Originally posted by Esther
View Post
In more bloviating detail:
There is a rather obvious problem with my view: It is not obvious from the text itself. We know from both Scripture and external history that Artemis worship was prevalent at Ephesus, where Timothy was stationed. We know from external sources, but not explicitly from Scripture, that *some* forms of Artemis worship included the idea that woman was created before man. We don't know for sure that form was extant in Ephesus, and the only sources that explicitly mention that form at all are external to Scripture. However, if true, it could, as Bartlett notes, also explain Paul's use of the rare word, "authenteo," and provide a thematic link to the "safe childbirth" bit (another potential Artemis reference) in v. 15.
The "traditional" view has its own problems:
-- It assumes "authenteo" means "have authority." If, as is likely, it means something more like, "domineer" or "control," then the traditional view, where Paul invokes the Creation narratives to universalize the instructions in vv. 11-12 would suggest it's ok for a man to control or domineer over women.
-- It assumes "epitrepo" means "I do not (ever) permit" rather than "I am not (currently) permitting." Gordon Fee (in his 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus volume of the NIBC), Ben Witherington (in his Letters and Homilies for Helenized Christians, Volume 1) and especially Payne (in his Man and Woman, One in Christ) argue for the latter, and that the grammar indicates Paul was specifically addressing the prohibition to a problem at that time and place.
-- It assumes the Creation Accounts self-evidently teach that Eve was subordinate to Adam. But that was not the case until they were fallen and redemption was thousands of years in the future. In Gen. 1, they are presented as equals, both of whom are to together "rule" the rest of Creation, not one of them over the other. In Gen. 2, Adam is created first, then Eve as his needed "ezer." Nothing about the word or the context suggests subordinance. In most of the places it occurs in Scripture, it refers to an ally, typically military, of comparable or greater power, often God Himself. There is no obvious hierarchy between husband and wife until Gen. 3:16.
Some claim that the act of "naming" is a demonstration of authority. That may or may not be the case. It is not explicit (and IMO not even implicit) in Gen. 1-2; plus some Bibles note in footnotes that Adam did not directly "name" Eve until 3:20, after the Fall, when he was already explicitly in a position of dominance.
In any case, Paul did not refer to "naming," but only to sequence. Nothing about being created earlier automatically entails higher authority, or fish and birds and bats and bugs and bears would have authority over humans. Some like to say that we know the creation of male prior to female gives authority to the male because Paul said so; but that's circular reasoning, or begging the question... I tend to get those two confused. Paul does not say that. He merely states the fact that man preceded woman.
Some like to claim that 2:14 shows that women should not teach men, because women are more easily deceived. But Paul does not say that. He says that *Eve* was deceived. Rather than saying "All women are like Eve," he was probably saying "Be careful not to become like Eve." If his point were that all women are easily deceived, then the natural corollary would be that men are better teachers because like Adam, they are not deceived, but willfully and knowingly reject the truth in favor of Satan's lies; that's wacky. Further, if women are by nature "easily deceived," they should not be allowed to teach *anyone*. Men would actually be in *less* danger from their false teaching than would other women.
Ha ha I hope you are joking? Real life is a busy business!
Comment