Kristen

Gengwall, I have prayed as you asked.

Cheryl– I have been lurking here a few days. I have not in the past been convinced of this view, but I am finding the grammatical arguments put forth by you and Gengwall to be quite persuasive– particularly the part about the grammatical construction that “the woman” “has come TO BE in transgression.” I always thought “she” referred to Eve (who was ‘redeemed” in a sense through the faithfulness of “they” — those of her descendents who come to and remain in Christ), but if “the woman” is STILL “in transgression,” obviously that can’t be right.

But I still have some questions. First, are there any articles in Koine Greek equivalent to the English “this” or “that”? In other words, I have had trouble believing that Paul would say simply “woman” (which is translated “a woman”) when what he meant was “that woman.” In English, we can say “a woman” can or can’t do something, and mean it collectively, even though the construction is singular. It is my understanding that this can also occur in ancient Greek– which is the source of my reservations. Generally when we mean a specific unnamed person, we say “this person” not “a person.” But if the Greek doesn’t have a way to say “this person” or “that person,” that would make sense.

I know you mentioned that in 1 Cor 5, Paul says “a man has his father’s wife,” and is referring to a specific man– but in the Greek, the word “man” does not appear in this passage. The phrase is not “aner has his father’s wife,” but actually says “someone has his father’s wife.” So I’m wondering if anywhere else in the New Testament, the word “man” or “woman” by itself can be used to refer to a specific man or woman when the context does not make it clear. I know that the stories about Jesus can begin with “A woman having an issue of blood” or “A man with a withered hand,” and we know by the context that it means “A CERTAIN woman or man.” But is this construction ever used elsewhere without such contextual clarifications?

Another question is, why did God allow such a personal letter from Paul to Timothy, including “inside” references to people only they would understand about, to become canon? I’m reading a book on the history of women in the church, and apparently this passage has been misunderstood almost since Paul wrote it, as a prohibition on all women teaching all men. It’s puzzling to me.

Any input from anyone here would be appreciated.