Frank

Well, Cheryl, I’m sorry to learn that Chris, when he couldn’t defeat you on the “home field,” had to make a playing field of his own, where he plays against “straw women and straw men,” which are nothing but caricatures of his egalitarian opponents. And I am sure my criticism of his misuse of both biblical hermeneutics and logical reasoning didn’t win me a place on his “favorite persons,” either. Unfortunately, he is an example of the proverb, “People convinced against their will, oft remain of the same opinion still.” And that is all that I wish to say regarding him.

Have your read Jefferson J. Davis’ article, “First Timothy 2:12, the Ordination of Women, and Paul’s Use of Creation Narratives,” in the 2009 Spring Issue of the Priscilla Papers? In several ways, it confirms a number of arguments you have already made. He does two things in this article: 1) Argues the case against the traditional understanding and translation of authentein, and 2) argues the case against the traditional understanding of how Paul uses the creation narratives, especially in 1 Tim. 2:13 and 14. In fact, he clearly states: “The major focus of this article is an examination of Paul’s appeal to the Genesis creation narratives, with a view to showing that, in (1 Tim 2:11-15) and other passages, the apostle refers to these texts with the local circumstances and the problems of specific churches in view. It is here argued that previous discussions of this passage have not given adequate recognition to the CONTEXT-SPECIFIC way in which Paul applies the creation texts” (p.6) First he deals with the different ways Paul applies these texts to various aspects of the Jew and Gentile conflict in Romans 5 and 14, then the problem of heresy and false teachers in 2 Cor 11:3 and 1 Tim 2:12.

Regarding these last two texts, Davis states, “This comparison of 2 Corinthians 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:12 shows that Paul does not have a ‘one size fits all’ hermeneutic when reading and applying the Genesis narratives of creation and fall: ‘Eve’ can be seen as a figure of women in Ephesus or as a figure for an entire church in Corinth–because the local circumstances differ, though false teaching is a danger in both settings. Applications are drawn from Genesis in a church-specific and contextually sensitive way.”

And I believe that what Davis argues about Paul’s “church-specific and contextually sensitive” understanding and application of these creation and fall narratives is the same view that you, Cheryl, have so well presented and demonstrated in these Pauline dialogues of yours. I think Chris and his supporters are upset with you, in part, because you have, by this means, have invalidated their cherished notion that Paul had a “one size fits all” hermenetic that they can use to promote their viewpoint.