The world's consensus means ..? Consensus means "general agreement". The world doesn't agree on much of anything. What are you trying to say?
Also, this has nothing to do with women teaching in church, the thread's subject.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Should women teach in the church?
- Thread starter jaybo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- women in the church
Also, this has nothing to do with women teaching in church, the thread's subject.
Why do you keep using the word "consensus"? The word means "general agreement : unanimity" (according to Webster). There is little to no agreement in the world about anything. So "the greatest number exhibits the world's consensus" means nothing.
Suddenly Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came to him, took hold of his feet, and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers and sisters to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”
Since the Bible clearly says that He was there, should I believe your guess or the Bible?
electedbyhim
Member
I am a firm believer that if a woman wants to take on the role of a Pastor, she will not be led by Holy Spirit, further more there will be false doctrine taught.
Why would God bless anyone going against His word.
electedbyhim
Member
Actually, I quoted a commentary on those verses a few pages back. It is what I believe. I also believe that one can take those scriptures at face value. If you keep reading into chapter 3, Paul lays out the qualifications for Pastors.
Edward
2024 Supporter
He was there. Mary thought He was the gardner. But it doesn't say the Angel rolled the stone back, and then Jesus came out. Jesus was resurectted with a glorified spiritual body and just went through the stone just like He did later when the Discples were in the locked room and Jesus appeared. The Angel rolled back the stone so that Mary and the discples can look inside and see He was gone. ...For He has risen.
elected,
That's your opinion ("I am a firm believer") and is not based on a careful exegesis of the relevant Scriptures.
Oz
to some degree i disagree on my drove home in the evening there is a woman pastor that comes on. yes i listen to her no other Gospel station i want listen to.. what i have heard from her was all Bible nothing false ..i think she is full Gospel only comes on twice a week
electedbyhim
Member
And you are entitled to your opinion.
Free,
You haven't bothered to consider the word for authority in 1 Tim 2:12 (authentein) is not the same word for authority in 1 Cor:11:5 (exousia). There's a world of a difference between the meaning of the 2 words.
Oz
Not without proper exegesis of the text.
It is true if you are in Christ.
God made His kingdom, and man can't change it.
The worldly have been trying to mold it into their own image for 2000 years now, but it still walks in the light.
The world loves sin more than it loves God.
Those fostering women preachers love their own interpretations of scripture more than they love what God has already given us.
The "world" agrees that God's word is wrong or incomplete or mistranslated or for a different culture or anything but pertinent for today.
The Christians are not of that world.
Luminous_Rose
CF Ambassador
If you believed what you thought was not important, you probably wouldn't be still responding here.
I don't see the response in which you answered the questions. All I'm seeing are where you've quoted what I said so far.
It can be nitpicking when you're picking a part and using it against people without reading the entire passage it comes from. The few verses from 1 Timothy, you left out parts of that passage, that are important, by the way. Some Bible verses are okay as standalone's as they are separated from surrounding context or the point is carried through the entire passage.
In 1 Timothy, Paul was going through a lot of different subject matters in one passage. It refers to "women" and "a woman" in different passages. It's clear this was a situation for a certain place and time, not an absolute to use to the end of time.
Women sure can teach other women and children, but also - that passage does not say that women "can only" teach other women and children. That's not even Biblical.
Oh, I see! So if God creates man first then he's the leader. Oh, so I assume that means the entire animal kingdom is more important than he is, right? That's what you're saying. The animals came first, so they must be more important! Right! Of course! I knew I always favored them butterflies over dear Uncle Fred! -sigh- It's a ridiculous excuse.
Yes, God created "Eve" as a helper. Notice the word, though - helper. That's not a phrase that puts Eve above nor below Adam, but on par and equal with him. No indication of the definition of the word helper being "sub" is described.
How is women not preaching Biblical? How does "Church History" prove this?
You know who it was in the early Roman churches that hid in the catacombs that kept many services together? WOMEN! You want to know why? Because women meant squat in the Roman Empire, many in authority cared not about what women did, so there they were singing hymns in the name of Jesus Christ.
What about the women I mentioned? What about how Priscilla AND Aquila helped instruct Apollos?
What makes the idea of women leading so twisted?
You wouldn't know what it's like to be a woman in the church today, but for some of us - that wasn't always easy. I came from a church that I would dare call spiritually abusive...was there most of my life. They believed the same thing as you - that women are to be silent. While this was a mere small portion of their antics, it was something that ALWAYS HURT my faith in God and Jesus Christ and made me feel like a thorn in the church's side...like I didn't belong.
Imagine....
-You love singing the hymns and you're so on fire for Christ...oh, if you could only pick one hymn in front of the church so that everyone could sing it together. The feeling of belonging and worshipping Jesus Christ with everyone. But no, you can't...sit in the pew and sing from your book so then you can proceed to be quiet.
-You need prayers for someone in your family, but low and behold...you're the only one at the service that day. In order for your prayer to be said in that church service, you would need to tell it to another man in the church so he could say you needed the prayer because how dare they hand the microphone to a woman to announce the need of a prayer.
-You're asked to help prepare the Lord's Supper, but you must be there extra early so that you may do so unseen and completely out of sight in a side room because you are in fact...a woman.
-Subject matter is being preached and taught, but not even the people they allow to preach know how to research their Biblical materials before hand. They don't dare stop a moron going on about Sigmund Freud and the "ego" "super ego" or "id". No, they let that moron babble his mouth for an hour and a half, but how dare they let a woman that knows how to research Bible verses, historical context, and meanings of words in the Concordance to be sure the sermon makes sense because she's a woman - the idiot they chose to preach at a Christian church that gave a non-Christian sermon is obviously the superior choice.
-You want to stand up and sing at worship time, but you're stared at UNLESS everyone else (usually the men) stand up, too.
-Imagine wanting to clap with a worship hymn, but you're stared down for doing so unless it's a specific hymn where the men will clap with you.
-Imagine, someone scolding you for bad parenting because your daughter wants to dance to a worship song and stand up during worship to show her praise to our Creator.
It's a vicious cycle...a rather spiritually abusive one. It hurts. I don't mind if a man preaches, but I don't mind if a woman preaches, either. I don't feel this has anything to do with any feminist agenda. Rather, I do believe that we are all one in Jesus Christ and women should be able to preach as men are able to. Women can be just as capable, if not more of giving a Biblically sound and historically accurate sermon.
Hopeful,
It's time for you to write to the translators of The Revised English Bible and tell them they were wrong with their translation of 1 Tim 2:12 (REB): "I do not permit a woman to teach or, more specifically, to impose authority over a man while first needing to learn, rather she is not to cause a disturbance."
Oz
electedbyhim
Member
Part 1
The Role of Women
Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. (1Ti_2:11-12)
Paul continues his discussion of women's duties by defining their role as learners rather than teachers during the public worship. While they are not to be the public teachers in that context, neither are they to be shut out of the learning process as was generally the case in ancient times. The verb in 1Ti_2:11 is an imperative form of manthano (“to learn,” “to be informed”), from which the Greek word translated “disciple” or “learner” derives. When Paul says let a woman…receive instruction, he is not requesting, rather he commands that the women be taught. That Paul is here discussing the order of the church (cf. 1Ti_3:15) shows the learning he speaks of was to take place in that context (cf. Act_2:42). It should be noted that despite the claims of some to the contrary, teaching and worship are not mutually exclusive. Rather, knowledge of God and His Word helps stimulate worship. Worship is to be in spirit and in truth (cf. Joh_4:20-24).
It may seem obvious to us that women should be taught God's Word, since they are spiritually equal in Christ and the commands of the New Testament are to all (1Pe_2:1-2). It was not at all obvious, however, to those who came from a Jewish background. first-century Judaism did not hold women in high esteem. While not barred from attending synagogue, neither were they encouraged to learn. In fact, most rabbis refused to teach women, and some likened it to throwing pearls to pigs.
Nor was the status of women in Greek society much better. William Barclay writes,
The respectable Greek woman led a very confined life. She lived in her own quarters into which no one but her husband came. She did not even appear at meals. She never at any time appeared on the street alone; she never went to any public assembly. (The Letters to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975], 67)
The existence of such a mind set at Ephesus may have contributed to the reaction of the women against such denigration. Unfortunately, some went too far, overreacting to their suppression by seeking a dominant position. Before Paul confronts that overreaction, however, he affirms their right to learn.
The prevalent Jewish tradition about women did not come from the Old Testament. The Old Testament affirmed that women have a spiritual status equal to that of men. The Mosaic law was given to all Israel, women as well as men (Deu_1:1). Both were to teach it to their children (Deu_6:4-7; Pro_6:20). The protection of the law applied equally to women (cf. Exo_21:28-32). Women had inheritance rights (Num_36:1-12). Men and women alike participated in the Jewish religious feasts (cf. Exo_12:3; Deu_16:9-15). The single greatest spiritual vow, the Nazirite vow, was open to both men and women (Num_6:2). Women were involved in spiritual service (Exo_38:8; Neh_7:67). Nor did God hesitate to deal directly with women (Gen_3:13 : Gen_16:7-13; Jdg_13:3).
Spiritual equality between the sexes did not, however, do away with the difference in their roles. There were no queens in either Israel or Judah (Athaliah was a usurper). It is true that Deborah served as a judge (Judg. 4:4-5:31). Her case, however, was unique. Dr. Robert L. Saucy comments,
There may be instances when the regular pattern of God's order may have to be set aside due to unusual circumstances. When, for example, the husband and father is absent, the woman of the house assumes the headship of the family. So it would appear, there may be unusual circumstances when male leadership is unavailable for one reason or another. At such times God may use women to accomplish his purposes even as he used Deborah. (“The Negative Case Against the Ordination of Women,” in Kenneth S. Kantzer and Stanley N. Gundry, eds., Perspectives on Evangelical Theology [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979], 285)
It is significant that Deborah declined to lead the military campaign against the Canaanites, deferring instead to a man, Barak. No women served as priests. None of the authors of the Old Testament were women. No woman had an ongoing prophetic (Speaking before people) ministry like that of Elijah, Elisha, or the other prophets. While Miriam (Exo_15:20), Deborah (Jdg_4:4), Huldah (2Ki_22:14), and Isaiah's wife (Isa_8:3) are called prophetesses, none had a permanent calling to that office. Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah gave only one recorded prophecy, and Isaiah's wife none. She is called a prophetess because she gave birth to a child whose name had prophetic meaning. A fifth woman mentioned as a prophetess, Noadiah, was a false prophetess (Neh_6:14). While God spoke through women on a few limited occasions, no woman had an ongoing role of preaching and teaching.
The New Testament, like the Old, teaches the spiritual equality and differing roles of the sexes. Gal_3:28 teaches the absolute spiritual equality of men and women in Christ. While many use that verse to justify women assuming leadership roles in the church, the context shows that Paul is speaking of salvation (cf. Gal_3:22, Gal_3:24, Gal_3:26, Gal_3:27). Again Saucy writes,
The interpretive question [in Gal_3:28] is: What is the distinction between male and female which is overcome in Christ? To phrase it another way in light of the apostle's statement “for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” what is the “oneness” which male and female share in Christ? We would like to suggest…that the answers to these questions do not concern the functional order between man and woman at all. Rather the issue, as in the other two pairs mentioned [Jews and Greeks, slaves and freemen], concerns spiritual status before God.…To impart the issue of the functional orders of human society into this passage is to impute a meaning not justified by a valid contextual exegesis. There is therefore no more basis for abolishing the order between man and woman in the church from Gal_3:28 than for abolishing an order between believing parents and children or believing citizens and rulers. For they are all one in Christ in or out of the organization of the church. (Saucy, 281-82)
That interpretation is further strengthened by the use of the general terms “male” and “female.” In every Pauline passage dealing with functional roles, the terms “man” and “woman,” or “husband” and “wife” appear. “Why, if the apostle is speaking of the functional relationship in Gal_3:28, does he not use the language which he uses in every other passage? Why does he not say, ‘there is neither man nor woman’ in Christ rather than ‘male’ and ‘female’?” (Saucy, 283). Oneness in Christ did not obliterate the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles. Nor did it remove the functional differences between slaves and masters (cf. 1Co_7:20-24). Why, then, should we assume it did so between men and women?
In no way does the New Testament treat women as spiritual inferiors. The first person Jesus revealed His messiahship to was a woman (Joh_4:25-26). Jesus healed women (Mar_5:25-34; Luk_13:11-13). In contrast to the prevailing practice of the rabbis, He taught women (Luk_10:38-42). Women ministered to Jesus and the disciples (Luk_8:2-3). Following His resurrection, Jesus appeared first to a woman (Mar_16:9; Joh_20:11-18). Women and men were involved in the prayer services of the early church (Act_1:13-14). Peter reminds men that women are to be “[granted] honor as fellow [heirs] of the grace of life” (1Pe_3:7). The fruit of the Spirit (Gal_5:21-22) are for both men and women. In short, all the promises, commands, and blessings of the New Testament apply equally to women and men.
As in the Old Testament, spiritual equality does not preclude differing roles. There are no women pastor-teachers, evangelists, or elders in the New Testament. None of the authors of the New Testament were women. The New Testament nowhere records a sermon or teaching of a woman. While the daughters of Philip are said to have prophesied (Act_21:9), neither the occasion nor the message is defined. There is no reason to assume they had an ongoing preaching ministry, or that they taught during the public worship. They, like Mary the mother of Jesus (Luk_1:46.), or Anna (Luk_2:36-39), delivered some message of truth elsewhere. As noted in chapter 6 of this volume, a comparison of 1Co_11:5 and 1Co_14:34 indicates women are permitted to pray and speak the Word, but Paul here makes clear that such allowance is not in the assembly of the church.
The Role of Women
Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. (1Ti_2:11-12)
Paul continues his discussion of women's duties by defining their role as learners rather than teachers during the public worship. While they are not to be the public teachers in that context, neither are they to be shut out of the learning process as was generally the case in ancient times. The verb in 1Ti_2:11 is an imperative form of manthano (“to learn,” “to be informed”), from which the Greek word translated “disciple” or “learner” derives. When Paul says let a woman…receive instruction, he is not requesting, rather he commands that the women be taught. That Paul is here discussing the order of the church (cf. 1Ti_3:15) shows the learning he speaks of was to take place in that context (cf. Act_2:42). It should be noted that despite the claims of some to the contrary, teaching and worship are not mutually exclusive. Rather, knowledge of God and His Word helps stimulate worship. Worship is to be in spirit and in truth (cf. Joh_4:20-24).
It may seem obvious to us that women should be taught God's Word, since they are spiritually equal in Christ and the commands of the New Testament are to all (1Pe_2:1-2). It was not at all obvious, however, to those who came from a Jewish background. first-century Judaism did not hold women in high esteem. While not barred from attending synagogue, neither were they encouraged to learn. In fact, most rabbis refused to teach women, and some likened it to throwing pearls to pigs.
Nor was the status of women in Greek society much better. William Barclay writes,
The respectable Greek woman led a very confined life. She lived in her own quarters into which no one but her husband came. She did not even appear at meals. She never at any time appeared on the street alone; she never went to any public assembly. (The Letters to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975], 67)
The existence of such a mind set at Ephesus may have contributed to the reaction of the women against such denigration. Unfortunately, some went too far, overreacting to their suppression by seeking a dominant position. Before Paul confronts that overreaction, however, he affirms their right to learn.
The prevalent Jewish tradition about women did not come from the Old Testament. The Old Testament affirmed that women have a spiritual status equal to that of men. The Mosaic law was given to all Israel, women as well as men (Deu_1:1). Both were to teach it to their children (Deu_6:4-7; Pro_6:20). The protection of the law applied equally to women (cf. Exo_21:28-32). Women had inheritance rights (Num_36:1-12). Men and women alike participated in the Jewish religious feasts (cf. Exo_12:3; Deu_16:9-15). The single greatest spiritual vow, the Nazirite vow, was open to both men and women (Num_6:2). Women were involved in spiritual service (Exo_38:8; Neh_7:67). Nor did God hesitate to deal directly with women (Gen_3:13 : Gen_16:7-13; Jdg_13:3).
Spiritual equality between the sexes did not, however, do away with the difference in their roles. There were no queens in either Israel or Judah (Athaliah was a usurper). It is true that Deborah served as a judge (Judg. 4:4-5:31). Her case, however, was unique. Dr. Robert L. Saucy comments,
There may be instances when the regular pattern of God's order may have to be set aside due to unusual circumstances. When, for example, the husband and father is absent, the woman of the house assumes the headship of the family. So it would appear, there may be unusual circumstances when male leadership is unavailable for one reason or another. At such times God may use women to accomplish his purposes even as he used Deborah. (“The Negative Case Against the Ordination of Women,” in Kenneth S. Kantzer and Stanley N. Gundry, eds., Perspectives on Evangelical Theology [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979], 285)
It is significant that Deborah declined to lead the military campaign against the Canaanites, deferring instead to a man, Barak. No women served as priests. None of the authors of the Old Testament were women. No woman had an ongoing prophetic (Speaking before people) ministry like that of Elijah, Elisha, or the other prophets. While Miriam (Exo_15:20), Deborah (Jdg_4:4), Huldah (2Ki_22:14), and Isaiah's wife (Isa_8:3) are called prophetesses, none had a permanent calling to that office. Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah gave only one recorded prophecy, and Isaiah's wife none. She is called a prophetess because she gave birth to a child whose name had prophetic meaning. A fifth woman mentioned as a prophetess, Noadiah, was a false prophetess (Neh_6:14). While God spoke through women on a few limited occasions, no woman had an ongoing role of preaching and teaching.
The New Testament, like the Old, teaches the spiritual equality and differing roles of the sexes. Gal_3:28 teaches the absolute spiritual equality of men and women in Christ. While many use that verse to justify women assuming leadership roles in the church, the context shows that Paul is speaking of salvation (cf. Gal_3:22, Gal_3:24, Gal_3:26, Gal_3:27). Again Saucy writes,
The interpretive question [in Gal_3:28] is: What is the distinction between male and female which is overcome in Christ? To phrase it another way in light of the apostle's statement “for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” what is the “oneness” which male and female share in Christ? We would like to suggest…that the answers to these questions do not concern the functional order between man and woman at all. Rather the issue, as in the other two pairs mentioned [Jews and Greeks, slaves and freemen], concerns spiritual status before God.…To impart the issue of the functional orders of human society into this passage is to impute a meaning not justified by a valid contextual exegesis. There is therefore no more basis for abolishing the order between man and woman in the church from Gal_3:28 than for abolishing an order between believing parents and children or believing citizens and rulers. For they are all one in Christ in or out of the organization of the church. (Saucy, 281-82)
That interpretation is further strengthened by the use of the general terms “male” and “female.” In every Pauline passage dealing with functional roles, the terms “man” and “woman,” or “husband” and “wife” appear. “Why, if the apostle is speaking of the functional relationship in Gal_3:28, does he not use the language which he uses in every other passage? Why does he not say, ‘there is neither man nor woman’ in Christ rather than ‘male’ and ‘female’?” (Saucy, 283). Oneness in Christ did not obliterate the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles. Nor did it remove the functional differences between slaves and masters (cf. 1Co_7:20-24). Why, then, should we assume it did so between men and women?
In no way does the New Testament treat women as spiritual inferiors. The first person Jesus revealed His messiahship to was a woman (Joh_4:25-26). Jesus healed women (Mar_5:25-34; Luk_13:11-13). In contrast to the prevailing practice of the rabbis, He taught women (Luk_10:38-42). Women ministered to Jesus and the disciples (Luk_8:2-3). Following His resurrection, Jesus appeared first to a woman (Mar_16:9; Joh_20:11-18). Women and men were involved in the prayer services of the early church (Act_1:13-14). Peter reminds men that women are to be “[granted] honor as fellow [heirs] of the grace of life” (1Pe_3:7). The fruit of the Spirit (Gal_5:21-22) are for both men and women. In short, all the promises, commands, and blessings of the New Testament apply equally to women and men.
As in the Old Testament, spiritual equality does not preclude differing roles. There are no women pastor-teachers, evangelists, or elders in the New Testament. None of the authors of the New Testament were women. The New Testament nowhere records a sermon or teaching of a woman. While the daughters of Philip are said to have prophesied (Act_21:9), neither the occasion nor the message is defined. There is no reason to assume they had an ongoing preaching ministry, or that they taught during the public worship. They, like Mary the mother of Jesus (Luk_1:46.), or Anna (Luk_2:36-39), delivered some message of truth elsewhere. As noted in chapter 6 of this volume, a comparison of 1Co_11:5 and 1Co_14:34 indicates women are permitted to pray and speak the Word, but Paul here makes clear that such allowance is not in the assembly of the church.
electedbyhim
Member
Part 2
When the church gathers, however, women are to listen to the men who teach quietly…with entire submissiveness. Hesuchia appears at the beginning of 1Ti_2:11 (quietly), and the end of 1Ti_2:12 (quiet), thus bracketing Paul's teaching on the role of women with the principle of silence. Submissiveness translates hupotage, which means “to line up under.” With entire emphasizes the complete subjection called for. In the context of the worship, then, women are to be silent and content in the role of the learner.
Some have tried to evade the plain meaning of the text by arguing that hesuchia means a meek and quiet spirit. Women, they contend, can preach or teach as long as they do it with the proper attitude. Some go to the opposite extreme and use this text as a prohibition against any talking during church by women. Neither of those revisionist interpretations is valid, however. The context makes the meaning unmistakable to the honest reader.
In 1Ti_2:12, Paul actually interprets the meaning of 1Ti_2:11. He defines exactly what he means by women staying quiet in the worship: But I do not (As the apostle of Jesus Christ, who speaks through me) allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. Women are to keep quiet in the sense of not teaching. They are to demonstrate subjection by not usurping the authority of the elder or preacher. That is true not because women are in any sense inferior to men, but because God's law commands it (1Co_14:34), in line with His design for the weaker vessels. Those who insist that subordination and equality are mutually exclusive would do well to consider Christ's relationship to the Father. While on earth, Jesus assumed a subordinate role, yet He was in no way inferior. 1Co_11:3 states, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.”
Epitrepo (allow) is always used in the New Testament to speak of permitting someone to do what they desire to do. Paul's choice of words may imply that some women in Ephesus desired to be the public preachers, and thus have authority over the congregation—as in today's church. Paul, however, speaking as the official apostle of Jesus Christ, does not allow that. The role of the elder as evangelist or pastor-teacher is only for men.
The present infinitive didaskein (to teach) would best be translated “to be a teacher.” The noted Greek grammarians H E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey wrote the following on the distinction between the aorist infinitive and the present infinitive:
It is well to notice particularly the difference between the aorist and present infinitive. The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, while the present infinitive indicates a condition or process. Thus pisteusai [aorist] is to exercise faith on a given occasion, while pisteuein [present] is to be a believer. (A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament [Toronto: MacMillian, 1957], 199)
By using the present infinitive instead of the aorist, Paul does not forbid women to teach under appropriate conditions and circumstances, but to fill the office and role of the pastor or teacher in the life of the church.
Paul also adds the prohibition that forbids women to exercise authority over a man. Authentein (exercise authority over), another present infinitive, appears only here in the New Testament. Some have attempted to evade the force of Paul's prohibition by arbitrarily supposing that authentein should properly be translated “abusive authority.” Women, according to that view, can exercise authority over men so long as it is not abusive authority. A study of the extra-biblical uses of authentein, however, makes clear that the word means simply authority. It carries no negative connotation, such as abusive or domineering authority. Paul, then, in an unqualified directive, forbids women from exercising any type of authority over men in the church. It is the ”elders [clearly men, since 1Ti_3:2 states they must be ‘the husband of one wife’] who rule” (1Ti_5:17).
That does not entirely rule out women teaching. Priscilla and Aquila both instructed Apollos (Act_18:26), but in private and not in the worship of the church. And women can and must teach other women (cf. Tit_2:3-4). Nor does it mean women cannot pray, merely that they are not to lead the prayers during the public worship of the church. It does not mean that women do not have spiritual gifts in the area of public speaking and leadership. The issue is where they exercise those gifts.
Some question whether women can fill leadership roles on the mission field in the absence of men. It is significant that Paul, who wrote this passage, was himself the greatest missionary the world has ever seen. Yet he made no exceptions for the mission field. God does not violate His principles for the sake of expediency.
Through the years there have been a number of good examples of how to cope with a shortage of men on the mission field. I know missionary women personally who found themselves in a situation where no men were present and they alone were biblically trained to handle the Word. Rather than violate the Scripture, they would prepare the message or lesson and teach it to a native man, who would be the preacher when the church gathered.
Women must stop believing the devil's lie that the only role of significance is that of leadership. People usually desire places of prominence not to humbly serve others, but to boost their own egos and gain power and control. Leaders, however, bear a heavy burden and responsibility, and the subordinate role often is one of greater peace and happiness. Subordination is not punishment, but privilege.
The Design of Women
For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression. (1Ti_2:13-14)
A popular view today is that woman's subordinate role is a corruption of God's perfect design that was the result of the Fall. Since the effects of the curse are intended to be reversed in Christ, it is argued, differing male and female roles should be abolished. Paul, however, establishes woman's subordinate role not in the Fall, but in the divine order of original creation. For it was Adam who was first created, he writes, and then Eve. God made woman after man to be his suitable helper (Gen_2:18). The priority of man's role is obvious.
Nor was Paul's teaching prompted by some cultural situation at Ephesus and hence not applicable today, as some argue. He not only appeals here to the creation account in Gen_2:1-25, but also taught this same truth to the Corinthians (1Co_11:8-9).
Paul does not derive women's role from the Fall, but he uses that event as further corroboration of God's intention. He points out that it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression. Gen_3:1-7 chronicles the tragic account of what happened when Eve usurped the headship role:
Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, lest you die.’” And the serpent said to the woman, “You surely shall not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
The whole human race thus fell into depravity and judgment. Eve was not suited by nature to assume the position of ultimate responsibility. When she stepped out from under the protection and leadership of Adam, she was highly vulnerable and fell. And, of course, when Adam violated his leadership role and followed Eve (Though it was not he who was deceived), the perversion of God's order was complete. The Fall resulted, then, not simply from disobedience to God's command, but from violating God's appointed roles for the sexes. That is not to say that Adam was less culpable than Eve, or that she was more defective. Although he was not deceived by Satan, as was Eve, Adam still chose to disobey God. As the head of their relationship, he bore ultimate responsibility. That is why the New Testament relates the Fall to Adam's sin, not Eve's (Rom_5:12-21; 1Co_15:21-22). Headship by the man, then, was part of God's design from the beginning, and he bears the responsibility for its success or failure. The tragic experience of the garden encounter with the serpent confirmed the wisdom of that design.
When the church gathers, however, women are to listen to the men who teach quietly…with entire submissiveness. Hesuchia appears at the beginning of 1Ti_2:11 (quietly), and the end of 1Ti_2:12 (quiet), thus bracketing Paul's teaching on the role of women with the principle of silence. Submissiveness translates hupotage, which means “to line up under.” With entire emphasizes the complete subjection called for. In the context of the worship, then, women are to be silent and content in the role of the learner.
Some have tried to evade the plain meaning of the text by arguing that hesuchia means a meek and quiet spirit. Women, they contend, can preach or teach as long as they do it with the proper attitude. Some go to the opposite extreme and use this text as a prohibition against any talking during church by women. Neither of those revisionist interpretations is valid, however. The context makes the meaning unmistakable to the honest reader.
In 1Ti_2:12, Paul actually interprets the meaning of 1Ti_2:11. He defines exactly what he means by women staying quiet in the worship: But I do not (As the apostle of Jesus Christ, who speaks through me) allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. Women are to keep quiet in the sense of not teaching. They are to demonstrate subjection by not usurping the authority of the elder or preacher. That is true not because women are in any sense inferior to men, but because God's law commands it (1Co_14:34), in line with His design for the weaker vessels. Those who insist that subordination and equality are mutually exclusive would do well to consider Christ's relationship to the Father. While on earth, Jesus assumed a subordinate role, yet He was in no way inferior. 1Co_11:3 states, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.”
Epitrepo (allow) is always used in the New Testament to speak of permitting someone to do what they desire to do. Paul's choice of words may imply that some women in Ephesus desired to be the public preachers, and thus have authority over the congregation—as in today's church. Paul, however, speaking as the official apostle of Jesus Christ, does not allow that. The role of the elder as evangelist or pastor-teacher is only for men.
The present infinitive didaskein (to teach) would best be translated “to be a teacher.” The noted Greek grammarians H E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey wrote the following on the distinction between the aorist infinitive and the present infinitive:
It is well to notice particularly the difference between the aorist and present infinitive. The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, while the present infinitive indicates a condition or process. Thus pisteusai [aorist] is to exercise faith on a given occasion, while pisteuein [present] is to be a believer. (A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament [Toronto: MacMillian, 1957], 199)
By using the present infinitive instead of the aorist, Paul does not forbid women to teach under appropriate conditions and circumstances, but to fill the office and role of the pastor or teacher in the life of the church.
Paul also adds the prohibition that forbids women to exercise authority over a man. Authentein (exercise authority over), another present infinitive, appears only here in the New Testament. Some have attempted to evade the force of Paul's prohibition by arbitrarily supposing that authentein should properly be translated “abusive authority.” Women, according to that view, can exercise authority over men so long as it is not abusive authority. A study of the extra-biblical uses of authentein, however, makes clear that the word means simply authority. It carries no negative connotation, such as abusive or domineering authority. Paul, then, in an unqualified directive, forbids women from exercising any type of authority over men in the church. It is the ”elders [clearly men, since 1Ti_3:2 states they must be ‘the husband of one wife’] who rule” (1Ti_5:17).
That does not entirely rule out women teaching. Priscilla and Aquila both instructed Apollos (Act_18:26), but in private and not in the worship of the church. And women can and must teach other women (cf. Tit_2:3-4). Nor does it mean women cannot pray, merely that they are not to lead the prayers during the public worship of the church. It does not mean that women do not have spiritual gifts in the area of public speaking and leadership. The issue is where they exercise those gifts.
Some question whether women can fill leadership roles on the mission field in the absence of men. It is significant that Paul, who wrote this passage, was himself the greatest missionary the world has ever seen. Yet he made no exceptions for the mission field. God does not violate His principles for the sake of expediency.
Through the years there have been a number of good examples of how to cope with a shortage of men on the mission field. I know missionary women personally who found themselves in a situation where no men were present and they alone were biblically trained to handle the Word. Rather than violate the Scripture, they would prepare the message or lesson and teach it to a native man, who would be the preacher when the church gathered.
Women must stop believing the devil's lie that the only role of significance is that of leadership. People usually desire places of prominence not to humbly serve others, but to boost their own egos and gain power and control. Leaders, however, bear a heavy burden and responsibility, and the subordinate role often is one of greater peace and happiness. Subordination is not punishment, but privilege.
The Design of Women
For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression. (1Ti_2:13-14)
A popular view today is that woman's subordinate role is a corruption of God's perfect design that was the result of the Fall. Since the effects of the curse are intended to be reversed in Christ, it is argued, differing male and female roles should be abolished. Paul, however, establishes woman's subordinate role not in the Fall, but in the divine order of original creation. For it was Adam who was first created, he writes, and then Eve. God made woman after man to be his suitable helper (Gen_2:18). The priority of man's role is obvious.
Nor was Paul's teaching prompted by some cultural situation at Ephesus and hence not applicable today, as some argue. He not only appeals here to the creation account in Gen_2:1-25, but also taught this same truth to the Corinthians (1Co_11:8-9).
Paul does not derive women's role from the Fall, but he uses that event as further corroboration of God's intention. He points out that it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression. Gen_3:1-7 chronicles the tragic account of what happened when Eve usurped the headship role:
Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, lest you die.’” And the serpent said to the woman, “You surely shall not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
The whole human race thus fell into depravity and judgment. Eve was not suited by nature to assume the position of ultimate responsibility. When she stepped out from under the protection and leadership of Adam, she was highly vulnerable and fell. And, of course, when Adam violated his leadership role and followed Eve (Though it was not he who was deceived), the perversion of God's order was complete. The Fall resulted, then, not simply from disobedience to God's command, but from violating God's appointed roles for the sexes. That is not to say that Adam was less culpable than Eve, or that she was more defective. Although he was not deceived by Satan, as was Eve, Adam still chose to disobey God. As the head of their relationship, he bore ultimate responsibility. That is why the New Testament relates the Fall to Adam's sin, not Eve's (Rom_5:12-21; 1Co_15:21-22). Headship by the man, then, was part of God's design from the beginning, and he bears the responsibility for its success or failure. The tragic experience of the garden encounter with the serpent confirmed the wisdom of that design.
electedbyhim
Member
Part 3
The Contribution of Women
But women shall be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. (1Ti_2:15)
Preserved is from sozo, the common New Testament word for salvation. The word can also mean “to rescue,” “to preserve safe and unharmed,” “to heal,” “to set free,” or “to deliver from.” It appears a number of times in the New Testament without reference to spiritual salvation (cf. Mat_8:25; Mat_9:21-22; Mat_10:22; Mat_24:22; Mat_27:40, Mat_27:42, Mat_27:49; 2Ti_4:18). Paul obviously does not intend to teach that women are eternally saved from the wages of sin through the bearing of children. That would contradict the New Testament's teaching that salvation is by grace through faith alone (cf. Rom_3:19-20). The future tense and the use of the plural pronoun they indicate that he was not even referring to Eve. The plural and the absence of any connection to the context show Paul was not referring to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as some suggest.
Paul teaches here that although a woman precipitated the Fall and women bear that responsibility, yet they may be preserved from that stigma through childbearing. The rescue, the delivery, the freeing of women from the stigma of having led the race into sin happens when they bring up a righteous seed. What a perfect counter! Women are far from being second-class citizens because they have the primary responsibility for rearing godly children. Mothers spend far more time with their children than do their fathers, and thus have the greater influence. Fathers cannot know the intimate relationship with their children that their mother establishes from pregnancy, birth, infancy, and early childhood. Paul's point is that while a woman may have led the race into sin, women have the privilege of leading the race out of sin to godliness. That does not mean that God wants all women to bear children; some He doesn't even want married (1Co_7:25-40). Paul speaks in general terms. The pain associated with childbirth was the punishment for the woman's sin (Gen_3:16), but the joy and privilege of child rearing delivers women from the stigma of that sin.
For women to reverse the blight that has befallen them in the Fall and fulfill their calling they need to raise a godly seed. To do that, they must continue in faith and love, where their salvation really rests. And they must continue in sanctity (Holiness) with self-restraint (The same word translated “discreetly” in verse 1Ti_2:9). It is the very appearance, demeanor, and behavior demanded of believing women in the church that becomes their deliverance from any inferior status, as they live godly and raise godly children.
In this passage we see how God has perfectly balanced the roles of the sexes. (For a complete discussion of the design of God for men and women in the church, see my book Different by Design [Wheaton, Ill.: Victor, 1994].) Men are to be the leaders in the church and the family. Women are kept from any accusation of inferiority through the godly influence they have in the lives of their precious children. For the church to depart from this divine order is to perpetuate the disaster of the Fall.
The Contribution of Women
But women shall be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. (1Ti_2:15)
Preserved is from sozo, the common New Testament word for salvation. The word can also mean “to rescue,” “to preserve safe and unharmed,” “to heal,” “to set free,” or “to deliver from.” It appears a number of times in the New Testament without reference to spiritual salvation (cf. Mat_8:25; Mat_9:21-22; Mat_10:22; Mat_24:22; Mat_27:40, Mat_27:42, Mat_27:49; 2Ti_4:18). Paul obviously does not intend to teach that women are eternally saved from the wages of sin through the bearing of children. That would contradict the New Testament's teaching that salvation is by grace through faith alone (cf. Rom_3:19-20). The future tense and the use of the plural pronoun they indicate that he was not even referring to Eve. The plural and the absence of any connection to the context show Paul was not referring to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as some suggest.
Paul teaches here that although a woman precipitated the Fall and women bear that responsibility, yet they may be preserved from that stigma through childbearing. The rescue, the delivery, the freeing of women from the stigma of having led the race into sin happens when they bring up a righteous seed. What a perfect counter! Women are far from being second-class citizens because they have the primary responsibility for rearing godly children. Mothers spend far more time with their children than do their fathers, and thus have the greater influence. Fathers cannot know the intimate relationship with their children that their mother establishes from pregnancy, birth, infancy, and early childhood. Paul's point is that while a woman may have led the race into sin, women have the privilege of leading the race out of sin to godliness. That does not mean that God wants all women to bear children; some He doesn't even want married (1Co_7:25-40). Paul speaks in general terms. The pain associated with childbirth was the punishment for the woman's sin (Gen_3:16), but the joy and privilege of child rearing delivers women from the stigma of that sin.
For women to reverse the blight that has befallen them in the Fall and fulfill their calling they need to raise a godly seed. To do that, they must continue in faith and love, where their salvation really rests. And they must continue in sanctity (Holiness) with self-restraint (The same word translated “discreetly” in verse 1Ti_2:9). It is the very appearance, demeanor, and behavior demanded of believing women in the church that becomes their deliverance from any inferior status, as they live godly and raise godly children.
In this passage we see how God has perfectly balanced the roles of the sexes. (For a complete discussion of the design of God for men and women in the church, see my book Different by Design [Wheaton, Ill.: Victor, 1994].) Men are to be the leaders in the church and the family. Women are kept from any accusation of inferiority through the godly influence they have in the lives of their precious children. For the church to depart from this divine order is to perpetuate the disaster of the Fall.