Resource Manager
-
Posts
15,028 -
Joined
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by Resource Manager
-
-
(Page 3)
Preface
In recent times there has been much comment upon the roles of our sisters in Christadelphian ecclesias and in particular their position in respect to leadership and speaking. The matter was heightened when in late 2007, an internet edition of two volumes, entitled, “All One in Christ Jesus” – Volume I (New Testament) and Volume II (Old Testament) became widely available to many ecclesias. These works amounted to more than 200 pages and represented a very strong commitment to revise and overthrow the established understanding of the role of sisters in the ecclesia as it has been with us from our beginnings.
Brother Jonathan Burke’s contribution to this ensuing debate has been to elucidate the rationale of exposition in “All One” (OT and NT). Many readers have felt a difficulty in this area. A feature of “All One” is to throw into conjecture the understanding of the specific Bible texts upon which all ecclesias had based their practice; then, having disturbed the foundation passages, to advocate a revolutionary position based upon incidental inferences in other passages of the Bible. It is a proverb that the exception proves the rule but it would seem here that the exception becomes the rule! In this booklet bro Burke seeks to analyse the rationality of this approach and it is felt that his work is a significant and timely contribution to the present discussion.
There is a very large answer to the matter before us, which overwhelmingly presents the intention of God. In the Old Testament there were God, Moses, the High Priest, the King, the priests the Levites and the prophets: these shouldered the responsibility of judgment, leadership and teaching in the public religion of the nation. In the New Testament there are the Father, the Son, the Apostles, the elders and the deacons, upon whom rested the governance and teaching of the ecclesia. Without dispute these offices were held by males, in both dispensations. Is it wise for us to overturn such foundations? Surely it is only the philosophies of the modern world that have made us look to change that which our God has so obviously arranged. Division of thought among us is the only possibility if such views are advocated. In these evil latter days we could surely do without this further diversion.
We have confidence that many will enjoy the reasoning of this treatise. Please note that it does not seek to answer or comment on the details of all the Bible passages related to the subject. That has been done in other works.
In conclusion we should pay tribute to the wonderful contribution made by our sisters in our ecclesial and domestic lives. Their role is indispensable. All the (page 4) brethren know this; from childhood to aging years the care and wisdom of the mothers in Israel is an encouraging and essential role. Even the Lord knew that in his life; he was born of a dear and loving mother; she was still there at the cross and numbered among the earliest disciples after his resurrection. In the height of his agony he ensured her well-being in the hands of the apostle John.
Any community that does not honour the beauty and faithfulness of motherhood is doomed to deteriorate. And there are many sisters in our meetings who, though not natural mothers in their own right, are yet mothers for many others, young and old. All of our ecclesias are tinctured with the willing service of our sisters in many aspects of our ecclesial life.
No career can be higher than this. It’s the way God has made it. We revise it at our deepest peril. “If the foundations be destroyed what can the righteous do?” Psalm 11:3.
BN LukeSecretary12 January 2009
“Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing (i.e. all that is motherhood, Gk TEKNOGONIA), if THEY continue in faith and love and holiness with sobriety” 1Timothy 2:15.
-
The Sister’s role – The Bible’s large picture
__________________________________________________________________
An assessment of the method of argument in the “All one in Christ Jesus” papers
Jonathan Burke
Published by the Christadelphian Scripture Study Service.
85 Suffolk Rd
Hawthorndene
South Australia 5051
Australia
Further copies are available from:
csssadelaide@webshield.net.au
or ph (08) 8278 6848 or (08) 8278 8256
__________________________________________________________________
The exception proves the rule
__________________________________________________________________
Table of Contents
Preface - 3
Introduction - 5
Errors of Logic - 7
An Inconsistent Method of Interpretation - 11
Biblical Evidence and a Consistent Method of Interpretation - 12
Contradictory Arguments, Contra Indicatory Evidence - 17
What Did Jesus Do? - 17
What Did The Apostles Do? - 19
Identifying Poor Reasoning - 20
Other errors in reasoning - ‘All One – NT’ - 24
Other errors in reasoning - ‘All One – OT’ - 31
A Study in Comparative Revisionism - 36
Comparative Revisionism – Identical Arguments - 38
False Doctrine (The trinity) – Identical Arguments - 40
Appendix A: Principles of Interpretation - 43
Appendix B – Comparison of “All One” with the “Principles of Interpretation” - 48
Appendix C Selecting the ‘Good Bits’ of the Bible - 57
List of Scriptural References in this booklet - 63
List of references in this booklet to the two “All One” papers - 66
-
'Following my identification of the pattern as from specific to general, Mounce concludes that "Paul does not want women to be in positions of authority in the church; teaching is one way in which authority is exercised in the church."‘48
Köstenbereger notes other egalitarians who agree with his syntactical analysis. Kevin Giles 'finds himself in essential agreement with the present syntactical analysis of 1 Tim 2:12‘,49 Craig Blomberg is quoted as saying 'Decisively supporting the more positive sense of assuming appropriate authority is Andreas Köstenberger‘s study‘,50 Esther Ng 'continues, "However, since a negative connotation of didaskein is unlikely in this verse (see below), the neutral meaning for authentein (to have authority over) seems to fit the oude construction better."‘,51 and Judith Hartenstein notes that 'Köstenberger shows through a syntactical study that 1 Tim 2:12 forbids women to teach and to have authority over men, not only to abuse authority‘.52
Thirty years have passed since the first egalitarian challenge to the meaning of authenteō. Throughout that time considerable lexical study of the word has been undertaken, and scholarly understanding of the word has been refined. However, the consensus over its lexical range has not been overturned. None of the standard lexicons have adopted the new meanings suggested by egalitarians. Meanings in the lexicons attributed to Paul‘s usage in 1 Timothy 2:12 include either a negative sense of domineering53 or a more positive sense of exercising authority‘, 54 though the most recent studies incorporating textual evidence not previously available to some of these lexicons (such as the studies of Baldwin and Wolter), substantiate the more positive sense. Significantly, Kostenberger‘s syntactical study has received wide acceptance from both complementarian and egalitarian scholars, substantiating the case for a positive sense of authenteō in 1 Timothy 2:12, whilst the egalitarian interpretation of authenteō as having a negative sense such as 'domineer‘, has been rejected by the majority of egalitarian and complementarian scholars. Standard modern Bible translations typically continue to render the word in its positive sense of having or exercising authority, which remains the most attested meaning in context.
-------
48 Ibid, page 48
49 Ibid, pages 48-49
50 Ibid, page 49
51 Ibid, page 49
52 Ibid, page 49
53 ANLEX, Louw/Nida, Zodhiates
54 BDAG, EDNT, LSJ
-
The lexical data was later supplemented by a large scale contextual study of the passage by Andreas Köstenbereger in 1995,41 which argued that the syntactical construction ouk didaskein oude authentein ('not teach nor have/exercise authority‘), requires that both didaskein and authentein have a positive sense. Köstenbereger examined fifty two examples of the same ouk... oude ('not... nor‘), construction in the New Testament, as well as forty eight extra-biblical examples covering the third century BC to the third century AD.42 His conclusion was that the syntactical construction has two patterns. Either both activities referred to must be positive (the first pattern), or both activities must be negative (the second pattern):
'The forty-eight syntactical parallels to 1 Tim 2:12 in extrabiblical literature (as well as the one exact parallel in the NT, Acts 21:21) identified in this study all feature the construction "negated fi-nite verb + infinitive + oude + infinitive" and in every instance yield the pattern positive/positive or negative/negative. This yields the conclusion that 1 Tim 2:12 is to be rendered either: "I do not permit a woman to teach [error] or to usurp a man‘s authority" or: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have (or exercise) authority over a man,"the latter being preferred owing to the positive connotation of didaskein elsewhere in the Pastorals.'43'Some examples of pattern 1 are Matthew 6:28 (they neither labor nor spin); Matthew 13:13 (they neither hear nor understand, but both hearing and understanding are viewed as desirable activities); Luke 12:24 (they neither sow nor harvest); or Acts 4:18 (neither speak nor teach). These activities are all viewed positively in their contexts. Examples of pattern 2, where both activities are viewed negatively, are Matthew 6:20 (neither break in nor steal); John 14:27 (neither be troubled nor afraid); Philippians 2:16 (neither run in vain nor labor in vein), and Hebrews 13:5 (neither leave nor forsake).44Köstenbereger concluded that teaching has a positive meaning in such passages as 1 Timothy 4:11; 6:2, and 2 Timothy 2:2.45 The force of the ouk... oude construction would therefore mean that authenteo likewise has a positive meaning, and does not refer to domineering but the positive exercise of authority.
Reception of Köstenbereger‘s study by the scholarly community was overwhelmingly positive. The majority of both complementarian and egalitarian scholars agreed, many considering that the contextual meaning of authenteo in 1 Timothy 2:12 has been conclusively decided by Köstenbereger. The following endorsements of Köstenbereger‘s conclusion are taken from prominent egalitarian scholars:
"Peter O‘Brien, in a review published in Australia,concurred with the findings of this study,18 as did Helge Stadelmann in an extensive review that appeared in the German Jahrbuch für evangelikale Theologie.19Both reviewers accepted the results of the present study as valid.‘46'Another egalitarian, Craig Keener, in a review that appeared in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, says that while (in his view) the principle is not clear in all instances cited in the present study, "the pattern seems to hold in general, and this is what matters most." Keener concurs that the contention of the present essay is"probably correct that ‘have authority’ should be read as coordinate with ‘teach’ rather than as subordinate('teach in a domineering way‘)."'47-------
41 Women in the Church: An Analysis and Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, (1995)
42 Grudem, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, page 315 (2004)
43 Köstenberger, “Teaching and Usurping Authority: I Timothy 2:11-15” (Ch 12) by Linda L. Belleville, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (10.1.44-45), 1995
44 Grudem, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, page 315 (2004)
45 Ibid, page 315
46 Köstenberger, “Teaching and Usurping Authority: I Timothy 2:11-15” (Ch 12) by Linda L. Belleville, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (10.1.47), 1995
47 Ibid, page 47
-
Key Studies of authenteō Author Conclusion Andrew Perriman
(1993)'While it would be hazardous to speculate on the exact course of the term‘s semantic evolution, this sense of 'acting authoritatively‘ must at least be considered as an available and significant nuance alongside those of 'perpetrating a crime‘ and 'having authority‘. In fact, to introduce the idea of 'authority‘ into the definition at all may be misleading if it is taken to mean a derived or ordained authority: it is 'authorship‘, not 'authority‘, that is at the heart of the meaning of αὐθενтέω.‘34 H Scott Baldwin
(1995)35'H. Scott Baldwin then presents a study of the word αὐθενтέω, arguing that it involves the concept of authority and that in 1 Timothy 2:12 it may mean "control," "dominate," "assume authority over," or perhaps "flout the authority of." He rules out several other possibilities after an exhaustive, computer-assisted study of ancient sources, most of which are reproduced with context and translation in an appendix. It is difficult to imagine a more thorough study.'36 Albert Wolters
(2000)'With respect to the meaning of αυθεντεω in 1 Tim. 2.12, my investigation leads to two further conclusions. First, the verb αυθεντεω should not be interpreted in the light of αυθεντης ‘murderer’, or the muddled definitions of it given in the Atticistic lexica. Instead, it should be understood, like all the other Hellenistic derivatives of αυθεντης, in the light of the meaning which that word had in the living Greek of the day, namely 'master‘. Secondly, there seems to be no basis for the claim that αυθεντεω in 1 Tim. 2.12 has a pejorative connotation, as in ‘usurp authority’ or ‘domineer’. Although it is possible to identify isolated cases of a pejorative use for both αυθεντεω and αυθεντια, these are not found before the fourth century AD.135 Overwhelmingly, the authority to which αυθεντης 'master‘ and all its derivatives refer is a positive or neutral concept.‘37 Attention has been particularly focused on two early papyri using the word authenteō:38
'I [Trypho] considered that Antilochos having thrown out the goods and subcontracted to his advantage counting with that termination of purchase and this not having altered the dispute in any particular. Soexercising my authorityon him (the man who hired the boat) that he pay fully to Calatytis the boatman to his fare in the hour, to which he [Antilochos?] yielded.‘39'Of Protogenos and Isidoros being bookkeepers of Leonides and being in charge of the memorandum and written-testimony of the clerk Leonides. Through the not-yet transmitted-items books done is at the risk of those bookkeepershaving authorityand he was in charge of his own portion, through-he himself Leonides being-present of one of thosehaving authoritybookkeepers.‘40These two papyri are significant not only because they are proximate to Paul‘s own usage of authenteō, but because they both use authenteō with a sense which is in agreement with the recent studies by Baldwin and Wolters. The Tebtunis papyrus in particular indicates a usage which cannot mean 'usurp authority‘ or 'domineer‘, nor can it have any negative connotation (bookkeepers are supposed to have authority over their accounts, and it makes no sense to speak of them 'dominating‘ accounting records).
-------
34 Perriman, What Eve did, What Women shouldn’t do, Tyndale Bulletin (44.1.137), 1993
35 Köstenberger, Schreiner, and Baldwin, eds., Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, (1995)
36 Pyne, Review of Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9–15, Bibliotheca Sacra (154.122), 1997
37 Wolters, A Semantic Study of αυθεντης and its Derivatives, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (11.1.54), 2006; originally published in Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism (1.145-175), 2000
38 Translation by brother Steven Cox
39 Papyrus BGU 1208 (c.27 BC)
40 Papyrus Tebtunis 15 (c.100AD)
-
It will be noted that 30 years of dispute over the meaning of authenteō has had little to no effect on the scholarly consensus. Within the lexical community there is no controversy over the lexical range of this word, and none of the standard lexicons have accepted the novel definitions suggested by egalitarians such as Catherine Kroeger. Nevertheless, the debate over its precise meaning in 1 Timothy 2:12 has resulted in a refinement of scholarly understanding of the word and its usage in Greek literature.
The following table lists the key studies of authenteō which have been undertaken over the last 30 years. Such studies typically involve comprehensive searches of the largest available databases of Greek literature, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae,28 and the Duke Databank of Documentary Papyri.29 These databases enable researchers to study the word in context, as it is used in a wide range of documents over a long period of time.
Key Studies of authenteō Author Conclusion Catherine Kroeger
(1979)'In 1979 Catherine Kroeger, a classics student at the University of Minnesota, published an article in which she argued that authenteō is an erotic term best translated "to engage in fertility practices," the implication being that in 1 Timothy 2 Paul is countering specific heretical aberrations in ancient Ephesus and hence not laying down a principle applicable for all time.'30 George Knight III
(1984)'Knight, who has made a thorough study of all the occurrences of αὐθεντέω in extant Greek literature, confirms the rendering "have authority" as the natural meaning. George W. Knight III, "ἈΥΘΕΝΤΕΩ in Reference to Women in 1 Timothy 2:12," New Testament Studies 30 (January 1984): 143-57.'31 Leland Wilshire (1988) 'A recent study by Leland Wilshire seeks to modify some of Knight’s conclusions based on the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae computer project at the University of California at Irvine. The research, however, in no way contradicts the basic theme of Knight’s work that αὐθεντέω means "exercise authority," not "domineer" in 2 Timothy 2:12. See especially the last paragraph of Wilshire‘s article on page 131, the last full paragraph on page 130, and Wilshire‘s recognition throughout most of the article of the importance of the papyri, which seems to butress Knight’s position, and the basic consistency of the early church fathers on understanding αὐθενηἐω as "exercise authority." (Leland Edward Wilshire, "The TLG Computer and Further Reference to ΑΥΘΕΝΤΕΩ in 1 Timothy 2:12," New Testament Studies 34 [1988]: 120-34).‘ 32 Catherine & Richard Kroeger
(1992)'Recently Kroeger and Kroeger have done significant research into the nature and background of ancient Ephesus and have suggested an alternative interpretation to 1 Tim 2:11-15. While they have provided significant background data, their suggestion that the phrase "to have authority" (authentein, authentein) should be rendered "to represent herself as originator of man" is, to say the least, far-fetched and has gained little support.'33 -------
28 A very large database of Greek literature from approximately 850 BC to 1500 AD; it is online at http://www.tlg.uci.edu/ (though public access is granted only to a small selection of the texts)
29 A database of around 500 Greek papyri; it is online at http://papyri.info/
30 Lutheran Church Missouri Synod Commission on Theology and Church Relations, AUTHENTEIN: A Summary, pages 3-4 (2005)
31 House, A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry Part 3: The Speaking of Women and the Prohibition of the Law, Bibliotheca Sacra (145.315), 1988
32 Ibid, page 315
33 Moss, 'NIV Commentary: 1, 2 Timothy & Titus', page 60 (1995); Moss is a complementarian, but his conclusion is well supported by egalitarians who have rejected the Kroeger‘s definition, as well as receiving support from the standard lexicon definitions
-
Those of the preceding lexicons which include authenteō are broadly in agreement with regard to its historical lexical range.
Lexicon Definitions of authentō Lexicon Definition1493 ANLEX 'αὐθενтέω strictly, of one who acts on his own authority; hence have control over, domineer, lord it over (1T 2.12).'17 BDAG 'αὐθενтέω (s. αὐθένтης; Philod., Rhet. II p. 133, 14 Sudh.; Jo. Lydus, Mag. 3, 42; Moeris p. 54; cp. Phryn. 120 Lob.; Hesychius; Thom. Mag. p. 18, 8; schol. in Aeschyl., Eum. 42; BGU 1208, 38 [27 b.c.]; s. Lampe s.v.) to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to w. gen. of pers. (Ptolem., Apotel. 3, 14, 10 Boll-B.; Cat. Cod. Astr. VIII/1 p. 177, 7; B-D-F §177) ἀνδρός, w. διδάσκειν, 1 Ti 2:12 (practically = ‘tell a man what to do’ [Jerusalem Bible]; Mich. Glykas [XII a.d.] 270, 10 αἱ γυσναῖκες αὐθενтοῦδι т. ἀνδρῶν. According to Diod S 1, 27, 2 there was a well-documented law in Egypt: κυριεύειν тὴν γυναῖκα тἀνδρός, cp. Soph., OC 337–41; GKnight III, NTS 30, ‘84, 143–57; LWilshire, ibid. 34, ‘88, 120–34).—DELG s.v. αὐθένтης. M-M.'18 EDNT 'αὐθενтέω authenteō rule (vb.)* 1 Tim 2:12: women should not rule over men (gen.). cf. G. W. Knight, ―Αὐθενтέω in Reference to Women in 1 Tim. 2,12," NTS 30 (1984) 143-57.'19 GELS20 'αὐθένтης,-ου+ N1M 0-0-0-0-1=1 Wis 12,6 Murderer Cf. LARCHER 1985, 710'21 Louw/Nida '37.21 αὐθενтέω: to control in a domineering manner—'to control, to domineer.' γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐттιтρέттω … αὐθενтεῖν ἀνδρός 'I do not allow women … to dominate men' 1 Tm 2.12. 'To control in a domineering manner' is often expressed idiomatically, for example, 'to shout orders at,' 'to act like a chief toward,' or 'to bark at.'22 LSJ923 'authent-eô , A. to have full power or authority over, tinos I Ep.Ti.2.12; pros tina BGU1208.37 (i B. C.): c. inf., Lyd.Mag.3.42. 2. commit a murder, Sch.A.Eu.42.'24 Newman 'αὐθεντέω domineer, have authority over.‘25 Swanson '883 αὐθενтέω (authenteō): vb.; ≡ Str 831—LN 37.21 control, have authority over (1Ti 2:12+).'26 Zodhiates '831. αὐθενтέω authentéō; contracted authentό; fut. authentésō, from authéntēs (n.f.), murderer, absolute master, which is from autós (846), himself, and éntea (n.f.) arms, armor. A self–appointed killer with one’s own hand, one acting by his own authority or power. Governing a gen., to use or exercise authority or power over as an autocrat, to domineer (1 Tim. 2:12). See anér (435, XI, C), husband. Syn.: exousiázō (1850), to exercise the right and power to rule; katexousiázō (2715), to exercise full authority over; kurieúō (2961), to lord it over, rule over as lord, and the more intens. katakurieúō (2634), to lord it over completely; basileúō (936), to rule, reign; hēgemoneúō (2230), to act as the ruler, to govern. Ant.: hupēretéō (5256), to serve, be a subordinate; douleúō (1398), to be a slave to, to serve; diakonéō (1247), to be an attendant, to minister.'27 -------
17 Friberg, Friberg, & Miller 'Analytical lexicon of the Greek New Testament‘, volume 4, page 81 (2000)
18 Arndt, Danker, & Bauer, 'A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature‘, page 150 (3rd ed., 2000)
19 Balz & Schneider, 'Exegetical dictionary of the New Testament. Translation of: Exegetisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testamen‘, volume 1, page 178 (1990-c1993)
20 Readers will note that the definition here is very short, and contains only one sense, as this word is only used once in the LXX and only with this meaning; this usage was obsolete by the 1st century AD
21 Lust, Eynikel, & Hauspie, 'A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (electronic rev. ed. 2003)
22 Louw & Nida, 'Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains‘, volume 1, page 473 (2nd ed. 1989)
23 The reference 'BGU1208.37 (i B. C.)‘ cited as an example of the use of the word with the meaning 'to have full power or authority over' (which is cited as the meaning of the word in 1 Timothy 2:12), refers to line 37 of papyrus 1208 in volume 4 of the Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Königlichen (later Staatlichen) Museen zu Berlin, Griechische Urkunden (abbreviated as BGU), a collection of paypri; the papyrus is dated to 27/26BC, from Herakleopolite in Egypt, and the relevant line reads in Greek 'kai emou authentêkotos pros auton peripoiêsai Kalatutei‘, speaking of a man who 'exercised authority‘ over another to have him pay a ferryman
24 Liddell, Scott, & Jones, 'A Greek-English Lexicon‘ (electronic ed., 9th ed. with supplement, 2007)
25 Newman, 'Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament‘, page 28 (1993)
26 Swanson, 'Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament)‘, DBLG 883 (2nd ed. 2001)
27 Zodhiates, 'The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament‘, G831 (electronic ed., 2000)
-
In fact, the meaning of the word was not seriously disputed until 1979, when Catherine Kroeger (then a university classics student), asserted the meaning 'to engage in fertility practices'.11 Although the claim was rejected by the scholarly consensus, debate over the meaning of the word had been opened, and Christians affirming an egalitarian view of the role of women in the church continued to contest the meaning of the word authenteō.12
Reference to a concordance, Bible dictionary, or lexicon is a standard method of determining word meaning. On this subject readers should note the importance of the following modern professional lexicons, as lexical tools used commonly in our community (such as Thayer‘s, Strong‘s, Young‘s, and Vine‘s), are little respected by modern scholarship, and are considered inadequate for serious study and commentary on contested word meanings.
Modern Professional Lexicons Abbreviation Lexicon ANLEX13 Friberg, Friberg, & Miller. (2000). Analytical lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Baker Books. BDAG14 Arndt, Danker, & Bauer. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. EDNT Balz & Schneider. (1990-c1993). Exegetical dictionary of the New Testament. Translation of: Exegetisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testamen. T&T Clark. GES Lust, Eynikel, & Hauspie. (2003). A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. (electronic rev. ed.). Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft (German Bible Society). Lampe Lampe Lampe, Geoffrey. (1961-1968). A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Clarendon Press. Louw/Nida Louw & Nida. (1989). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains. (2nd ed.). United Bible Societies. LSJ915 Liddell, Scott, & Jones. (2007). A Greek-English Lexicon. (electronic ed., 9th rev. ed. with supplement.) Newman Newman. (1993). Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft (German Bible Society), United Bible Societies. Spicq Spicq. (1994). Ernst. (trans.). (ed.). Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. Hendrickson. Swanson Swanson. (2001). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament. (2nd ed.). Logos Research Systems, Inc. TDNT Kittel, Bromiley, & Friedrich. (1964-c1976). Theological dictionary of the New Testament. (electronic ed.). Wm. B. Eedrmans. Zodhiates Zodhiates. (2000). The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament. (electronic ed.). AMG Publishers. Differing in scope, depth, and presentation, these are the standard professional Greek lexicons recognized and used in the scholarly literature and represent the lexical scholarly consensus.16
-------
11 Lutheran Church Missouri Synod Commission on Theology and Church Relations, AUTHENTEIN: A Summary, pages 3-4 (2005)
12 During the past two decades at least 15 studies examining in some detail the lexical data have appeared, mainly among evangelical scholars holding opposing positions on the role of women in the church (commonly referred to as a debate of complementarians vs egalitarians)‘, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, Commission on Theology and Church Relations AUTHENTEIN: A Summary, page 3 (2005)
13 This lexicon only indexes words appearing in the LXX
14 This lexicon focuses specifically on Biblical usage of Greek words, but includes extensive references to extra-Biblical usage
15 This lexicon mainly indexes words appearing in the non-Biblical Greek literature, between approximately 600 BC and 600 AD
16 The scholarly consensus is the general collective agreement of professionals in a given field, but it is not synonymous with 'unanimity'; it refers to a view which has consistently been examined and is agreed on as accurate by the overwhelming majority of qualified professionals in the field (views outside the scholarly consensus are always minority views, and are almost invariably dismissed by professionals as suspect at best, unworthy of notice at worst)
-
The Meaning of Authenteō
Considerable debate has raged over the last twenty years over the meaning of a single Greek word in Paul‘s first epistle to Timothy, and its application to the role of women in the church.
1 Timothy 2:12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet.1
The Greek word in question, here translated 'exercise authority', is authenteō (used by Paul in the present infinitive active form authentein). The precise meaning of this word in this particular context is of importance in understanding exactly what Paul was forbidding women to do.
The difficulty involved in understanding the word is complicated by two factors. The first is that the lexical history of this word is long and complex. Walter Liefeld (an egalitarian writer), describes briefly the word‘s problematically broad semantic range:
A perplexing issue for all is the meaning of authentein. Over the course of its history this verb and its associated noun have had a wide semantic range, including some bizarre meanings, such as committing suicide, murdering one‘s parents, and being sexually aggressive. Some studies have been marred by a selective and improper use of the evidence.2The issue is compounded by the fact that this word is found only once in the New Testament, and is not common in immediately proximate Greek literature. Nevertheless, English Bible translations over the years have been generally in agreement when rendering the word.
English Bible Translations of authentō Version Translation KJV 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.3 RSV 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.4 GNB 12 I do not allow them to teach or to have authority over men; they must keep quiet.5 NIV 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.6 CEV 12 They should be silent and not be allowed to teach or to tell men what to do.7 NASB 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.8 NLT 12 I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly.9 NET 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet.10 Given the substantial agreement among these representative translations (from archaic to modern, formal equivalence to paraphrase), the average Bible student would wonder why such a disagreement exists over this word within the scholarly world.
-------
1 Biblical Studies Press. (2005; 2005). The NET Bible First Edition (Noteless); (1 Ti 2:11-12)
2 Walter Liefeld, Women And The Nature Of Ministry, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (30:51), 1987. The Evangelical Theological Society.
3 The Holy Bible : King James Version. (electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version.; Bellingham WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995), 1 Ti 2:12.
4 The Revised Standard Version (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1971), 1 Ti 2:12.
5 The Holy Bible : The Good News Translation (2nd ed.; New York: American Bible Society, 1992), 1 Ti 2:12.
6 The Holy Bible : New International Version (electronic ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, c1984), 1 Ti 2:11-12.
7 The Contemporary English Version : With Apocrypha. (electronic ed.; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995), 1 Ti 2:12.
8 New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update (LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), 1 Ti 2:12.
9 Holy Bible : New Living Translation. ("Text edition"--Spine.;, 2nd ed.; Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2004), 1 Ti 2:12.; the alternative rendering usurp authority‘ is provided in a footnote
10 Biblical Studies Press. (2005; 2005). The NET Bible First Edition (Noteless); (1 Ti 2:11-12) -
Witherington‟s own words are pertinent here:
'That the so-called Western texthas certain definite theological tendenciesnot found in various other manuscript traditions is sowell-known that it hardly needs rehearsing.'26The evidence for deliberate theological revision of the text within the Western text type is indeed well recognized by the scholarly consensus. The evidence is so apparent and so abundant, that the case is undisputed. This is completely different to the suggestion that the Western text type also contains evidence of deliberate 'anti-feminist' revision of the text, as the evidence for the latter is not in any way equivalent to the evidence for the former.27
-------
26 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984)
27 Together with brother Mark Olsen, the author has co-written a 40 page paper addressing commonly asked questions concerning New Testament textual criticism (especially with regard to the issue of identifying the most reliable manuscripts), which the interested reader may request by email (dixit-dominus (at) thechristadelphians.org)
-
Assessment of alteration, by Witherington and the UBS committee Witherington UBS Committee 'Consider the Western text of Matt 5:32b. D, ita, b, d, k, and other manuscripts omit καὶ through μοιχᾶται in 5:32b. Bruce Metzger suggests that some scribes felt that if the divorced woman is made an adulteress by illegal divorce, then anyone marrying such a woman also commits adultery.
Alternatively, this omission may reflect the tendency of the Western text to highlight and protect male privilege, while also relegating women to a place in the background. In this case, the omission here is of material that reflects badly on men.'21'The reading of B (ὁ … γαμήσας) seems to have been substituted for the reading of the other uncials (ὃς ἐὰν … γαμήσῃ) in order to make the construction parallel to the preceding participial clause (ὁ ἀττολύων). The omission of the words καὶ … μοιχᾶται (D ita, b, d, k Greek and Latin mssacc. to Augustine) may be due to pedantic scribes who regarded them as superfluous, reasoning that if “everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress [when she remarries],” then it would go without saying that “whoever marries a divorced woman [also] commits adultery.”'22 Author’s comment: Once again Metzger makes the point that the scribal tendency to smooth the text (in this case to create a neat parallel), and to remove material perceived as redundant, is an adequate cause for the alteration, so there is no necessity to attribute to this alteration an 'anti-feminist' motivation. Witherington UBS Committee 'This anti-feminist tendency appears also to be in evidence at Col 4:15. While B, 6, 424c, 1739, 1881, et al. have αὐτῆς indicating a church in the house of Nympha, D, G pm, et al. have αὐτοῦ indicating a church in the house of Nymphas.'23 'Νυμφαν can be accented Νύμφαν, from the feminine nominative Νύμφα (“Nympha”), or Νυμφᾶν, from the masculine nominative Νυμφᾶς (“Nymphas”). The uncertainty of the gender of the name led to variation in the following possessive pronoun between αὐτῆς and αὐτοῦ. On the basis chiefly of the weight of B 6 424c 1739 1877 1881 syrh, pal ms copsa Origen, the Committee preferred Νύμφαν … αὐτῆς. The reading with αὐτῶν arose when copyists included ἀδελφούς in the reference.'24 Author’s comment: Metzger notes that the gender of the name was uncertain to start with, giving rise to variations in the text. The difference between the female name Nympha and the male name Nymphas was a matter of accenting the Greek letters one way or another, but the earliest manuscripts did not use any accents at all, meaning that later scribes had to make interpretative decisions at times. There is therefore no need to attribute to this alteration an „anti-feminist‟ motivation, even given the fact that the ambiguity was settled in favour of the male name Nymphas. When all the facts are presented, the argument for significant alterations of the Greek text by 'anti-feminist' scribes becomes significantly diminished. Instead of alterations being observed from the second century onwards, we find instead alterations only from the 4th century onwards, some 200 years later. Instead of evidence of systematic scribal bias in collaboration with emerging 'anti-feminist' attitudes, we find a tiny handful of alterations in a mere handful of manuscripts, none of which contains all of the alterations, and most of which contain only one or two.
Instead of clear evidence of 'anti-feminist' motivation in the case of each alteration, we find clear evidence that normal Western scribal influences (a tendency to paraphrase, eliminating perceived irregularities in the text, smoothing the grammar, creating parallels, and harmonizing with other passages), 25 were in most cases a more likely cause.
-------
21 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.84), (March 1984)
22 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 11 (2nd edition 1994)
23 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.84), (March 1984)
24 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 407 (2nd edition 1994)
25 'The chief characteristic of Western readings is fondness for paraphrase. Words, clauses, and even whole sentences are freely changed, omitted, or inserted. Sometimes the motive appears to have been harmonization, while at other times it was the enrichment of the narrative by the inclusion of traditional or apocryphal material. Some readings involve quite trivial alterations for which no special reason can be assigned', Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page xx (2nd edition 1994)
-
Assessment of alteration, by Witherington and the UBS committee Witherington UBS Committee 'In the Western text of chap. 18, there is a definite effort to reduce the prominence of Priscilla, probably because she appears to the editors to be assuming her husband's first place and also because she was a well-known teacher of a male Christian leader, Apollos.'17 'Apparently the Western reviser (D itgig syr copsa arm al) desired to reduce the prominence of Priscilla, for he either mentions Aquila first (as here) or inserts the name of Aquila without including Priscilla (as in verses 3, 18, and 21). The unusual order, the wife before the husband, must be accepted as original, for there was always a tendency among scribes to change the unusual to the usual. In the case of Priscilla and Aquila, however, it was customary in the early church to refer to her before her husband (cf. Ro 16.3; 2 Tm 4.19).10 On an anti-feminist tendency, see the comment on 17.12 above.'18 Author’s comment: Although it is possible to read the tendency in some of the Western witnesses to place Aquila first or insert Aqulia's name without including Priscilla as a desire to reduce the prominence of Priscilla, there is also the fact (as Metzger observes), that the general tendency of the Western text type scribes was to 'change the unusual to the usual'. Since in their day (centuries later), it seemed to them unusual that Priscilla would be mentioned first, they altered the text to conform to what they considered to be more likely to be original. The fact that they did this with many other passages indicates that there is no necessity to attribute to this alteration an 'anti-feminist' motivation, even though in this case it is entirely likely. Witherington UBS Committee 'W. M. Ramsay has observed rightly that the omission in Codex Bezae of καὶ γυνὴ ὀνόματι Δάμαρις at 17:34 is in all likelihood more evidence of an anti-feminist tendency in this textual tradition.'19 'The omission in codex Bezae of the words καὶ γυνὴ ὀνόματι Δάμαρις has been taken by some (e. g. Wm. M. Ramsay) to be another indication of the anti-feminist attitude of the scribe (see the comment on ver. 12 above).9 It is, however, more likely, as A. C. Clark suggests,10 that a line in an ancestor of codex Bezae had been accidentally omitted, so that what remains in D is ἐν οἷς καὶ Διονύσιός τις Ἀρεοτταγείτης εὐσχήμων καὶ ἕτεροι σὺν αὐτοῖς (“among whom also was a certain Dionysius, an Areopagite of high standing, and others with them”). In either case, however, the concluding phrase σὺν αὐτοῖς suggests that Luke originally specified more than one person (Dionysius) as among Paul‟s converts. It is curious that codex Bezae reads εὐσήχμωνto indicate the high standing of Dionysius, though being an Areopagite would naturally imply his honorable estate without adding the adjective.11 Its presence, according to an ingenious explanation proposed by J. Armitage Robinson,12 is to be accounted for as follows. According to Robinson it is significant that in Acts the word εὐσήχμων is used only of women (13.50; 17.12). Under the influence of its usage earlier in Acts some gallant scribe added the word after Δάμαρις .13 Later, after the church had taken her stand against the pagan or heretical claims advanced in behalf of her ambitious women, a more orthodox if less chivalrous transcriber deleted the name of Damaris altogether, but left the adjective standing, a witness at once against his own deed and the deed of the scribe who had gone before him.'20 Author’s comment: There is a case to be made here that the alteration is a deliberate attempt to diminish the importance of the women in the text. However, as Metzger says, it is more likely to have been due to an accidental omission, so there is no necessity to attribute to this alteration an 'anti-feminist' motivation. -------
17 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984)
18 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 413 (2nd edition 1994)
19 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.84), (March 1984)
20 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 407 (2nd edition 1994)
-
Assessment of alteration, by Witherington and the UBS committee Witherington USB Committee 'We find the same phenomenon at 17:12. D* alters the text so that both the men and women are prominent (καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ τῶν εὐσχημόνων ἄνδρες καὶ γυναῖκες) and thus the women's prominence is lessened somewhat.'13 'After beginning the verse with a rather banal observation, τινὲς μὲν οὖν αὐτῶν ἐττίστευσαν, τίνες δὲ ἡττίστησαν (“Some of them, therefore, believed, but some did not believe,” cf. 28.24), codex Bezae smooths the grammar of the generally received text and reads καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ τῶν εὐσχημόνων ἄνδρες καὶ γυναῖκες ἰκανοὶ ἐττίστευσαν (“and many of the Greeks and men and women of high standing believed”).
Besides being better Greek the readjusted order has the effect of lessening any importance given to women (cf. comments on ver. 34 and on 18.26). According to Menoud, “the antifeminist tendency of the writer of D seems to be more or less general in the last decades of the first century. In any case it is not one of the major trends in the thought of the Western recension.”'14Comment: Metzger points out that the reason for Codex Bezae (D), altering the text was to smooth the grammar and render it into better Greek. Such alterations are a common feature of the Western text type, especially Codex Bezae, so this textual alteration is simply doing what the scribes of the Western text type typically did in any case. There is therefore no need to attribute to this alteration an 'anti-feminist' motivation. Witherington USB Committee 'Of a similar nature is the addition of καὶ τέκνοις at 1:14 by Codex Bezae so that women are no longer an independent group but are simply the wives of the apostles.'15 'Instead of the colorless σὺν γυναιξίν codex Bezae reads σὺν ταῖς γυναιξὶν καὶ τέκνοις (“with their wives and children”); compare 21.5, where the Tyrian Christians accompany Paul to his ship σὺν γυναιξίν καὶ τέκνοις, 16 and the Dura fragment of Tatian‟s Diatessaron, which apparently17 refers to the wives of those who accompanied Jesus from Galilee.'16 Comment: Metzger notes that the original text was 'colorless'. It is characteristic of the Western text type to alter the text to make it more stylistically 'interesting', and in this case Metzger also points out that the scribe altered the text to conform to the grammatical pattern already existing in Acts 21:5, an alteration which the scribe considered to be more likely to be in conformity with the original.
Such 'harmonization' is also characteristic of the Western text type, so there is no necessity to attribute this alteration to an 'anti-feminist' motivation. In any case, does associating the women with the apostles as their wives really diminish them in any meaningful way? This sounds like the imposition of a 21st century cultural view onto the 1st century text.-------
13 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984)
14 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 402 (2nd edition 1994)
15 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984)
16 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 246 (2nd edition 1994)
-
From this survey of Witherington's evidence it may be seen that he does not in fact present any actual textual evidence earlier than the 4th century, and most of his textual witnesses date to the 5th century. It is significant that these errors are all found in the Western text type, since this text type is most well known not for its 'anti-feminist' bias, but for its general tendency to paraphrase and edit the text in a particularly arbitrary manner.9
It is also significant that almost all of these errors are found in only one manuscript tradition of the Western text (D), with only three errors appearing in any other Western manuscript tradition (Gpm, ita, b, d, k, h), as this demonstrates that these are not even systematic changes to one particular manuscript tradition, let alone the entire Western text type.
This is one of the reasons why modern textual scholars generally view few (if any), of these alterations as genuinely motivated by a desire to minimize the role of women in the early church. They are so few and far between, so inconsistently found, and some of them are so much more readily attributable to accidental scribal error or the desire to render the text more grammatically, that they contradict the idea that the New Testament was revised studiously by groups of 'anti-feminist' scribes as a result of changing attitudes to women in early Christian history.
Thirdly, it should be pointed out that Witherington is an egalitarian scholar, whose interpretation of these textual alterations is demonstrably influenced by his own sensitivity to the subject. A comparison of Witherington's statements on the texts with the statements of the United Bible Societies' Committee,10 shows that in a number of cases there is a more likely explanation for the text's alteration than any 'anti-feminist' attitude by a particular scribe.
The comments from the UBS Committee in the following table were in fact written by Bruce Metzger, and are considerably more moderate on the subject than his own previous comments in 'The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration', written two years earlier. Comments are given after the text from Witherington and the UBS Committee.
Assessment of alteration, by Witherington and the UBS committee Witherington USB Committee 'While there is some ambiguity in the text of 17:4 as we have it in p74, K, A, B, E, P (so that γυναικῶν τε τῶν ττρώτων might be translated "the wives of leading men" instead of rendering "women of the first magnitude"), D and others give us the unambiguous καὶ γυναῖκες τῶν ττώτων.'11 'It is possible to translate γυναικῶν τε τῶν ττρώτων “and wives of the leading men,” an interpretation that the Western text enforced by reading καὶ γυναῖκες τῶν ττρώτων. A majority of the Committee preferred the reading supported by P74 א A B E P Ψ 33 81 614 1739 al, not only because of superior external attestation, but also because it was thought much more likely that copyists would replace the less usual connective by the more common καί (or δέ, as in l1021).'12 Comment: Both Witherington and Metzger agree that the text here is actually ambiguous in the first place, and could be read either way. This is therefore not clearly a matter of a deliberately „anti-feminist‟ reading being introduced, but a scribal decision as to which particular interpretation of the text made more sense to them. -------
9 'The chief characteristic of Western readings is fondness for paraphrase. Words, clauses, and even whole sentences are freely changed, omitted, or inserted. Sometimes the motive appears to have been harmonization, while at other times it was the enrichment of the narrative by the inclusion of traditional or apocryphal material. Some readings involve quite trivial alterations for which no special reason can be assigned', Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page xx (2nd edition 1994)
10 The committee responsible for the UBS Greek New Testament, 4th edition, the Greek text from which almost all modern English Bible translations are made (see the section „Standard works‟ in the introduction of the present work)
11 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984); Witherington says 'D and others', but does not specify which other texts he is referring to
12 Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 401 (2nd edition 1994)
-
Misogynist Alterations of Scripture
An argument found among egalitarian scholars is that the New Testament text was altered by later generations of Christians in order to validate developing misogynist attitudes. This argument is found articulated in particular detail by egalitarian Ben Witherington III:
'In view of the above evidence, it appears that there was a concerted effort by some part of the Church, perhaps as early as the late first century or beginning of the second, to tone down texts in Luke's second volume that indicated that women played an important and prominent part in the early days of the Christian community.'1
Witherington says 'it appears that there was a concerted effort by some part of the Church, perhaps as early as the late first century or beginning of the second'2, but when it comes to presenting the actual evidence which can be observed, Witherington does not cite any textual evidence earlier than the 4th century,3 some 200 years after the 2nd century.4
Text cited by Witherington; Passage Text Name Text Type Date Matthew 5:32 D5, ita, b, d, k 6 Western 4th century, 5th century Acts 1:14 D Western 5th century Acts 17:4 D Western 5th century Acts 17:12 D Western 5th century Acts 17:34 D Western 5th century Acts 18:3, 18, 21, 26 ith 7 Western 5th century Colossians 4:15 D, Gpm 8 Western 5th century, 9th century -------
1 Witherington says 'D and others', 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.83), (March 1984); in fact, as shall be demonstrated, Witherington does not cite any texts earlier than the 4th century
2 Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.83)
3 In fact he only cites one text as early as the 4th century
4 Witherington's most frequently referred to text is the 5th century text D (Codex Bezae), but the Greek text type (called 'Western'), which D preserves cannot be dated any earlier than 250 AD, even if quotations from early Christian writers are used (there are no Western type Greek manuscripts or papyri earlier than the 4th century)
5 A Greek/Latin diglot, also known as Codex Bezae Cantabrigensis, or Dea (where 'ea' refers to the content of the text, the gospels (known as 'Evangelium') and Acts (known as 'Apostolos'), or '05' in the Gregory-Aland text numbering system; Witherington says 'D and others' ('The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984), but does not specify which other texts he is referring to
6 This is an African Old Latin copy of an earlier Greek text (the 'it' stands for 'Itala', meaning Latin, and the other letters stand for various specific copies of this Latin manuscript); this same reading is also found in Greek and Latin manuscripts, according to the 4th-5th century Christian writer Augustine
7 Witherington does not refer specifically to any particular text, but does quote JH Ropes as citing this text, 'The Beginnings of Christianity (London: Macmillan, 1926) 3. 178, note on v 26', in Witherington, 'The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts', Journal of Biblical Literature (103.1.82), (March 1984), while Metzger, 'A Textual Commentary On the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Fourth Revised Edition)', page 246 (2nd edition 1994), notes that manuscripts itgig (a 13th century Old Latin manuscript), syr (a 5th century Syriac translation) copsa (a 4th century Coptic translation), arm (a 5thcentury Armenian translation), contain the same reading, but this does not provide Witherington with any textual evidence earlier than the 4th century
8 The text referred to as 'Gpm' (the 'pm' stands for the Latin 'permulti' meaning 'very many', and indicates that many manuscripts of this tradition have this reading), is a 9th century Greek/Latin interlinear diglot also known as Codex Boernerianus (Gregory-Aland number 012); Witherington (ibid, page 84), says 'D, G pm, et al. [and others]', but does not say which other manuscripts he is referring to
The Sister’s Role – The Bible’s Large Picture
in Christadelphian Publications
Posted
Page 5
Introduction
This booklet is a review of ‘All One – NT’ and ‘All One – OT’, two papers written by Brother Ian and Sister Averil McHaffie which present a case for the increased participation of sisters in the ecclesia. The preface from the first paper ‘All One – NT’ is reproduced here in order for the two papers to be introduced in the words of their authors.
This review does not directly address the details of a number of the arguments made in ‘All One – NT’ and ‘All One – OT’. It does not, for example, enter into a discussion of the meaning of various words the meaning of which is contested (such as HSUCHIA, ‘silence’, EXOUSIA, ‘authority’, KEFALH, ‘head’, and AUTHENTEIN, ‘usurp authority’), nor does it address certain interpretations of (page 6) the historical background of the New Testament passages under question (such as the beliefs of the Gnostics).
Such is not the purpose of the review. It simply examines the method of interpretation and process of reasoning by which the authors derive their conclusions.
There are many other articles, books, and papers which address specifically the role of sisters from a traditional Christadelphian point of view. Readers will find the following helpful:
The appendices to this booklet contain other material which provides further challenges to those advocating changes to the role of sisters such as purported by the authors of “All One”.