Dave

Some people have big questions about verbal aspect theory http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2008-November/047956.html

I hope an expert comes along to make a comment soon, but one of the concerns I have with things like this theory is that it provides an opportunity for people to throw into doubt a Biblical truth by quoting a ‘theory’ that is still not widely accepted, that has been shown to not be applicable in all situations, and that they will apply it even when the context of the passage in question does not lend itself to it’s application.

So, even when I read stuff by Con Campbell (the Moore College guru on the subject) I cannot see how verbal aspect theory impinges on our understanding in this passage as it is different to the examples he uses. It is different because according to them the verbal aspect must change in the middle of the story in 1 Tim 2
:14-15. Unless of course the woman is not Eve. I think the same rules have to apply.

If we see the verbs as temporal then the change in tense and the use of logic show we are talking about a different person. If the verbs are aspect related, then we have a change of aspect in the middle of the discussion. This must signify something! The stuff I have read does not allow for us to change aspect in the middle of a story…unless of course there is a purpose. The purpose here? The women is not Eve?

Can someone help me understand this better?!?!