Cheryl Schatz

TL,
I think you answered Patrick’s thought quite well.

Patrick, you said this about TL:

But you have not engagd in my comments apart from restating Cheyl’s position and claiming it was ‘clear’. I doubt this is true considering the understanding of this passage over the last two millenium.

Actually TL did engage your comments and then went on to state other things. There is a flaw in your argument and TL saw it. As far as the passage being “clear” over the last “two millenium”, Paul’s very detailed wording has caused lots of problems for people who see Paul through human tradition. Paul becomes much more clear when we don’t stop with verse 12 but continue on to verse 15 with the outcome of Paul’s instruction which is “clear” that this is an issue of salvation, thus the teaching that is being stopped is not the true teaching of a true Christian, but the error of an unsaved person.

My example was simply to show that within the context of a generic discussion, one can use a singular with the clear undertanding that it applies to the whole, as per Cheryl’s request.

If that is what you were trying, then you need to rethink your example as your example shows that two women who accompany each other are allowed to do what generic women cannot do. It is a problem for sure, and if you really said that, I’ll bet some industrious teenagers could figure it out, that you aren’t stopping women generically from going upstairs after all.

When i said a woman must not be upstairs, given the context i’m not sure anyone assumed i was talking about a specific woman- it seems too unnatural to the flow of the context plus is equally a poor grammatical construct (at least in English).

I think you are likely right here about not meaning a specific woman. But then you did not add anything about “the woman” (verse 14) and “she” and “they” that give Paul’s meaning more body.

Nonetheless, Cheryl asked for a good reason- i think i provided that.

No, I don’t think you did, but you gave it a jolly good try, and for that you should be commended!

Furthermore, you didn’t discuss the second point i made regarding 1 Cor 12-14. Understadable though, since it’s not your blog.

Well, I did cover it and it is my blog 😉 But I noticed that you didn’t actually deal with the fact that Paul never stopped the teaching of the truth by anyone. Perhaps it would be an appropriate time to ask why one should assume that Paul was stopping the truth of the gospel in verse 12 rather than applying his stated purpose to have Timothy stop the teaching of error?

Thanks for stopping by, Patrick. I apologize in advance if I don’t get to any new comments in a timely fashion. I have a very busy ministry schedule, but I am much more flexible when I don’t have deadlines. Things should lighten up a bit in a week.