1. Contextually, does this translation make sense within the flow of Paul’s argument about men and women, Adam and Eve, learning, teaching and quietness?

2. Lexically, does it fit with the way authenteō is used in other Greek literature of the period?

3. Translationally, does it make sense of the ways that the early church fathers and subsequent translators rendered and understood authenteō in their own languages?

4. Etymologically, does it shed any light on the ways that subsequent words (like “authority” and “authenticity”) have derived from it?

So here’s my suggestion: what about stepping away from “authority” language for a moment – which is where almost all of the debate, online and in print, is focused – and think in terms of “mastery” instead? That would leave us with this: “I do not permit a woman to teach or master a man; she must remain quiet.”

Contextually it fits, but then most of the options do. Despite the lengthy online exchanges over whether the word is “positive” or “negative” (like here and here), in this context at least, Paul clearly thinks of it “negatively” enough to prohibit women from doing it, but not so negatively as to prohibit everyone from doing it. (That is why the recent NIV went for the more neutral “assume authority”, which could go either way.) “Mastery” could be good or bad, depending on the context.

Lexically, it fits very well with the way authenteō is used elsewhere. (The first example below involves someone celebrating their “mastery”, and the third involves someone decrying it, which is why none of the “authority”-based translations can make sense of all three texts.) Try these on for size:

I was surprised that there was no argument. And since I had mastered him, within the hour he agreed to secure for Calatytis the boatman at the same fare. (Letter from Tryphon to Asclepiades)

If Saturn alone is ruler of the body and masters Mercury and the moon, if he has a dignified position with reference to the universe and angels, he makes his subjects lovers of the body. (Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos)

Masters will master their servants savagely, and servants will assume an unruly demeanor towards their masters. (Hippolytus, On the End of the World)

Translationally, it helps too. Plenty of writers have pointed to Jerome’s use of dominari to translate authenteō into Latin - which, if you are interested, was later changed by Erasmus to the stronger usurpare, hence the King James’s choice of “usurp authority.” “Mastery” language shows clearly how you get from authenteō to dominari, given that a dominus was a master or lord, and from there to the more negative connotations of English terms like “domineer” or “lord it over.” (When you see those terms in an English Bible today, as in Mark 10:42 and 1 Peter 5:3, they translate a quite different word, katakurieuō).

The most surprising payoff may be the least important, namely the etymological one. How on earth, we might wonder, does the same Greek word give rise to the words “authority” and “authenticity,” which sound so very different? Again, think about mastery. Clearly, a “master” is an authority figure. But it is also the word we give to the “master copy,” the authentic and original version of something, the one from which other versions derive both their “authority” and their “authenticity.” No doubt there is a broader point to be made here about the way Western people (wrongly) see “authenticity” precisely as a rejection of “authority,” but that’s for another day.

So that’s my translation suggestion for the day. Any takers?