Isn't "a woman" from 1 Timothy 2 clear that she is "generic woman"?

Isn't "a woman" from 1 Timothy 2 clear that she is "generic woman"?

Q: You say that “a woman” in 1 Timothy 2:11 & 12 is the same terminology as Paul calling “a man” living in sin in 1 Corinthians 5. Wouldn’t you have to admit that the normal grammatical reading in 1 Corinthians 5 which says that Paul is talking about a particular man, not “all men”, is clearer there than in the passage in 1 Timothy 2 talking about “a woman” not meaning “all women”?

A: Absolutely, yes, I agree. That is why the 1 Corinthian 5 passage is not considered a difficult passage. 1 Timothy 2 has many difficult elements and it has been considered a difficult passage throughout church history.

However for one to insist that “a woman” is generic woman or “all women” in verses 11 & 12 one would have to disregard the clear tie that Paul makes to the first deceived woman in verse 14 & his indisputable reference to “she” in verse 15. We choose not to disregard any part of the passage or any part of the grammar and we believe that the entire passage is inspired with the exact words and grammar that the Holy Spirit wanted to convey to show that “a woman” is a single deceived woman in Ephesus.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: