gengwall

Craig – just to expand on what Cheryl said in relation to your questions @39-41. We know a specific woman is in view in verse 14 because of the use of the definate article. The Greek says literally “the woman” instad of simply “woman”. Now, it could be Eve since Eve is the most recent specific woman spoken of at verse 13. But, two circumstances steer us away from Eve.

One is by implication which you have noted – Paul doesn’t repeat Eve’s name, but instead refers to some unnamed woman, where he does call Adam by name a second time in verse 14. It seems odd at best if Paul is referring to Eve still.

But the second reason, the grammatical one Cheryl details, is conclusive. The deceived state is ongoing – there is no other valid conclusion based on the tense of the “to be” verb. How virtually all translators get this wrong is mind boggling, until one considers that most were men who probably had the same presupposition that this passage deals with all women (which would explain the translators even grosser error in dealing with singular and plural throughout the passage). But it doesn’t change the reality – Paul is talking about a specific woman who continues to be under decpetion at the writing of his letter. It simply can’t be Eve.

We then look to see who it can be. Verse 15 refers again to a specific woman who can be saved (or redeemed) in the future. Again, this can’t be Eve, but the construction of 14 and 15 make it seem, at least to me, obvious that the same woman is being spoken of in both verses. But who is this woman? Was she pulled completely out of thin air? Did Paul suddenly have a “squirl!”* moment, becoming completely distracted? Or is it possible, considering the consistent use of the singular in verses 11-15, that this woman we know to be a specific human being from verses 14 and 15 is the same woman in the whole passage? To me, that makes perfect sense.

Let’s imagine for a moment that Timothy had written Paul something like this:

“I have this woman in the congregation who is immersed in pagan worship and teaching. More than that, she has brought this false teaching into her home and her husband seems either unwilling or unable to stop her. In fact, it appears that she completely dominates him as we rarely see him and when we do, she actually will not allow him to speak. I have even heard rumors that she has rejected the teaching of the church and abuses her husband if he tries to speak up. Never-the-less, I am uncomfortable bypassing her husband and challenging her directly. I am at a loss as to what to do. Is there any hope for this couple or should we remove them from the assembly?

Paul responds (keep in mind that the letter from Paul has an implicit “regarding what you wrote me” in front of every instruction to Timothy. I have included how this might possibly have been interptreted by Timothy considering his close relationship with Paul)

[Regarding what you wrote me about a particular woman] A wife should learn in peace, being ready to cooperate in everything. But I [Paul, as an apostle and authority in the church] do not allow the wife to teach or to be domineering over the husband [so go ahead and name drop Timothy], rather, she is to remain at peace. [Now let me describe for you a similar situation we are all familiar with] For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, [back to your situation] but this woman [like Eve], having been deceived, has come to be in transgression. But she will be redeemed through the birth of the child [just as I was – see chapter 1 of this letter], if she and her husband continue to live in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint [unlike what has been going on to date in their marriage].

Makes perfect sense to me. We have to accept that Timothy and Paul were close enough that there was some reading between the lines and some things were perfectly left unspoken. That doesn’t mean we can;t apply what Paul teaches. But it does mean that we can’t jump to conclusions about what Paul is talking about without considering context at three levels – what was going on in Ephesus at the time, what Paul’s theme is, and how close Paul’s and Timothy;s relationship was.

*Sorry for the reference if you haven’t seen the movie “Up!”. On the other hand, if you have, the reference as applied to Paul and this passage seems perfectly appropriate. If you accept the grammatical facts (most comps choose to ignore them) but still see this as a prhibition on women in general, then you have to conclude Paul went completely bonkers for a moment to find any “sense” in the whole passage.