From: Jim West (jwest@highland.net)
Date: Thu Apr 27 2000 - 13:57:58 EDT
At 10:16 AM 4/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
> The question comes with regard to the relationship of the two
>clauses and *oude*. Does the not allowing "a woman to teach" only relate
>to the "man," [that is the sentence is stating that the woman cannot teach
>a *man* but can teach women and children] could it be that the first
>clause stands independently, and thus a woman is simply not allowed to
>teach. He is affirming the latter, but I cannot figure an objective way
>to either deny or affirm his exegesis.
> I am well aware of the ramifications of this question and I am
>quite aware of the other passages that relate to this question. I am
>concerned with the syntax of the sentence.
Since its syntax that "taxes" you here (pun intended) Blass-Debrunner
suggest (in the 17th edition of their grammar), p. 374-5, that "oudh am
Satzanfang oder nach ou innerhalb desselben Satzstueckes = 'auch nicht',
'nicht einmal'. But since the phrase you wonder about doesnt "begin" with
the word-- this is not necessarily applicable.
Perhaps oudh here could be rendered "not even".... (see Robertson, p. 1185).
In any event this in not a very politically correct way to render the
verse-- but I think that the author of 1 Tim meant just that-- that women
should be silent and not teach, and not even have any sort of authority---
over men.
Over women and children??? Who knows. The passage doesn't seem to address
that issue at all.
Best,
Jim
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
jwest@highland.net
http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:41:07 EDT