Holmes examines four exegetical devices employed by all sides in the debate on 1 Tim. 2.9-15, proposing that together they create a 'whirlwind' effect which obscures the text's meaning. She concludes that (1) the immediate context is general, not ecclesial; (2) background often reconstructed from passages elsewhere in the Pastorals is misleading; (3) comparison with 1 Cor. 14.34-35 can similarly mislead; and (4) the conjunction gar ('for') has been allowed unduly to dominate interpretation. The writer of the letter, it is argued, has been misunderstood since very early in the Christian...