Authentein: Paul & Timothy reading the LXX
It’s becoming clearer that Paul and Timothy didn’t read the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible.
Below is what one writes in Greek to the other followed by the ESV translators’ reading:
διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω, οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ’ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ.
I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
Our BLT co-blogger Suzanne has elsewhere dealt with authentein, and has already helped us see a plausible reading of the Greek verb in question, not from the ESV lens but from the “the literature contemporary with the NT” where it “essentially means ‘to be master,’ to be superior to another in prestige, authority, or skill.”
Here’s a passage from the LXX that another suggests Paul (and Timothy too) surely had in view:
τέκνων τε φονέας ἀνελεήμονας καὶ σπλαγχνοφάγων ἀνθρωπίνων σαρκῶν θοῖναν καὶ αἵματος, ἐκ μέσου μύστας θιάσου 6 καὶ αὐθέντας γονεῖς ψυχῶν ἀβοηθήτων, ἐβουλήθης ἀπολέσαι διὰ χειρῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν.
Here’s a fair English translation of that:
“Do you remember the ancient inhabitants of your holy land? You scorned them for their unholy ways, for their sorcery and profane rituals, their callous killing of children, their cannibal feasts on human flesh and blood. They practiced secret rituals in which parents slaughtered their own defenseless children” (Wisdom of Solomon, 12:3-6, TIB). [my boldfont emphasis to match the Greek above]
This is from the blog by “bobandhelga” here and here.
This blog post writer goes on to tie this interpretation, which Paul and Timothy would have and could have found in the LXX, to this interpretation of the Greek verb among Paul’s and Timothy’s contemporaries:
Similar uses of this word can be found throughout the Greek literature of the New Testament era. Writing in the same time period as the apostle Paul, Diodorus Siculus used the word on three separate occasions to mean: “perpetrators of sacrilege,” “author of crimes,” or “supporters of violent actions.” Also writing in the 1st century A.D., Flavius Josephus used the term twice to mean: “perpetrator of a crime” and “perpetrators of a slaughter.” In the same period, Philo Judaeus used the term once to mean “being one’s own murderer” (Wilshire, p. 28). [boldfont emphasis in the original blogpost]
That’s just different from the ESV, isn’t it? And what a difference it makes.
HT to Eric Weiss on fb, who leads into this insight with the following comment from that blog:
Bob Edwards, I just read your article, then explained it to my husband…and then I sat down and read 1 Timothy, for the first time in 22 years as a Christian, without fear, cringing, or despair. I’m weepy right now. There is no value or price tag I can put on this moment. I’ve spent the entirety of my Christian life (first in the Baptist church, then in other complementarian denominations) *justifying my existence* as a strong, vocal, outspoken woman, and will do it no longer. I honestly could not reconcile some egalitarian positions of 1 Tim 2 before now–they all felt like they were reading into the text, whereas this gives a detailed historical basis for it. I can’t thank you enough.
We were already going to look for an egalitarian church with our new move, but now I’m *excited* about it. Thank you.
BLT 
“Say it ain’t so Joe, say it ain’t so.”
Much insight can often be found in the LXX.
Dana
So. You are suggesting that the second clause in 1 Timothy 2:12 means that “a woman ought not to be a killer or murderer of a man” but be in stillness. I think that such counsel could be assumed among first century Christians without saying. Certainly, the application of such an interpretation is not only redundant, it is also incongruous within the context.
While I don’t subscribe to the CBMW perspective on relations between the sexes, and that the translation of the Greek is imperfect in all English translations (very precociously arrogant of me), it would be useful to honestly and scrupulously check out all Greek texts on the matter, not just the ones you think support your pre-existing position. My own suggestion is Euripides, The Suppliants, line 442, in which the use of the term αὐθέντας is most similar and parallel although not talking relations between the sexes. (perseus.tufts.edu)
Considering that there is another Greek term, which is more often used both in the Greek New Testament and other extant non-biblical Greek literature, namely exousia; authentein references a specific kind of authority, namely that which is authored by the person’s own arm or authority, rather than one being which is delegated by the ecclesiastical leadership.
A church which is not willing to delegate such authority to a woman is a dangerous church, especially considering the scandals that are occurring at the present time. The victims of such scandals have no one of their own gender in the ecclesiastical organization who may empathize (rather than merely sympathize) and advocate on their behalf (re: Karen Hinkley, The Villiage Church of Matt Chandler).
Intellectual integrity is of far greater virtue and value than which side a person is on with regard to any controversial issue. Without it, one is “like the blind, we feel our way along the wall, groping like those without eyes. We stumble at midday as in the twilight; among the vigorous we are like the dead.” (Isaiah 59:10)
Johnny, The “suggestion” is the one made by the blogging “bobandhelga” and by Leland E. Wilshire, whom is quoted. And most importantly, it’s what we read in not just the LXX but also the writings contemporary with and slightly after the NT.
Thanks for bringing in Euripides, and the one instance in all of the extant plays by Euripides where the Greek phrase in question is used. I’d suggest we all read this in its context, and would encourage a look at how various English translators have rendered it. Rosanna Warren’s Englishing in verse brings out the violence. Nonetheless, you make a good point not to leave out our looking at all the texts written that employ the term. It’s great advice, and I think at the least we see ambiguity; and what emerges from our homework is the fact that the preponderance of uses of the word show that the writers of it meant it to convey violence or one sort or another.
One lesson for us all might be to tolerate ambiguities. Ironically Aristotle used “pure Greek” ambiguously when advising his elite male-only disciples to avoid ambiguities. That’s a bit of an aside, but it’s also a segue back into the other word you suggest we should consider around notions of “authority.” It’s not always as it seems however:
The Greek word that can be used for authoritarian acts is one that is also used for liberal deeds:
ἐξουσία
English translators of the “Politics” of Aristotle at page 1319a all prefer to go with the latter use when rendering this caution to men living in a democracy:
ἡ γὰρ ἐξουσία τοῦ πράττειν ὅ τι ἐθέλῃ τις οὐ δύναται φυλάττειν τὸ ἐν ἑκάστῳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων φαῦλον
“for where absolute freedom is allowed, there is nothing to restrain the evil which is inherent in every man” (Benjamin Jowett)
“for liberty to do whatever one likes cannot guard against the evil that is in every man’s character” (Harris Rackham)
“Freedom to do exactly what one likes cannot do anything to keep in check that element of badness which exists in each and all of us” (Thomas Alan Sinclair)
Since you’re seeming to direct your comment to me, the author of the blog post, pointing to things authored by others, let me confess my own position – whether or not it’s a “pre-existing position” as you put it. I notice you imply that from such a position I may have a lack of integrity, perhaps a lack of honesty. Well, perhaps. My own position is extremely biased, deeply so, perhaps unconsciously. And so in that sense, you might call it “pre-existing.” I do so very much appreciate this view by one Bible translator. Please let me quote her at length on the point of my issue here:
What is lodged in my own unconsciousness, perhaps, and what is too often incongruous with what comes out in my writing and my speaking as if that’s more conscious is the notion that the male writers of the NT were caught up in a system of male supremacy. Thus it shouldn’t surprise me, or anybody if you’d allow me to believe that, when a Bible text sounds sexist. Nonetheless, and this is my own take away from Bird, I’m most responsible reading this far out as somebody the text is written “for” or “to”; but rather as somebody eavesdropping, overhearing, listening in to. I get the implications of an “authoritative” text, like, say, the Bible, or the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution of the United States. There are personal connections to me and mine, here and now. But I like reading a plurality of perspectives and find that the notion of ambiguities and especially the tolerance of them is helpful. I do hope this helps you some, somewhat knowing where I stand, whether with “pre-existing” views, as if these must remain fixed somehow, or not.
Finally, since you get us thinking about Pastor Chandler’s inactions and silences surely you’re thinking about not only Ms. Hinkley but other victims of the violations that have occured at the Village Church. (https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/10/17/the-village-church-in-texas-may-be-botching-yet-another-sexual-abuse-case/).