simple future in SWQHSETAI here may be analogous to
the use of the paraphrastic future in Col. 2:17 in which Paul refers by TWN
MELLONTWN to "things that were to come." This idiom, if these are
legitimate instances, corresponds to the Semitic imperfect which may serve
as future seen from either present, future, or past perspective. The
perspective here, taking SWQHSETAI as referring to Eve, would be from past
perspective: "She was to be saved."
>
> again, EAN MEINWSIN EN PISTEL KAI AGAPH KAI AGIASMW ...
>
> If who remains? They (women), They (men), They (men and women), They
> Adam and Eve wouldn't make sense. But the other three would! The third
> person seems to "backwash" over the first person, if that comment makes
> sense, in that "s/he will be saved if they ..." seems to imply that the
> a plural group is being referred to as a unit, therefore in the singular
> (English example, "The family WAS here"), who are then referred to as
> specific individuals, "if they remain..." thereforeare in the plural
> (English example, "Mom. Dad, and Jr. WERE here). I think that the paragraph beginning wiht verse 8, which starts with men and women, ends in
> verse 15, again talking about men and women.
Another possibility is a reference to the TEKNOI that she bears,
since, if the readers understood this as referring to Eve, they would have
in mind that salvation came through the seed that "continued in faith and
love and holiness with self-control." Cain, by the way, failed signally in
all of these.
Although Eve was not an example in the part she had in occasioning
the fall, she does serve as an example in taking motherhood as a holy
calling (Gen. 4:1, 25. Cf. 1Tim. 5:14).
-- David L. Moore Director Miami, Florida, USA Department of Education dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com Southeastern Spanish District http://www.netcom.com/~dvdmoore of the Assemblies of God
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:46 EDT