1 Timothy 2:12

[Granny2young]

Can we get some more thoughts on that verse in Timothy please. I justified myself for not teaching an adult Sunday School class by that verse. I was told by our pastor that I was wrong in feeling that way..that that verse meant that women should not have business dealings in the church when there is a man to do it, and that it was okay to teach a class in God's eyes. Sorry preacher, I love you, but I can't make my heart interpret the scripture that way.

[J.A.I]

But I do not allow a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence.
1Ti 2:12 MKJV

The verse for those who need it. Since Granny2young had a genuine question and concern, I split her post from the now closed thread. If this turns personal, please beware that it will be handled accordingly.

In Christ,
J.A.I

[Harry the Heretic]

In my congregation women can only teach children including unbaptised males. If a male grows up and remains unbaptised he is moved into the adult class which is always tought by a male. young children are not baptised so anyone who is baptsised is moved into a teen class, or adult class, again, both being taught by men.

God bless you for your courage.

[twistedsketch]

Well, teaching children and discipling other women is definitely within bounds. And any ministry position where you'd be helping the poor, such as a deaconess. It's just when it comes to handling men that there is a limitation.

[Granny2young]

at what age should a woman stop teaching a sunday school class? is teaching teens okay?

[twistedsketch]

In my experience, it was always the men who taught in the youth groups and their wives were there, working with the girls, building relationships, discipling, that sort of thing. And the other male staff did that with the guys. Since I believe teenagers ought to be raised as young men and women, rather than children, I'd rather not have a woman teaching the young men in a youth group. Now there was also a time when the girls and the guys split up and a couple college girls came in for a Q&A. The theme was Christian dating and that was in the middle of a 3 week series. I don't see a problem with that. The person who was in charge of that guys group was a man and he taught the rest of the time.

[Rebirth In Flames]

Paul was very likely prohibiting the Ephesian women, not all women, from preaching. (see 2:9-15).. aside from this verse to put things in context here, he did in fact commend women within the church who held leadership roles, (i.e. Phoebe, Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa, Euodia, and Syntyche). In 1 Corinthians 11:5 Paul comments on women publicly praying and prophesizing.. however the women in the Ephesian church seemed to be abusing their power in the church and their new-found freedom in Christ. Because these women were new converts, they did not yet have the necessary experience, knowledge, or Christian maturity to teach those who already had extensive Scriptural experience.



I hope that helped, there’s quite a few churches these days who focus on that one verse rather than putting in context of whom it was told to and the circumstances regarding it. (=

[twistedsketch]

Where did you get those interesting context details?

[J.A.I]

Research ;)

[BarbB]

And what about Beth Moore who is a Sunday School teacher at her church. Though admittedly her Bible studies are geared to women (Thank you Father!)!

[Rebirth In Flames]

For a church to not let women work in the church and take up leadership roles, solely based upon 1 Timothy, is to show their lack of biblical knowledge. Whenever I come across a church that holds contradictory beliefs or beliefs that prove a lack of research, red flags go up in my head and I basically just stay away from them and focus on my own walk with Christ. I just hate to see people taking things way out of context, as this was a good example of that.

[tesnusxenos]

here is an interesting link on this subject http://www.indwes.edu/tuesday/Women-blockers-i-respect.htm It talks about the other rules that people who are against women teaching should also be following if their walk is not hypocritical.

[Harry the Heretic]

here is an interesting link on this subject http://www.indwes.edu/tuesday/Women-blockers-i-respect.htm It talks about the other rules that people who are against women teaching should also be following if their walk is not hypocritical.
I read the article and though there is a lot of truth in the author's assessment of the hypocrisy of man, his perspective and that of the men he criticizes is skewed.

Many see the role of ministry as noble and grand. Who has not imagined being one of the apostles or prophets and longed for that intimacy or stature.

I do not long for it. Almost all of them were murdered. They were despised, they had hard lives. So do true ministers. They bear many burdens, they must give of themselves constantly, they even sacrifice their families for God's purpose. It is a dirty, exhausting, draining call if truly performed in accordance to the will of God. Unfortunately I believe some see it as glamorous but the reality is that it should be a life of sacrifice.

The leaders of a church are the "feet washers", or they should be.

I wonder if the author of the article (assuming he is married or in a relationship) would ask his wife or daughter to defend their own "honor", while he sat back. Would he request that we send our daughters off to war? If he is offended would he have his wife fight the battle for him? I could list many more instances than he in proof of his own constituencies hypocrisy.

the true hierarchy in order of privilege and honor, not responsibility is thus:

children
women and wives
men and husbands

Should I ask my wife to wash my feet as well as the whole congregations and die for us if necessary? My life is a life of service to them, and a Presbyters even more so as he must minister to me and my family as well.

[bliz]

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

So this is the situation Tuimothy is facing and that Paul is addresing.

The Greek verb used here is 'epirtrepsein' to permit or to allow for a specific purpose rather than an overall permission for ever and always. Parents use this kind of permission all the time "Can I ride my bike to Billy's?" "Well, that's outside the area where you may ride, but you have been quite responsible lately, so, yes, I permit you to do it today." Some Biblical scholars feel that "I am presently not allowing..." would be a far more accurate translation. The verse would mean "Until women have learned what they need in order to get a full grasp of the true teaching, they are not to teach or have authority over men.”

Authority. The Greek noun in this verse is "authentein" is used no where else in scripture. And it was not frequently used in writings of the day. It is not the same word used elsewhere in the Bible when authority is being spoken of. This word has a dark meaning. It is often used in reference to murder, suicide or parents who had children conceived in pagan sex rituals.

Other passages of scripture have Paul instructing how women are to speak propohetically, and cites women as leaders in the church. In Romans 16 Pheobe is called "diakonos" - which literally means servant, but elsewhere is translated as 'deacon'.

I think careful study of the passage makes it clear that women's speaking and teaching is not prohibited overall, but it was for a short time in this congregation.

In Acts 18:26 we have Priscilla teaching Apollas. And most signifigently, in John 20:17 the risen Jesus instructs Mary to go and tell the disciples that Christ has risen. That seems to me to be a command direct from the Son for God for a woman to preach to men.

Having said all of that, I don't think that Christians will ever come to agreement on this issue on this side of heaven and we need to find ways to live peacably and respectfully together.

[Harry the Heretic]

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

So this is the situation Tuimothy is facing and that Paul is addresing.

The Greek verb used here is 'epirtrepsein' to permit or to allow for a specific purpose rather than an overall permission for ever and always. Parents use this kind of permission all the time "Can I ride my bike to Billy's?" "Well, that's outside the area where you may ride, but you have been quite responsible lately, so, yes, I permit you to do it today." Some Biblical scholars feel that "I am presently not allowing..." would be a far more accurate translation. The verse would mean "Until women have learned what they need in order to get a full grasp of the true teaching, they are not to teach or have authority over men.”

Authority. The Greek noun in this verse is "authentein" is used no where else in scripture. And it was not frequently used in writings of the day. It is not the same word used elsewhere in the Bible when authority is being spoken of. This word has a dark meaning. It is often used in reference to murder, suicide or parents who had children conceived in pagan sex rituals.

Other passages of scripture have Paul instructing how women are to speak propohetically, and cites women as leaders in the church. In Romans 16 Pheobe is called "diakonos" - which literally means servant, but elsewhere is translated as 'deacon'.

I think careful study of the passage makes it clear that women's speaking and teaching is not prohibited overall, but it was for a short time in this congregation.

In Acts 18:26 we have Priscilla teaching Apollas. And most signifigently, in John 20:17 the risen Jesus instructs Mary to go and tell the disciples that Christ has risen. That seems to me to be a command direct from the Son for God for a woman to preach to men.

Having said all of that, I don't think that Christians will ever come to agreement on this issue on this side of heaven and we need to find ways to live peacably and respectfully together.

Repsectfully I must say your arguement falls short. Your position requires a context that is not Paul's. Paul gives the perspective of his commandment in the next 2 verses;

1 Timothy 2
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

God Bless

[Harry the Heretic]

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

To understand this passage we need to understand to whom it was written. Paul wrote to Timothy who was now leading the church in Ephesus. The church there had been undergoing some major attacks by Gnostics and many within the church had been influenced by their teaching.

Gnostics held some quasi-Christian beliefs, as well as some that were quite different. Among them, and important to this passage, the belief that women held and elevated position and were to be worshiped. They taught that Eve had been created first and then Adam. Women in the church who were Gnostics or who had been influenced were creating a lot of problems by wanting to exercise these clearly wrong beliefs.

Further, Gnosticism had started out ot Greek and Jewish roots, but it had begun to attract a lot of pagans as well, many of whom did not realize the differences between Christianity and Gnosticism.

So this is the situation Tuimothy is facing and that Paul is addresing.

The Greek verb used here is 'epirtrepsein' to permit or to allow for a specific purpose rather than an overall permission for ever and always. Parents use this kind of permission all the time "Can I ride my bike to Billy's?" "Well, that's outside the area where you may ride, but you have been quite responsible lately, so, yes, I permit you to do it today." Some Biblical scholars feel that "I am presently not allowing..." would be a far more accurate translation. The verse would mean "Until women have learned what they need in order to get a full grasp of the true teaching, they are not to teach or have authority over men.”

Authority. The Greek noun in this verse is "authentein" is used no where else in scripture. And it was not frequently used in writings of the day. It is not the same word used elsewhere in the Bible when authority is being spoken of. This word has a dark meaning. It is often used in reference to murder, suicide or parents who had children conceived in pagan sex rituals.

Other passages of scripture have Paul instructing how women are to speak propohetically, and cites women as leaders in the church. In Romans 16 Pheobe is called "diakonos" - which literally means servant, but elsewhere is translated as 'deacon'.

I think careful study of the passage makes it clear that women's speaking and teaching is not prohibited overall, but it was for a short time in this congregation.

In Acts 18:26 we have Priscilla teaching Apollas. And most signifigently, in John 20:17 the risen Jesus instructs Mary to go and tell the disciples that Christ has risen. That seems to me to be a command direct from the Son for God for a woman to preach to men.

Having said all of that, I don't think that Christians will ever come to agreement on this issue on this side of heaven and we need to find ways to live peacably and respectfully together.

I respectfully say your argument falls short. Your position requires a context that is not Paul's. Paul gives the perspective of his commandment in the next 2 verses;

1 Timothy 2
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

The context of Paul's statement trancends both time and culture.

God Bless

[bliz]

I respectfully disagree.

Remember Paul was writing to Timothy giving him instruction on how to deal with the problems that Gnosticism had created in the church in Ephesus. The Gnostics taught that women were to be worshiped, that they were more powerful and that woman was created first and then Adam.

So, Paul has said "Since women in the church have been misled by Gnosticism, I am presently not allowing women to teach until they have learned what they need to learn including: Adam was created first, then Eve and that Eve was deceived, not Adam."

How do you refute a lie? First, you tell the truth. Paul is telling the truth about the order of God's creation because the Gnostics have been lying about it. He is not saying that creation order determines the order of things between men and women in church forever more. Much of scripture has illustrated the last becoming first and the first, last, so a creation order argument is really, well, wrong.

[Harry the Heretic]

I respectfully disagree.

Remember Paul was writing to Timothy giving him instruction on how to deal with the problems that Gnosticism had created in the church in Ephesus. The Gnostics taught that women were to be worshiped, that they were more powerful and that woman was created first and then Adam.

So, Paul has said "Since women in the church have been misled by Gnosticism, I am presently not allowing women to teach until they have learned what they need to learn including: Adam was created first, then Eve and that Eve was deceived, not Adam."

How do you refute a lie? First, you tell the truth. Paul is telling the truth about the order of God's creation because the Gnostics have been lying about it. He is not saying that creation order determines the order of things between men and women in church forever more. Much of scripture has illustrated the last becoming first and the first, last, so a creation order argument is really, well, wrong.

7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Is verse 8 just refering to the men of Ephesus, and also verse 9 only for Ephesian women? And in the next chapter the qualifications for bishop,
is Ephesus the only church with a Bishop?

Can we say that any intructions that Paul gives only applies to the inteneded recipients? Is there any other instance of Paul giving advice to a congregation or individual where that principal is applied only locally? Paul states in Corinthians that his ordinances are the same in all the churches.

God Bless

[bliz]

Harry -

"Is verse 8 just refering to the men of Ephesus, and also verse 9 only for Ephesian women? And in the next chapter the qualifications for bishop, is Ephesus the only church with a Bishop?

Can we say that any intructions that Paul gives only applies to the inteneded recipients? Is there any other instance of Paul giving advice to a congregation or individual where that principal is applied only locally? Paul states in Corinthians that his ordinances are the same in all the churches."

No, I am not saying that what Paul wrote applies only to those who received the original letter. I am saying that in order to correctly understand the principal that Paul is teaching, we need to understand the context.

I believe the principal here is that women and men ought not to preach and teach until the know what they are talking about. The women teaching in that church had been misled by Gnostics and were saying things that were untrue. Of course they should not be teaching! The principal is universal and applies to all of us.

Further, it says that women are to learn in full submission, but it does not state to whom they are to be in submission. I assume God and the church leadership, not to men in the church in general or to men in general.

I think this is also the case in the next chapter. The principal is: An overseer must be above reproach. I believe that what follows is a list of examples that illustrate what "above reproach" means.

In verse 3:12 "A deacon must be the husband of but one wife..." essentially the same language used to describe an overseerer. The Greek word for deacon is diakonos.
Paul used the same Greek word in Romans 16 to describe Pheobe. English translations say servant, helper, friend for Phoebe, but it is the identical Greek word that elsewhere in the NT has been translated as deacon. Paul was an educated man; I figure he used language very carefully. If he used the same word, it has the same meaning.

So, on one hand he seems to say women may not be deacons but then refers to a woman with whom he has worked as a deacon. Scripture does not contridict itself. So what's the deal? It makes sense if we see the list as examples to illustrate the principal. If we see the list as a checklist, we have a conflict.

A list to illustrate the principal was also done in the 10 Commandments. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his man servant or his maidservant, his ox or donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor." The verse does not specifically say that I am not to covet my neighbor's husband. Am I to assume that husband coveting is permissable? The man servant is off limits, but not the master! Of course not! The principal is that we are not to covet anything or anyone. The list is not a checklist, it is a list of illustrations.

I have long ago decided that this is an issue that Christians will not all agree about on this side of heaven. Sadly, the disagreement does make it hard for many folks to fellowship together as they disagree. However, we are talking about properly understanding God's word and an issue that impacts over half the members of the Body of Christ directly. I cannot be silent.

I choose to believe that you are sincerly seeking God's truth in this matter. I trust you will make the same choice about me.

[twistedsketch]

Where is it that your read all these wonderful details of the context? I am not accusing, I sincerily want to know.

[Harry the Heretic]

I believe the principal here is that women and men ought not to preach and teach until the know what they are talking about. The women teaching in that church had been misled by Gnostics and were saying things that were untrue. Of course they should not be teaching! The principal is universal and applies to all of us.

Yes there was something definitely going on at Ephesus. Most likely caused by the Nicolaitanes. There are several pointers to it, in Rev, 1 Tim, Eph and Acts. They were motivated by greed and were clever speakers, and they masqueraded as Christians. There are some similarities to this problem alluded to in Peters epistles as well. It may be gnostic in origin but it may be something different than what John was encountering.

In order for me to consider your position outside of Paul's statements about women in 1Cor 14 and also Peters similar teachings, you would need to give me some strong evidence of a heresy that would entangle women only, or at least in the vast majority. From what I understand about gnosticism, it does not fulfill the criteria.

I am not being contentious here as you may suspect. I, having been involved in a couple of very small congregations, would rejoice in allowing women as teachers, preachers etc, if that was scriptural. Ministering to a congregation is a lot of work.

As far as deacon Phebe is concerned, I trust the context that the translators of the KJV chose. That word is also used in the context of servant in many of the sayings of Christ. I would not build nor destroy a doctrine based on this mention.

God bless

[bliz]

I do not have evidence of the heresy entangling only women. I can understand how the gnostic hericies would attract some women, but I do not have evidence. And you do not have evidence that it did not. We are dealing with limited information from a long time ago and writings in a language that no one alive speaks. Neither of us is able to PROVE our position.

Yes, servant is a good translation of diakonos. And I would gladly live with it if the same word had not been altered to form the new English word, deacon, in other passages. Why was that?

"Neither Jew nor Greek; slave nor free, male or female". I've heard that explained away in a dozen different ways - it only applies to salvation, to creation - but it reads very clearly to me.

Why did Jesus instruct a woman to tell the disciples that He was risen? If that's not preaching or teaching under the direct instruction from the Son of God, I don't know what is. And one will argue that "telling" isn't preaching or teaching.

What did Jesus mean when he said that Mary had chosen "the better part", sitting at His feet and learning as heretofore only men had learned. Was that assessment only for Mary or was it universal?

As a little girl in my Baptist church I memorized a lot of scripture. For missionary week I memorized "Go ye into all the world... baptizing and teaching..." the words of Christ, But then be told that I wasn't really to teach that that verse did not mean women were to teach. Did Jesus have it wrong? Why doesn't it mean women are to teach? Is this a "blue" verse meant only for men?

I read of Deborah leading Israel... but was later told that I was only to lead women and children and, at the time, brown, black and yellow men.

For youth Sunday I memorized "Let no man despise you for your youth." But I was asked to ignore the preceeding verse - "Command and teach these things."

Does all of scripture apply to me, or only the "pink" verses?

[Simon_Templar]

The verse which says there are neither male nor female in christ obviously can not apply in this sense or it would be in direct contradiction to a number of other scriptures. In the world paul was writing to there were many social prejudices based on sex, status, nationality etc. Jews were not allowed to even eat with gentiles (greeks), women in jewish culture were also second class citizens not allowed to partake of scripture, or study, or even other normal parts of society, the distinction between slave and free is pretty obvious. Paul wasn't saying that there are no proper roles for these people in God's kingdom, as he clearly does lay out proper roles and behaviors for them in a number of places. What he was saying was that in the Kingdom we can not hold prejudices towards each other to not ascociate with someone because they aren't jewish or because their a woman, or a slave. We are all part of the body of christ and should be brothers.

In answer to the comments about telling, that wasn't teaching in the least. If anything its much more akin to the gift of prophecy, which women are free to exercise in church. Prophecy is when God gives you a messge to deliver, teaching is when you take God's word or message and teach people what it means, how to follow it, etc.

As to the use of the word Deacon. As with other ministries and giftings of the Spirit, and prophecy there is a difference between having a gifting and having an office in the church. Someone could be active in the gift of prophecy and not be a prophet. The two are different things. One involves authority and one does not. The same is true in the case of the deacon. One can be a servant (deacon) in ministry and calling, and not be a deacon of the church ie. have authority of office.

Prohibiting women from teaching the church and having authority over men in the church in no way prohibits them from witnessing and carrying the gospel to the world. Most men aren't qualified according to scripture to be pastors and elders, but all men are called to do those things as well.

Deborah did lead israel, and you'll note that when she took an office of authority over men what did she say to them? she told them that it was a shame upon them all that she a woman had to lead them because no man was willing. If your going to take an office authority in your church you should ask yourself, do you want to shame all the men in your church? It might be necessary to do so as in the case of deborah, but realise the real result as well, that you are shaming the men.. maybe the men deserve it, but I guess thats up to you in your situation to judge.

All the scriptures do apply, even the ones that say "suffer not a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man".

In answer to the original question, about teaching the adult sunday school. If there are men in it I'd have to say its not correct according to the scriptures. As for adolecent boys, I'd have to say that once they reach a level of maturity where they can be held accountable (around 10 or 12 in most cases I'd think) I would say they should be taught by men.
However, Elder women of the church have not only the option, but in fact the obligation, the duty to teach and mentor the younger women of the church.

[bliz]

Simon - your 'deacon' commentary does not explain why the same word is translated differently when it applies to a woman. Next, you will explain that Pheobe was not a woman... which has been done with several of the other women Paul mentioned in Romans 16 already, so why not Pheobe?

Every defination of prophecy I am familiar with refers to a prediction of the future. Mary was not predicting anything. She was telling the disciples that Jesus had risen, an event in the very recent past, and at the instruction of Jesus. Was Jesus forced to use whoever just happened by the tomb? I don't think so. Why is that not preaching or teaching? You will have to explain it to me.

You make my point on Deborah! God did not strike her dead. God did not raise up a man to lead. Deborah did not shame the men, the men shamed themselves by their lack of action and God used her leadership to help accomplish His goals. If women in leadership over men are anathama to God, why would he permit her to do it? Would he build His kingdom using unacceptable stone?

On what basis can you say what Paul meant when he said "neither male or female?" Why do you assume that there is only one meaning? What gives you the right to declare what the meaning is?

So "go ye into all the world" doesn't mean teaching and baptizing, even though those are the words that are in the verse. It really means, according to you, to witness and "carry the Gospel". You will have to explain exactly what "carry the Gospel" means. The verse does not say "Men, go and preach, and women, go and share." You have not explained to me why this verse does not instruct me, a woman, to teach and baptize. Or, you can try and explain to me why this verse of scripture does not apply to me.

You are lookiing at all of scripture through the light of a few verses. Why not try and look at those few verses through the light of all scripture.

[twistedsketch]

Prophesy refers to speaking the mind of God. Mary Magdeline was not teaching or exercising authority, she was spreading news, like the servant girl in Acts 12:14. Read John 20:2, that does not sound the least like preaching.

From the context of Galatians 3:28, we glean that all people in Christ are equal in God's sight. The Galatian church was being influenced by the Judiazers, who were attempting to force the old Law on the Church. This of course called for division between Jew and Gentile. Verse 26 says that we are all sons of the living God, and every Christian is included, even women. What does that mean? "Sons" refers to who gets an inheritance. If I'm not mistaken, in the Roman world sons came before daughters when it came to receiving an inheritance. God is saying that we all have an equal standing before Him no matter what our station in life is, and the Church should respect that.

The office of a deacon is mainly service rather than teaching, although teaching may be part of the deal. The first deacons in the Church were appointed to serve those who had the least social standing at the time: Greek widows. My aunt just got ordained as a deacon in the Methodist church, what she's doing is helping at a youth center and doing counselling.

[Harry the Heretic]

Prophesy refers to speaking the mind of God. Mary Magdeline was not teaching or exercising authority, she was spreading news, like the servant girl in Acts 12:14. Read John 20:2, that does not sound the least like preaching.

From the context of Galatians 3:28, we glean that all people in Christ are equal in God's sight. The Galatian church was being influenced by the Judiazers, who were attempting to force the old Law on the Church. This of course called for division between Jew and Gentile. Verse 26 says that we are all sons of the living God, and every Christian is included, even women. What does that mean? "Sons" refers to who gets an inheritance. If I'm not mistaken, in the Roman world sons came before daughters when it came to receiving an inheritance. God is saying that we all have an equal standing before Him no matter what our station in life is, and the Church should respect that.

The office of a deacon is mainly service rather than teaching, although teaching may be part of the deal. The first deacons in the Church were appointed to serve those who had the least social standing at the time: Greek widows. My aunt just got ordained as a deacon in the Methodist church, what she's doing is helping at a youth center and doing counselling.
Good points twisted,

Also remember that in Peter's epistle and in Paul's teaching, it says that I should submit myself to kings and earthly governments, even if they are pagan. Are they above me in respect in the Lord's concerns? "God forbid"! No but was not the Lord cursed in this earth, at least as it seemed in the world's view?

" He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not."

In the NT many women are credited with great faith, given special witness, and revelation, and realized things that the Apostles did not understand, what a privilege, and remember that all of the apostles were murdered.

[bliz]

Someone will have to very patiently explain the difference between "spreading the news" and preaching and teaching. I've heard all the vocabulary - women may share, encourage, counsel, mention, talk about, testify, but not the 'P' word. Will someone explain to me the difference?

Wait! I know what the difference is - only men may preach, right? It's circular reasoning, guys. Bad logic.

Twisted, I quite agree with your discussion of Galatians. But I think there are multiple meanings to the statement that are also true. I belieive that God is saying that in all spiritual matters, there are no distinctions between humans.

No argument about the history or role of deacons. But that does not explain the translation question.

...and Harry - the little "reminder" that all the apostles were murdered is beneath you and quite an insult to the character of Christian women. Did men preach to protect the women-folk? God has called upon many women to die for Him and throughout the Bible and history many women have risked their lives to do as God called them to do, just as men have.

[Harry the Heretic]

...and Harry - the little "reminder" that all the apostles were murdered is beneath you and quite an insult to the character of Christian women. Did men preach to protect the women-folk? God has called upon many women to die for Him and throughout the Bible and history many women have risked their lives to do as God called them to do, just as men have. You say it is an insult, and perceive it is such, and you accuse my motives for a factual statement. You take that statement as an offense. It is you who imply that by being submissive that God sees us as a class of people. It is you who makes that inference from scripture, not me.

So shall we trivialize the death of the Christ, since many have suffered and died. And shall we discredit the risks and sufferings of stephen, because others have been martyred?

And shall we brag about our sufferings in boasting of our holiness?
I think not. But mainly shall we despise the service that is ministered to us, wishing to be the minister. Shall we deny the blessing?
What you perceive as legalism and bondage you are free to discard. If you seek to teach an obstinate, prideful, self loving man, then by all means do so.

I have left unspoken the thrust of your hermeneutics to this piont. If you go back and read your post about 1 timothy carefully, you will see that in essence, you are saying that the women of ephesus were sucumbing to a heresy and the men were not. Draw your own conclusions, and do not assume mine, I am just pointing out the weakness of your logic.

I hope you do not speak from a position of hypothesis, and find a place to teach, because Lord knows I speak from practicality.

God bless

[twistedsketch]

Someone will have to very patiently explain the difference between "spreading the news" and preaching and teaching. I've heard all the vocabulary - women may share, encourage, counsel, mention, talk about, testify, but not the 'P' word. Will someone explain to me the difference?

Read John 20:2 and Acts 12:14, I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. Those are merely reporting facts. It is far from the confident preaching we hear from Jesus, Peter in Acts 2, and in the epistles.


Twisted, I quite agree with your discussion of Galatians. But I think there are multiple meanings to the statement that are also true. I belieive that God is saying that in all spiritual matters, there are no distinctions between humans.

Well, there are many passages outlining the different responsibilites of husbands and wives. Ephesians 5 comes to mind, with husbands baing symbolic of Christ and wives being symbolic of the church (that said, we owe the ladies a lot more than what we're already giving them!) That does not make women less than men, but it does show that there are different roles that God has made for each. Yet in 1 Peter, he reminds the husbands that wives are their spiritual equals - co-heirs.


No argument about the history or role of deacons. But that does not explain the translation question. If the role of a deacon is clear, why is the translation a problem? In the NIV, Pheobe is referred to as a "servant" - which defines what a deacon is.


...and Harry - the little "reminder" that all the apostles were murdered is beneath you and quite an insult to the character of Christian women. Did men preach to protect the women-folk? God has called upon many women to die for Him and throughout the Bible and history many women have risked their lives to do as God called them to do, just as men have.

Yep. Peter's wife was martyred, and there are many stories of female martyrs. Belinda's story is quite remarkable. John died peacefully, though he also had his share of sufferings.

[bliz]

Twisted - Since when is telling others that the Lord is risen " merely reporting facts"?

We are not given the text of what was said to the disciples by the women after the resurrestion. I think its safe to say it was more than the sentence of two contained in scripture. Without the text, how can you say it is not confident preaching of others? Even if it was not preaching, how is it not teaching? They were telling the men about something they did not know.

We have not been discussing the roles of husbands and wives. We can save that for another thread.

My question concerning the translation is: Why was the same Greek word that was elsewhere translated - or actually modified - into the English word 'deacon' ,when it appears in scripture, but it was translated as 'servant' or helper, or friend, when it is used to describe Pheobe?

[bliz]

Harry -

You wrote: "In the NT many women are credited with great faith, given special witness, and revelation, and realized things that the Apostles did not understand, what a privilege, and remember that all of the apostles were murdered."

What did you mean? If I misunderstood your point, which you plainly think I did, and I may well have, what was the point of bringing up the fact that the apostles were killed for their faith at this point in the discussion? It seemed to me a non-too-subtle threat. "So you want to preach? Just remember you can get killed for preaching!" Since that conclusion is in error, what meaning was intended by stating this fact?

You asked: "So shall we trivialize the death of the Christ, since many have suffered and died" I have said nothing that would trivialize the death of Christ or anyone who has died for the sake of the Gospel. Why would you infer that I have done this?

Yes, I believe that some of the women in Ephesus were deceived by heresy and that's what I said.
I have drawn my own conclusion, and my conclusion is: that some women in Ephesus were deceived by heresy. What conclusion do you draw?

You said: "And shall we brag about our sufferings in boasting of our holiness?
I think not." Well, I don't think so, but Paul seemed to think it was OK. II Corinthians 16 begins a passage wherein Paul details some of the things he has suffered in his ministry.

"But mainly shall we despise the service that is ministered to us, wishing to be the minister. Shall we deny the blessing?
What you perceive as legalism and bondage you are free to discard. If you seek to teach an obstinate, prideful, self loving man, then by all means do so."
Sorry - I'm clueless as to what you are saying above.

[twistedsketch]

Twisted - Since when is telling others that the Lord is risen " merely reporting facts"?

We are not given the text of what was said to the disciples by the women after the resurrestion. I think its safe to say it was more than the sentence of two contained in scripture. Without the text, how can you say it is not confident preaching of others? Even if it was not preaching, how is it not teaching? They were telling the men about something they did not know.

But they had no authority over the disciples. They were not the leadership. They were simply the first to know. There was no teacher-student relationship there.

He are the words Paul used in 1 Timothy 2:12 to describe the actions forbidden to women.

didasko

1. to teach
1. to hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses
2. to be a teacher
3. to discharge the office of a teacher, conduct one's self as a teacher

2. to teach one
1. to impart instruction
2. instill doctrine into one
3. the thing taught or enjoined
4. to explain or expound a thing
5. to teach one something

auqenteo

1. one who with his own hands kills another or himself
2. one who acts on his own authority, autocratic
3. an absolute master
4. to govern, exercise dominion over one

That doesn't sound like what Mary Magdalene was doing. She was giving them the news that Jesus told her to give them.


My question concerning the translation is: Why was the same Greek word that was elsewhere translated - or actually modified - into the English word 'deacon' ,when it appears in scripture, but it was translated as 'servant' or helper, or friend, when it is used to describe Pheobe?

Yes, and since we can all agree that a deacon IS a servant, helper, and friend, I don't even know why we're making an issue of it. Scripture does not forbid women from being deacons. Pheobe was a deacon, and I have no problem with that.

[bliz]

That doesn't sound like what Mary Magdalene was doing. She was giving them the news that Jesus told her to give them.[QUOTE]

How can you say it doesn't "sound" like what Mary M. was doing when you do not have the words she said? We do not have the text. What makes you sure she did not preach or teach?

[QUOTE]But they had no authority over the disciples. They were not the leadership. They were simply the first to know. There was no teacher-student relationship there.
Do you think it was by chance that the women were the first to know? I think it was by God's plan. For what reasons I cannot say, but it seems a bit dismissive to say "They were simply the first to know."

Does that mean that teaching is only teaching if it is done in a pre-existing teacher-student relationship? People who are not my teachers teach me things all the time. I consider it teaching when the waitress explains local history or my neighbor tells me why my tomatoes are small this year. These peolpe have no authority over me, but they teach me just the same.


He are the words Paul used in 1 Timothy 2:12 to describe the actions forbidden to women.[QUOTE]

That is what you believe this passage teaches. YOur understanding of the passage, although popular, is not universal. I believe that Paul was instructing Timothy that women in Ephesus should not teach until they had a better understanding of the Christian faith and were not being deceived by Gnostic theology.

[QUOTE]Yes, and since we can all agree that a deacon IS a servant, helper, and friend, I don't even know why we're making an issue of it. Scripture does not forbid women from being deacons. Pheobe was a deacon, and I have no problem with that.
I am glad that you have no problem with women being deacons, but many people and denominations do think that Scripture forbids that.

My point is that translators, as much as they try, are not immune to cultural influences. How else do we explain that when the word clearly referred to a woman, most translators used very different English words than when the word was applied to men? Translations are done by falliable human beings the overwhelming majority of whom are men. Do you think that has had no impact on decisions the choices that are made during translation?

May you have a refreshing Lord's Day tomorrow.

[twistedsketch]

Do you think it was by chance that the women were the first to know? I think it was by God's plan. For what reasons I cannot say, but it seems a bit dismissive to say "They were simply the first to know."

Probably to prove the authenticity of the Gospels themselves, as no self respecting forgerer would have women be the first to witness the risen Christ. If they were to play it up, it would have been Peter and John without the women telling them.


Does that mean that teaching is only teaching if it is done in a pre-existing teacher-student relationship? People who are not my teachers teach me things all the time. I consider it teaching when the waitress explains local history or my neighbor tells me why my tomatoes are small this year. These peolpe have no authority over me, but they teach me just the same.

Careful. Paul is talking about women being teachers in a teacher-student or pastor-parishoner context. Make sure the kind of teaching you're talking about is the same kind that Paul is. Paul is talking about teaching with authority. Disciple making.

I am glad that you have no problem with women being deacons, but many people and denominations do think that Scripture forbids that.


They're not looking at their NIV footnotes :D


My point is that translators, as much as they try, are not immune to cultural influences. How else do we explain that when the word clearly referred to a woman, most translators used very different English words than when the word was applied to men? Translations are done by falliable human beings the overwhelming majority of whom are men. Do you think that has had no impact on decisions the choices that are made during translation?


When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate), it was rife with bias to defend Catholic tradition. But again, we have study tools readily available. And rather than asking the question "was this translator biased?" we should go in with an open heart and mind. Because all the proof in the world will not change someone's opinion if they've already made up their minds about the translators in the first place. Then you get stuff like the Jefferson Bible.

[Harry the Heretic]

bliz

]What did you mean? If I misunderstood your point, which you plainly think I did, and I may well have, what was the point of bringing up the fact that the apostles were killed for their faith at this point in the discussion? It seemed to me a non-too-subtle threat. "So you want to preach? Just remember you can get killed for preaching!" Since that conclusion is in error, what meaning was intended by stating this fact?
No you did not misunderstand my statement, it was your perception that it was an insult or a veiled threat that astonishes me.


You asked: "So shall we trivialize the death of the Christ, since many have suffered and died" I have said nothing that would trivialize the death of Christ or anyone who has died for the sake of the Gospel. Why would you infer that I have done this?
It was a rhetorical question based on my previous sentiment.


Yes, I believe that some of the women in Ephesus were deceived by heresy and that's what I said.
I have drawn my own conclusion, and my conclusion is: that some women in Ephesus were deceived by heresy. What conclusion do you draw?
But this does not help your position. I see one of two possibilities here.

1. There was a specific heresy that preyed on women (unlikely)

2. There was a heresy that the women fell for that the men did not.

Why? Is it because of Paul's statement in 1 Tim 2:14?, or the implications of 5:11-15? What complementary reason could one give to excuse the women of Ephesus. If women are equal to men in discerning truth, then why did only they fall into error?

Since I do not concur with your theory about Paul's statement concerning women teaching men, I am not forced into this quagmire, but if you do accept your theory, the question is left, and the conclusion is not flattering.


I think not." Well, I don't think so, but Paul seemed to think it was OK. II Corinthians 16 begins a passage wherein Paul details some of the things he has suffered in his ministry.
Lets look at the introduction to his boasting in 2 Cor 10:17-11:1

" 17 But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
18 For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth. 1 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me."

It is a folly, and Paul says so.

[bliz]

Harry -

It does not seem at all surprising to me that certian heresys would be more attractive to one group of people than another. That some women in a society that represed and limited the freedoms of women would be attracted to the erronous notion that women were superior to men, seems quite predictable. I doubt if many men would find such theology attractive. Our gender, experiences, history and education make all of us more likely to accept particular beliefs than others. People who have had abusive fathers often have a tough time with God the Father and might be more easily wooed by the notion of God exclusivly as a friend.

I believe that Paul is refuting the lies of the Gnostics by stating the truth - Adam was created first; Eve was deceived. Those are the facts. I don't see that there are implications to be drawn from those facts. What implications do you see?

It seems quite illogical to me to assume that the deceivability of one woman at one time indicates anything about the deceivability of all women for all time. Do we assume that becasue Peter denied the Lord and Judas betrayed Him that men are more likely to deny and betray Christ than women are? No, I don't think so.

I see nothing in Paul's instruction to Timothy that says that only women are misled by non-Christian ideas. I don't see any quagmire or any unflatttering conclusions.

______________________
I asked if I had misunderstood a previous statement and you said that I had correctly understood you statement, which I paraphrased as: "So you want to preach? Just remember you can get killed for preaching!"

You commented: "... it was your perception that it was an insult or a veiled threat that astonishes me." The clear implication is that women are not willing to take that risk for the Gospel. That is an insult to Christian women in general, but especially to the women who have indeed been killed becasue of their faith in Christ.

It is also a threat. One kind of threat is "If you don't do what I want you to do, I will get you." You didn't use that one. You used the more subtle threat in which you can disguise yourself as friend or advisor "If you don't do what I want you to, they will get you." It's a threat.
______________________________________
Now, tell me, how is it that I, as a woman am to ignore particular passages of scripture?

Matthew 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and treaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

I Timothy 4:11 Command and teach these things.

II Timothy 2:24-25 The Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently instruct in the hope that God will grant them repentence leading them to a knowledge of the truth

Bear with me, Harry, I'm tryin to gently instruct you.

[bliz]

Twisted -

I asked if it was by chance that the women at the tomob were the first ones to know Christ had risen. You replied:

"Probably to prove the authenticity of the Gospels themselves, as no self respecting forgerer would have women be the first to witness the risen Christ. If they were to play it up, it would have been Peter and John without the women telling them."

Your comment discusses the inclusion of that fact in Scripture. You missed my point. My point was that God was in full control of who first saw the risen Son. God chose it to be women. And Jesus instructed them to go and deliver the message. Were it anathama for women to instruct men, why would Jesus have given that command about such an important piece of information? It seems a very curious choice for a God to make if He did not want women instructing men.

"Careful. Paul is talking about women being teachers in a teacher-student or pastor-parishoner context. Make sure the kind of teaching you're talking about is the same kind that Paul is. Paul is talking about teaching with authority. Disciple making."

First, of what is it that I should be careful?

Second, yes, I agree. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I say teaching. Teaching like Priscilla did with Appolos. Teaching as all Christians are instructed to do: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." That's it. Disciple making teaching. That's exactly what I mean.

If this is not the responsibilty of all belivers, you will have to explain to me why I am to ignore that passage of scripture.

"And rather than asking the question "was this translator biased?" we should go in with an open heart and mind. Because all the proof in the world will not change someone's opinion if they've already made up their minds about the translators in the first place."
Can one not do both? Can one not have an open mind and heart and look critically (in the proper meaning of the word) at translations?

I'm willing to believe that you look at the Word with open heart and mind, seeking God's true meaning in His word. Are you willing to believe that about me?

[Harry the Heretic]

.

______________________
I asked if I had misunderstood a previous statement and you said that I had correctly understood you statement, which I paraphrased as: "So you want to preach? Just remember you can get killed for preaching!"

You commented: "... it was your perception that it was an insult or a veiled threat that astonishes me." The clear implication is that women are not willing to take that risk for the Gospel. That is an insult to Christian women in general, but especially to the women who have indeed been killed because of their faith in Christ.

It is also a threat. One kind of threat is "If you don't do what I want you to do, I will get you." You didn't use that one. You used the more subtle threat in which you can disguise yourself as friend or advisor "If you don't do what I want you to, they will get you." It's a threat.
______________________________________


Bear with me, Harry, I'm tryin to gently instruct you.
It is no more a threat than when Christ assured us of the same. The implication that you take is your own. I do not trivialize the sacrifices of anyone. Neither did the Lord.

So far, in your gentle instruction you have accused me of being insulting, threatening, and masquerading as something I am not. Are you absolutely sure of my motives, or do you assume them? You assume that the women of Ephesus where more susceptible to gnosticism, but you can not tell me why.

And if a person's background or experiences play such an important part in accepting or discerning truth, then who is able to? The list would be quite small. God's arm would be shortened to a large degree.

In the scriptures you quoted, you assume or limit evangelism to being a function that takes place only within congregational walls, or in the case of baptism you imply that everyone within a congregation must baptize.

I believe that Paul is refuting the lies of the Gnostics by stating the truth - Adam was created first; Eve was deceived. Those are the facts. I don't see that there are implications to be drawn from those facts. What implications do you see?
That in the church, men have authority over women. It is a clear teaching, also stated in other places;

1 Peter 3:1
Eph 5:23
1 Cor 14:34
1 Cor 11:3

The teachings in Ephesians 5 and in 1 Tim, and in John chapters 13-17, say that men are not to lord it over the congregation, but the principle is that they are to be as servants ( this principle applies to women also but not as teachers over men, in the congregation, or in marriage). So many men abuse this office, but a lot of others do not.

The motive for some of my statements was to illustrate that being a teacher or preacher in the true sense is not glamorous, nothing more, as you seem to believe.

You seem to read a lot of things into my statements and into scripture as well, and when a premise is supported with faulty logic, it can be a problem. ie;

All chickens have 2 legs.
John doe has 2 legs.
John doe is a chicken.

Just because I state a truth about the service of some men, does not mean that I insinuate another towards women.

[Iosias]

Can we get some more thoughts on that verse in Timothy please. I justified myself for not teaching an adult Sunday School class by that verse.
Praise the LORD! If only there were more women like you the church would not be in so dire straights. Pride reigns in many a woman's heart and they think that they are above the orders of God. I commend you for your actions!:hug:

[bliz]

I do not think that I am above the orders of God. I simply do not agree with you, based upon reading and study of the whole Word of God, on what all the orders are.

Christians will never all agree on this issue on this side of heaven, and we shall probaby not care a whole lot on the other. I do not believe that either side of debate can prove their position from scripture without leaving some questions unanswered and unanswerable. If I am in error, and I pray that I will not be, then I shall error on the side that is inclusive and seek God's forgivness if I am wrong.

I believe that this is an issue on which that Christians will have to agree to disaree. It is not a slavation issue; it does not deal with the diety of Christ or the sovreignty of God, which are essential. It is about how we shall build the Kingdom and I believe that God will gift and call whomever He chooses, regardless of race, gender, bacground, social status, occupation, maritial status, etc.

I shall never shut my mouth when asked about the things of God. I shall never withold information about God's grace from anyone. God will put me where He wants me and show me to whom I am to speak, and I will speak, teach or preach, as He calls me.

It is clear that on this thread we are not bringing glory to God, so I will depart.

[tesnusxenos]

I am a woman that sometimes is called to speak to a group ( including men).
But I always give my message with humility and ask the people listening to check it out with their Bibles or their regular pastors. I pass on what I have learned.

as a student of riding I have my riding instructor who I check information with . But I also go to a lot of clinics and listen to a lot of other instructors. My regular teacher is the one in authority for me, but that does not stop me from receiving instruction from others, but anything that I am not sure of or question I bring back to my regular teacher to discuss. I think we should be doing similar things in our spiritual walk, anytime we are not sure of what we hear from a speaker and lack the Biblical knowledge to check it out we should go to our personal pastor (who should be a male).