I have been banging my head against 1 Timothy 2 ALL DAY.
I listened to Claire Smith's talk this morning and was delighted to find myself absolutely convinced by a clear and logical yet profound talk delivered with flawless expression.
Then I went back to Richard France's 1995 lectures to compare the egalitarian arguments.
Then I started to think.
*BANGS HEAD*
I really wanted to be able to post something more helpful than this. Soon, I hope.
Heh, I've got my head full of 1Tim 2 atm also.
ReplyDeleteAt the recent CBE conference in Melbourne there was a good 1Tim 2 paper by Tim Foster. You can read a summary here: http://www.earngey.info/2010/06/14/cbe-international-13th-june-2010-tim-foster-%E2%80%93-1-timothy-28-15-gender-wars-at-ephesus/
I've never heard of Richard France's 1995 lectures. Got a link handy?
I think 1Tim 2 is where the Comp explanation is at it's weakest. Compare closely v13-14 in 1Tim 2 with Genesis 2-3 and you'll notice that the *significance* that Comp's argue Paul was intended with his reference to Adam's creation, for example, is nowhere in either text.
It takes a lot of inferences to get to the Comp. position.
i dont have a link im sorry - i've been reading through his lectures in a book i borrowed from my church library. it is this very book that provoked me to thinking about all of this. well, that and finding out that barneys on broadway allows women preachers and wanting to figure out what the biblical basis for that could be.
ReplyDeletei think that the egalitarian arguments require just as much inference. particularly considering that much of the argument revolves around circumstances in Ephesus rather than what Scripture itself actually says.