gengwall

Riddle me this Chris. You are correct that Paul is giving exhortations to men and women in vs. 8-10, but do you not recognize that those exhoratations are related to the corporate ministry of the whole congregation outlined in vs. 1-4; a ministry, btw, that can not be conducted “in silence”. Verses 1-10 call the church to action – make supplications, pray, intercede, give thanks, lift holy hands, “adorn” yourselves in good works, etc. – “for this is good and acceptable in sight of God our Savior, who desires all men [i.e. humans] to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (vs. 3-4). Your argument makes vs. 11-15 an extension of the exhortation! How can that be when 11-15 are recognized by all, I believe even you, to be a prohibition. If we are to follow your line of reasoning it leaves Paul saying “women – I exhort you to take action by prohibiting you from taking action”.

You are correct that there is a pattern here – but it is not the linear one you envision from verse 1 all the way through verse 15. Paul is employing a couplet. Here is the pattern

1 Tim 2:1-10 In General:
People are not living in truth ->
God wants them to be saved ->
the congregation is called to action to bring about what God wants for those people.

1 Tim 2:11-15 Specifically:
There is a woman not living in truth ->
God wants her to be saved ->
“they” are called to action to bring about what God wants for her.

Of course, it would be senseless to try and construct specific prohibitions for “kings and all who are in authority” and “all men” since everyone’s situation is different. Therefore, Paul does not bother going down that road in the first section. He simply tells the congregation what it must do in order to minister, and God will take care of the rest. But in the specific instance he turns to in the second section, there are specific actions Timothy must take to get the situation under control. Only then can this woman be properly ministered to in order to bring about her slavation (or restoration).

We may quibble over who “they” are but there is no doubt who “she” is – “the woman” that Timothy knows all too well.

Incidentally, the couplet pattern is repeated in chapter 1, although the situation for the named individuals there is much more dire and the consequences much more severe than it is for “the woman” in chapter 2.