Craig

Interesting discussion! I’ll need to reread some of the comments to digest it all, but I just thought I would throw some more thoughts into the mix. It’s late here so I’ll just put them out there and see if there are any nibbles while I am asleep. (I’ll put on my flame proof suit before I read any responses, because they are, like most of my comments, just off the top of my head and could have “holes” everywhere! 🙂 )
1 We seem to be assuming in some of our comments that the teaching not permitted is just to “a man”. I am not sure that this is certain is it? Isn’t it also possible from the grammar that the teaching could be to everyone and this teaching is combined with “authentein a man”. The word order in my interlinear says “but a woman to teach I do not allow, nor to authentein a man.”
2 If “authentein” had a sexual meaning, imagine there was a particular woman from a background as an Artemis Temple Priestess. Could she have been teaching intimacy with God through intimacy with her? She would be deceived, and holding out the “forbidden fruit” to the Adam’s of the congregation. It would be very important if she is to be saved, for the men to hold fast to their Christian faith and godliness and not be like Adam and fall when offered the “fruit”. I think the language Paul uses of “a man” in v12 could involve one or many men ( because presumably she would only have one man at a time- but I am speaking from total ignorance of the temple practices of the time!) The “they” in v15 could be the woman and one man, the woman and many men, or just the men.