« Solar-cell business poised for huge growth | Main | DBE: Chapter 14 – The Priority of Spirit Gifting for Church Ministry »

Oct 18, 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Comment removed at author's request.

Michael Kruse

Thanks Jorge!

Somewhere around here I have a couple of articles by egalitarian writers who would support your claim that not all agree with Bellville. I took a quick look when I was doing that post and when I could not find them I decided I might post something later. What I seem recalling is that while they differed with Belleville on the Grammar the differed with other folks on the implications.

Thanks for raising this. I will take a look at the article (eventually) and see if I can dig up the articles. Maybe Kostenberger's article will reference them.


Rusty Bullerman

Belleville's article is a very strong one. She documents her claims and quotes the authorities. Kostenberger must look beyond the verb to the verbal noun. This opens up a lot of other possibilities. She also engages the other authors of the book with the same precision and detail. I fail to see how this is a weak article. I would very interested to see Kostenberger and his buds respond with equal academic precision to her arguments. The fact that she is "out of step" with other egalitarians strikes me as a non-sequitur. This is par for the course as far as the rejoinders I have read.

I have read two of the Complementarians that accept Kostenberger's claim. Padgett accepts it then two lines later refutes Kostenberger's claim that teaching is always positive in Paul. Padgett shows that it is negative in at least two places in 1 Timothy alone. He then uses Kostenberger's point to refute Kostenberger's claim about Paul excluding women from teaching and any exercise of authority. Since this is one of the foundational points of the book, I fail to see how Kostenberger and company excel and exceed Belleville's and Padgett's critique.

The second egalitarian, Craig Keener, acknowledges Kostenberger's point and then shows that he doesn't have to use either sense to make his case in 1 Timothy 2 in Women in Ministry, 2 Views.

To show you that egalitarians cannot be cut from the same mold, Keener subscribes to the Eternal subordination of the Son, an almost exclusivly complementarian position. It is not safe or good scholarship to base your convictions and arguments on a person's label in a debate with the corollary assumption that they all hold to the same tenets.


Jeremy Pierce

I think Kostenberger acknowledges that an occurrence of the verb for teaching can refer to something negative when a negative adjective or adverb modifies it. The occurrences I know of in I Timothy are such instances. What he argues, I believe, is that unmodified instances of that verb are always positive in Paul. I don't have it in front of me, but that's what I seem to remember of his argument.

Michael Kruse

The grammar stuff is hardly my forte. I do well to compose complete sentences in English. I understand Belleville's and Kostenberger's claims about the grammar but I am not the best to make and definitive claims. I have asked others who live in such debates, and who I trust, who find Belleville's position persuasive.

In short, it is all Greek to me.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Kruse Kronicle on Kindle

Check It Out