This work was originally a doctoral dissertation in 1995. Interaction with some later works has been incorporated, though it appears that the major argument of the volume essentially predates 1995. It is the author’s thesis that “several contextual, linguistic, grammatical and literary components in 1 Tim. 2.9–15 have universally been either ignored or misunderstood” (18). Three main approaches to the text are catalogued, but each is found to be problematic.