A
Alabaster
Guest
She fits in that she must be the spouse of one, faithful, and her spouse must be honourable and she must be able to manage her household well.
Obviously as Phoebe was considered diakonos, she certainly fits.
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
WOMEN PASTORS
- Thread starter Bonairos
- Start date
She fits in that she must be the spouse of one, faithful, and her spouse must be honourable and she must be able to manage her household well.
Obviously as Phoebe was considered diakonos, she certainly fits.
theLords
Member
1 Cor 14:34-36 (KJV)
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only.
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only.
A
Alabaster
Guest
1 Cor 14:34-36 (KJV)
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only.
Don't you think using such a font is kind of barging in with rudeness?
cleanfreak
Member
You are taking the verse clearly out of context. You missed the beginning of the verse where Paul clearly uses 'anēr', which means 'an adult male person'.
We will have to agree to disagree it seems.
theLords
Member
No, I think it needs to be seen very clearly. Obviously, this passage is not what everyone is making of it.
Paul is making a statement in reply to the statement of the men of Corinth. ;)
A
Alabaster
Guest
1 Corinthians 14:34-26 NLT
<sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28672">34</sup> Women should be silent during the church meetings. It is not proper for them to speak. They should be submissive, just as the law says. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28673">35</sup> If they have any questions, they should ask their husbands at home, for it is improper for women to speak in church meetings.<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href="#fen-NLT-28673h" title="See footnote h">h</a>]"></sup>
<sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28674">36</sup> Or do you think God’s word originated with you Corinthians? Are you the only ones to whom it was given?
First off--men are to learn in silence as well. Good manners is important! But certain women were problematic at this church.
There are only two passages in the entire NT which might seem to contain a prohibition against the ministry of women (1 Corinthians 14:34 and 1 Timothy 2:12). Since these must be placed alongside Paul's many other statements and practices, they can hardly be considered absolute, unequivocal prohibitions of the ministry of women. Instead, they are teachings dealing with specific, local problems that needed correction.
There are various interpretations of what Paul was limiting when he said, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak." Options include:
1. chatter in public services
2. ecstatic eruptions
3. certain authoritative ministries (such as judging prophecies)
4. asking questions during services
Yet, Paul apostolically allows all women to pray and prophesy in the corporate worship setting, and even encourages it (1 Corinthians 11:5).
Conclusion? This passage does not prohibit female leadership, but like the rest of the chapter, and in keeping with the theme, it admonishes that "all things be done decently and in order (1 Corinthians 14:40).
<sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28672">34</sup> Women should be silent during the church meetings. It is not proper for them to speak. They should be submissive, just as the law says. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28673">35</sup> If they have any questions, they should ask their husbands at home, for it is improper for women to speak in church meetings.<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href="#fen-NLT-28673h" title="See footnote h">h</a>]"></sup>
<sup class="versenum" id="en-NLT-28674">36</sup> Or do you think God’s word originated with you Corinthians? Are you the only ones to whom it was given?
First off--men are to learn in silence as well. Good manners is important! But certain women were problematic at this church.
There are only two passages in the entire NT which might seem to contain a prohibition against the ministry of women (1 Corinthians 14:34 and 1 Timothy 2:12). Since these must be placed alongside Paul's many other statements and practices, they can hardly be considered absolute, unequivocal prohibitions of the ministry of women. Instead, they are teachings dealing with specific, local problems that needed correction.
There are various interpretations of what Paul was limiting when he said, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak." Options include:
1. chatter in public services
2. ecstatic eruptions
3. certain authoritative ministries (such as judging prophecies)
4. asking questions during services
Yet, Paul apostolically allows all women to pray and prophesy in the corporate worship setting, and even encourages it (1 Corinthians 11:5).
Conclusion? This passage does not prohibit female leadership, but like the rest of the chapter, and in keeping with the theme, it admonishes that "all things be done decently and in order (1 Corinthians 14:40).
A
Alabaster
Guest
Sorry, but it is not out of context but in perfect context with all of Paul's anointed teachings.
theLords
Member
“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.â€â€“Paul, 1 Timothy 2:11-12
Paul’s letters are already difficult to interpret because they are like listening to one side of a telephone conversation, but faulty translations only further complicate our understanding of his words. There are a few key words that are conveniently mistranslated in 1 Timothy 2: 11-15.
Hesuchios/Hesuchia: Traditionalists normally translate this word as “silence†(at least in passages concerning women), but the word in all other places is translated as “peacefulness†“Peaceable†or “quietness.†The word does not carry the meaning of literal silence or absence of speech, but of an atmosphere or presence in which learning should take place. Strong’s Greek Dictionary defines hesuchios/hesuchias as “properly, keeping one’s seat,†“stillness†“undisturbed,†“undisturbing,†and “peaceable.â€
When Paul has absence of speech in mind, he uses the term “sigao.†The same word is used just nine verses earlier and is translated as “peaceable,†1 Timothy 2:1-2. Hesuchios/hesuchia is translated as quiet/quietness in 1 Thess. 4:11, 2 Thess. 3:12, 1 Peter 3:4. None of these verses are about silence, as in the literal absence of speech, but a tranquil quietness or peaceable presence/environment. This fits the context much better than a literal silence, since Paul just rebuked the men in the congregation for praying while angry and quarreling. Obviously, this would NOT be the optimum environment for anyone to learn in. Thus, Paul tells Timothy to make sure the woman can learn in quietness or peacefulness, and not amid the chaos that was taking over church meetings.
Paul also instructs that women should learn in full submission. This is not a unique request asked only of women, but men are also suppose to learn in full submission to the gospel and sound teaching. The reason this command is directed toward women here is only because teaching women in the same way as men was still a revolutionary practice and still repulsive to many men, believers or not.
Now, onto the grand-daddy of mistranslations and controversy….
“…nor to have authority over [authentein] a man…â€
Exousia is the normal word used for “authority,†a carrying out of one’s official duties. But this is not the word Paul uses here. He instead picks the word authentein and it is the ONLY time this word appears in the New Testament. Exousia, however, appears over 100 times. Other uses of authentein from the same time period show that this word does not simply mean legitimate or routine authority, but carries violent, sexual, and dominating meanings.
Authentein.
It cannot be stressed enough how unusual this word is, especially for Paul. Paul writes about authority quite a bit and he never uses authentein as a synonym for legitimate, godly authority. For most mentions of authority, he uses exousia. Louw and Nida’s Lexicon lists 12 common ancient Greek words that are synonyms for routine or legitimate authority, exousia being the most common throughout the new testament. There are 47 words that are synonyms for legitimate “rule†or “governing.†Yet Paul uses none of these words in 1 Timothy 2:11, he chooses the unusual authentein.
We do not find any evidence that authentein, in any of its forms, connotates a routine or legitimate authority until the late third to fourth centuries, far too removed from Paul’s era to provide relevant meanings and contexts. And even once the word took on a less severe meaning in later centuries, THIS passage was ALWAYS been understood as Paul forbidding women to dominate a man, not simply exercise legitimate Christ-like authority. Consider these early translations:
Old Latin Version from the second – fourth century translates this verse as “I permit not a woman to teach, neither to dominate a man {neque dominari in viro}.
The Vulgate, from the second to fourth century, translates this verse as “I permit not a woman to teach, neither to domineer over a man {neque dominari in virum}.
“There is a basically unbroken tradition, stemming from the oldest version and running down to the twenty first century, that translates authentein as “to dominate†and not “to exercise authority over.â€-Linda Belleville
It is not until the 1500s that the verb authentein used in this verse changes from the drastically negatively-charged “to dominate/domineer†to a slightly water-downed phrase, “to usurp authority†(thanks, King James). Still different from exercising legitimate authority, but much less forceful than the violent and even sexual connotations of the original authentein. The King James version asserts that women are not to wrestle authority or seize it from men. No believer is permitted to usurp authority or act in self-interest over others. It is not until after World War II that authentein really gets the botched-translated: “to exercise/assume authority over.†That’s right, less than 80 years ago! So, the notion that women may never exercise godly authority within the body based on this verse is completely unbiblical, both logically and historically.
Source: The Mistranslation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 « christian feminism
Feminism: a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women
Paul’s letters are already difficult to interpret because they are like listening to one side of a telephone conversation, but faulty translations only further complicate our understanding of his words. There are a few key words that are conveniently mistranslated in 1 Timothy 2: 11-15.
Hesuchios/Hesuchia: Traditionalists normally translate this word as “silence†(at least in passages concerning women), but the word in all other places is translated as “peacefulness†“Peaceable†or “quietness.†The word does not carry the meaning of literal silence or absence of speech, but of an atmosphere or presence in which learning should take place. Strong’s Greek Dictionary defines hesuchios/hesuchias as “properly, keeping one’s seat,†“stillness†“undisturbed,†“undisturbing,†and “peaceable.â€
When Paul has absence of speech in mind, he uses the term “sigao.†The same word is used just nine verses earlier and is translated as “peaceable,†1 Timothy 2:1-2. Hesuchios/hesuchia is translated as quiet/quietness in 1 Thess. 4:11, 2 Thess. 3:12, 1 Peter 3:4. None of these verses are about silence, as in the literal absence of speech, but a tranquil quietness or peaceable presence/environment. This fits the context much better than a literal silence, since Paul just rebuked the men in the congregation for praying while angry and quarreling. Obviously, this would NOT be the optimum environment for anyone to learn in. Thus, Paul tells Timothy to make sure the woman can learn in quietness or peacefulness, and not amid the chaos that was taking over church meetings.
Paul also instructs that women should learn in full submission. This is not a unique request asked only of women, but men are also suppose to learn in full submission to the gospel and sound teaching. The reason this command is directed toward women here is only because teaching women in the same way as men was still a revolutionary practice and still repulsive to many men, believers or not.
Now, onto the grand-daddy of mistranslations and controversy….
“…nor to have authority over [authentein] a man…â€
Exousia is the normal word used for “authority,†a carrying out of one’s official duties. But this is not the word Paul uses here. He instead picks the word authentein and it is the ONLY time this word appears in the New Testament. Exousia, however, appears over 100 times. Other uses of authentein from the same time period show that this word does not simply mean legitimate or routine authority, but carries violent, sexual, and dominating meanings.
Authentein.
It cannot be stressed enough how unusual this word is, especially for Paul. Paul writes about authority quite a bit and he never uses authentein as a synonym for legitimate, godly authority. For most mentions of authority, he uses exousia. Louw and Nida’s Lexicon lists 12 common ancient Greek words that are synonyms for routine or legitimate authority, exousia being the most common throughout the new testament. There are 47 words that are synonyms for legitimate “rule†or “governing.†Yet Paul uses none of these words in 1 Timothy 2:11, he chooses the unusual authentein.
We do not find any evidence that authentein, in any of its forms, connotates a routine or legitimate authority until the late third to fourth centuries, far too removed from Paul’s era to provide relevant meanings and contexts. And even once the word took on a less severe meaning in later centuries, THIS passage was ALWAYS been understood as Paul forbidding women to dominate a man, not simply exercise legitimate Christ-like authority. Consider these early translations:
Old Latin Version from the second – fourth century translates this verse as “I permit not a woman to teach, neither to dominate a man {neque dominari in viro}.
The Vulgate, from the second to fourth century, translates this verse as “I permit not a woman to teach, neither to domineer over a man {neque dominari in virum}.
“There is a basically unbroken tradition, stemming from the oldest version and running down to the twenty first century, that translates authentein as “to dominate†and not “to exercise authority over.â€-Linda Belleville
It is not until the 1500s that the verb authentein used in this verse changes from the drastically negatively-charged “to dominate/domineer†to a slightly water-downed phrase, “to usurp authority†(thanks, King James). Still different from exercising legitimate authority, but much less forceful than the violent and even sexual connotations of the original authentein. The King James version asserts that women are not to wrestle authority or seize it from men. No believer is permitted to usurp authority or act in self-interest over others. It is not until after World War II that authentein really gets the botched-translated: “to exercise/assume authority over.†That’s right, less than 80 years ago! So, the notion that women may never exercise godly authority within the body based on this verse is completely unbiblical, both logically and historically.
Source: The Mistranslation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 « christian feminism
Feminism: a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women
cleanfreak
Member
Why are you ignoring the fact he used 'anēr'? Maybe because it is clearly defined the same way it is the other 215 times in scripture.
Oh well, I tried.
handy
Member
I hadn't heard the term either (yes, I've been watching this thread) so thought I'd look it up as well.
It comes from Romans 16:2 "that you receive her (Phoebe) in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well.
Prostatis is translated as "helper" in the NASB, "succourer" in the KJV. According to Strongs the word means:
1) a woman set over others
2) a female guardian, protectress, patroness, caring for the affairs of others and aiding them with her resources
Considering that Paul gave instructions to the Roman Christians to render Phoebe whatever aid she required from them, the 1st definition of the word fits, as well as the second definition as Paul said she was a helper to him as well.
A good definition of "succourer" a word not really all that common anymore is someone who saves others and/or gives help during times of distress.
I'm not sure where diakonos is used as a verb, but we know at least from the context of Romans 16:1 that Pheobe was a diakonos (noun) not that she actively diakonosed (verb?, what would the verb form look like?).
However, as a deacon is a separate office than a pastor, I'm not sure that Phoebe is the best example to use in support of women pastors.
A few random thoughts on the thread...
I believe that God is both a sexist and a bigot, but I would disagree that either of these things are necessarily sinful. We tend to think they are sinful, because that is the standard of the day...but God holds Himself to a differing standard. Is it inherently sexist to deliberately place husbands over wives and men over women? Yes...that is what the very definition of sexism is...Is that sinful? Nope, not that I can see.
Suppression of women is a whole different story though, and for too long...way to long, the Body suppressed women both as wives and as members in the church.
They say if you repeat a lie often enough, people start believing it as a truth...I think one "lie" that has been repeated over and over and over again was that women were nothing more than chattle or possessions within the Scriptures.
Not so!!! Not even remotely so! The Scriptures are filled with women who were strong, courageous, worked hard, held high offices (for better or for worse, better: Deborah; worse: Jezebel), prophesied like the men did, did business like the men did (the Proverbs 31 woman was a business woman, as was Lydia, the first Christian in Europe), taught like the men did, and sometimes acted far more intelligently than some men did (ever read the story of Abigail and Nabal?).
We have somehow been conditioned to believe that women in the Bible were downtrodden, helpless and hopeless, and yet I do not find that the Bible teaches this at all. I think the historic suppression of women is more of an example of the Church being influenced by Satan (who is the enemy of the woman, and boy does he ever hate women) rather than being influenced by what the Bible actually teaches about women.
I do find that the Bible teaches us that there are differing roles for men and for women, especially within the church and within marriage.
In marriage, it is crystal clear that the woman is to submit to her husband. We have had several threads on submission and that submission is not subservience nor suppression, but rather the voluntary giving up of one's will to another. That God commands this of wives is irrefutable.
However, within the church...things aren't all that clear cut to me. We do have several statements made by Paul regarding certain women in certain churches to be sure.
But, we also have Paul seemingly acting contrary to his own words...saying that women aren't to teach, yet praising Pricillia, a woman who taught Apollos. Saying that women are to be SILENT in church, yet recommending that they wear a head-covering when praying or prophesying. (And let's face it, prophesy is a gift for the edification of the church...I am not buying the argument that Paul was referring to woman only prophesying at home. The context of the very passage itself refutes that idea.) We have Paul saying that a woman is not to hold authority over a man, and yet he tells the Romans to do whatever Phoebe tells them to do.
Since we know that Paul is NOT contradicting himself and that Paul was fully and wholly inspired by the Holy Spirit to write and act as he did, then we should simply apply the same hermeneutical standards to his writings about women as we do any other topic of Scripture...let Scripture interpret Scripture and look at all passages of a given topic to examine what the Holy Spirit is truly requiring of us.
For instance, let's take the topic of the Law. Reading through the Old Testament, we see that the Law is God's requirement of all of us. Jesus Himself verified this when He said, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill."
Many Christian over the years (some members of this site) look to this declaration by Christ and say that we Christians are subject to the Law, except for the sacrificial part of it. Oh, and circumcision.
However, when we look at the totality of what the Scriptures say regarding the Law...we see that Jesus did indeed fulfill the Law, it's purpose is finished and we are not longer bound to follow it's precepts...meaning that the Bacon Cheeseburger I just ate wasn't sinful. Fattening as all get out (I'd better spend a little extra time on the treadmill!), but not sinful as it most assuredly would be under the Law.
So, looking at the totality of Scriptures when it comes to how women can and should exercise their God given abilities, talents and spiritual gifts within the Body, I see that God has called women to fill authoritative positions (He called Deborah to be judge of Israel), to be prophets, (various women prophets from Miriam to the daughters of Philip), to be home-church leaders (Lydia), to be deacons (Phoebe), to teach (Priscilla).
I've gone over and over this issue for a number of years now. It used to be, back in my Orthodox Presbyterian days that I equated women pastors with heretical liberal apostasy. I now believe that this is an area where different Christians can hold differing views and yet still be accepted as a Bible believing, affirming Christian. Much in the same way sincere, bible-affirming Christians can hold differing views on baptism (infant vs. believers, sprinkling vs. immersion) or predestination vs. free-will without falling into apostasy.
My own view is that women should not be the final authority or ultimate teacher in a church. I do believe that this is most in line with instructions Paul gave to the church...instructions straight from the Holy Spirit. However, if the church overseers do find that a woman is more gifted with teaching or preaching and they desire her to do so under their authority, so be it.
Having said that...I've no desire to change churches, and the church I go to now would never ordain a woman pastor.
theLords
Member
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE:
Exegetical Fallacies in Interpreting 1 Timothy 2:11–15
This is by far the best article I’ve read on 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Linda Belleville, a new testament professor, put together a thorough and compelling paper on 5 exegetical fallacies concerning 1 Timothy 2:11-12 : Contextual/historical, Lexical, Grammatical, Cultural, and Doctrinal. She provides a thorough survey of the early uses of authenteo, in all its forms. This is a MUST read to gain a proper understanding of the egalitarian position.
Catherine C. Kroeger also put together a brilliant survey of authentein (and all it’s sister-nouns/adjectives) uses from before Paul up until the third and fourth centuries. I would particularly challenge Tonya and Catrina to read these articles in full before giving me CBMW rebuttals.
These combined articles find that early uses of authentein (in its noun, verb, and adjective forms) collectively mean “criminal mastermind,†“a perpetrator,†“one who slays with his own hand,†“self-murder,†“women who can command domestic and sexual services from their male concubines,†“incestuous sex and murder,†“religious sexual orgies,†“to dominate,†“to control,†“to restrain,†and “to domineer.â€
Hardly the meaning we find in modern translations of 1 Timothy 2:11.
One of the earliest meanings to authentein is the act of murder or the act of violence.
Wisdom of Solomon 12:6, an apocrypha book translated into ancient Greek, considered “scripture†by both Jews and Christians until the second century AD, uses a form of authentein.
“With their priests out of the midst of their idolatrous crew, and the parents, that killed with their own hands [authentas] souls destitute of help.â€
Ancient Greek grammarians and lexicographers define authentein as “to dominate,†“to control, restrain, and domineer.†It is also classified as a “vulgar†term, possibly because of it’s sexual uses.
Other notable uses of the word include:
Josephus, the famous Jewish historian from Paul’s own time, used the noun form, authenten, to describe the “author†of a poisonous drink. Diodorus of Sicily wrote about the “sponsors†(authentas) of daring plans and the “perpetrators†(authentas) of a crime. John Chrysostom, an early church father, used the same word, authentia to express “sexual license†or perverse sexual practices. Clement, another early church father, linked the word with women involved in sexual orgies.
Catherine Kroeger makes an excellent analysis of the implications of the original meaning of authentein:
“Chrysostom [the early church father] uses autheritia to denote “sexual license.†If the word in this context refers to sexual behavior, it puts a quite different interpretation on the entire passage. For instance, if we were to translate the passage, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or discuss higher algebra with a man,’ we would understand the prohibition to be directed against instruction in mathematics. Suppose it read, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or talk Japanese with a man.’ Then we infer that the injunction applies to the teaching of language. ‘I forbid a woman to teach or dangle a man from a high wire’ would presuppose that the instructor was an aerialist. ‘I forbid a woman to teach or engage in fertility practices with a man’ would imply that the woman should not involve a man in the heretical kind of Christianity which taught licentious behavior as one of its doctrines. Such a female heretic did indeed ‘teach to fornicate’ in the Thyatiran church mentioned in Revelation 2:20 (cf. 2:14f.; Num. 25:3; 31:15f.).
Too often we underestimate the seriousness of this problem for the New Testament church. A passage in 2 Peter expresses concern not only for those drawn into this error but also for the illegitimate children which it produced:
‘But Israel had false prophets as well as true; and you likewise will have false teachers among you. . . . Having eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls, an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children which have forsaken the right way … following the way of Balaam…. They utter big empty words, and make of sensual lusts and debauchery a bait to catch those who have barely begun to escape from their heathen environment (2:1,14f.,18).’â€
Others have conducted in depth word studies on authentein with similar results…
Dr. David H. Scholer sites Leeland Edward Wilshire’s exhaustive study of the word authentien.
“Wilshire is the first to use the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG) computer database, which contains virtually all three thousand ancient Greek authors from Homer to A.D. 600. The database showed that authentein and its cognates occurred about 330 times and over a large number of centuries almost exclusively meant “a perpetrator of a violent act, either murder or suicide.â€
But there is no evidence from the first century that authentein means ordinary or legitimate authority. Nothing exists until the late third and fourth centuries to suggest other meanings, and even then, the verse in question still translates authentein as “dominating men†or “domineer over men.â€
Paul is not allowing a woman to teach others to dominate men, to teach the domination of men, nor to dominate a man themselves, but to be peaceable (heshucias). This verse has nothing to do at all with mature, trained christian women exercising their spiritual gifts and serving the body through teaching, preaching, or leading. These were women led astray by false teaching, whom Paul is correcting in these verses and who must start at the beginning with full submission to the gospel and sound teaching.
He ties in the creation story to draw a correlation between Eve being deceived by the voice of false teaching and these women. It is a reminder to the church of the devastating effects of false teaching and deception.
I know someone is going to say, “Well, if Paul is forbidding dominating others as opposed to holding mere authority and it’s wrong for all believers to dominate each other, why does Paul only address this to women?†Consider that HERE IN THIS LETTER, Paul is correcting the ones exhibiting specific behaviors. Consider that Paul only tells the men to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger or disputing. Now, just because he only directs the men here in this verse, does that mean women shouldn’t lift up holy hands? Does it mean women are free to be angry and constantly disputing in or out of church? Of course not. But the men in the body were the ones exhibiting this behavior, so Paul only addresses them, even though it’s inappropriate for all believers to behave that way. Likewise, he only addresses the women about dominating and seizing authority through false teachings, possibly sexual ones, because they were the ones doing it in this instance.
Consider this reality of ancient Greek culture pointed out by Catherine Koeger:
“Virtually without exception, female teachers among the Greeks were courtesans, such as Aspasia, who numbered Socrates and Pericles among her students. Active in every major school of philosophy, these hetairai (high-class, intellectual prostitues) made it evident in the course of their lectures that they were available afterwards for a second occupation. But the Bible teaches that to seduce men in such a manner was indeed to lead them to slaughter and the halls of death (cf. Prov. 2:18; 5:5; 7:27; 9:18). The verb authentein is thus peculiarly apt to describe both the erotic and the murderous.â€
It becomes overwhelming clear from the the well-documented culture of Ephesus coupled with the original word meanings used in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, that this mandate is not a prohibition against all women teaching/preaching/leading in the church. It’s simply absurd to keep gifted and qualified women from teaching the truth of the gospel, leading church bodies in the ways of Jesus, or simply contributing their gifts by vocally participating in the gatherings of the entire body because of a verse that was originally a disciplinary action against women at Ephesus. who were lead astray by false teaching.
next post: the case for junia, the lost apostle
Exegetical Fallacies in Interpreting 1 Timothy 2:11–15
This is by far the best article I’ve read on 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Linda Belleville, a new testament professor, put together a thorough and compelling paper on 5 exegetical fallacies concerning 1 Timothy 2:11-12 : Contextual/historical, Lexical, Grammatical, Cultural, and Doctrinal. She provides a thorough survey of the early uses of authenteo, in all its forms. This is a MUST read to gain a proper understanding of the egalitarian position.
Catherine C. Kroeger also put together a brilliant survey of authentein (and all it’s sister-nouns/adjectives) uses from before Paul up until the third and fourth centuries. I would particularly challenge Tonya and Catrina to read these articles in full before giving me CBMW rebuttals.
These combined articles find that early uses of authentein (in its noun, verb, and adjective forms) collectively mean “criminal mastermind,†“a perpetrator,†“one who slays with his own hand,†“self-murder,†“women who can command domestic and sexual services from their male concubines,†“incestuous sex and murder,†“religious sexual orgies,†“to dominate,†“to control,†“to restrain,†and “to domineer.â€
Hardly the meaning we find in modern translations of 1 Timothy 2:11.
One of the earliest meanings to authentein is the act of murder or the act of violence.
Wisdom of Solomon 12:6, an apocrypha book translated into ancient Greek, considered “scripture†by both Jews and Christians until the second century AD, uses a form of authentein.
“With their priests out of the midst of their idolatrous crew, and the parents, that killed with their own hands [authentas] souls destitute of help.â€
Ancient Greek grammarians and lexicographers define authentein as “to dominate,†“to control, restrain, and domineer.†It is also classified as a “vulgar†term, possibly because of it’s sexual uses.
Other notable uses of the word include:
Josephus, the famous Jewish historian from Paul’s own time, used the noun form, authenten, to describe the “author†of a poisonous drink. Diodorus of Sicily wrote about the “sponsors†(authentas) of daring plans and the “perpetrators†(authentas) of a crime. John Chrysostom, an early church father, used the same word, authentia to express “sexual license†or perverse sexual practices. Clement, another early church father, linked the word with women involved in sexual orgies.
Catherine Kroeger makes an excellent analysis of the implications of the original meaning of authentein:
“Chrysostom [the early church father] uses autheritia to denote “sexual license.†If the word in this context refers to sexual behavior, it puts a quite different interpretation on the entire passage. For instance, if we were to translate the passage, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or discuss higher algebra with a man,’ we would understand the prohibition to be directed against instruction in mathematics. Suppose it read, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or talk Japanese with a man.’ Then we infer that the injunction applies to the teaching of language. ‘I forbid a woman to teach or dangle a man from a high wire’ would presuppose that the instructor was an aerialist. ‘I forbid a woman to teach or engage in fertility practices with a man’ would imply that the woman should not involve a man in the heretical kind of Christianity which taught licentious behavior as one of its doctrines. Such a female heretic did indeed ‘teach to fornicate’ in the Thyatiran church mentioned in Revelation 2:20 (cf. 2:14f.; Num. 25:3; 31:15f.).
Too often we underestimate the seriousness of this problem for the New Testament church. A passage in 2 Peter expresses concern not only for those drawn into this error but also for the illegitimate children which it produced:
‘But Israel had false prophets as well as true; and you likewise will have false teachers among you. . . . Having eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls, an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children which have forsaken the right way … following the way of Balaam…. They utter big empty words, and make of sensual lusts and debauchery a bait to catch those who have barely begun to escape from their heathen environment (2:1,14f.,18).’â€
Others have conducted in depth word studies on authentein with similar results…
Dr. David H. Scholer sites Leeland Edward Wilshire’s exhaustive study of the word authentien.
“Wilshire is the first to use the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG) computer database, which contains virtually all three thousand ancient Greek authors from Homer to A.D. 600. The database showed that authentein and its cognates occurred about 330 times and over a large number of centuries almost exclusively meant “a perpetrator of a violent act, either murder or suicide.â€
But there is no evidence from the first century that authentein means ordinary or legitimate authority. Nothing exists until the late third and fourth centuries to suggest other meanings, and even then, the verse in question still translates authentein as “dominating men†or “domineer over men.â€
Paul is not allowing a woman to teach others to dominate men, to teach the domination of men, nor to dominate a man themselves, but to be peaceable (heshucias). This verse has nothing to do at all with mature, trained christian women exercising their spiritual gifts and serving the body through teaching, preaching, or leading. These were women led astray by false teaching, whom Paul is correcting in these verses and who must start at the beginning with full submission to the gospel and sound teaching.
He ties in the creation story to draw a correlation between Eve being deceived by the voice of false teaching and these women. It is a reminder to the church of the devastating effects of false teaching and deception.
I know someone is going to say, “Well, if Paul is forbidding dominating others as opposed to holding mere authority and it’s wrong for all believers to dominate each other, why does Paul only address this to women?†Consider that HERE IN THIS LETTER, Paul is correcting the ones exhibiting specific behaviors. Consider that Paul only tells the men to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger or disputing. Now, just because he only directs the men here in this verse, does that mean women shouldn’t lift up holy hands? Does it mean women are free to be angry and constantly disputing in or out of church? Of course not. But the men in the body were the ones exhibiting this behavior, so Paul only addresses them, even though it’s inappropriate for all believers to behave that way. Likewise, he only addresses the women about dominating and seizing authority through false teachings, possibly sexual ones, because they were the ones doing it in this instance.
Consider this reality of ancient Greek culture pointed out by Catherine Koeger:
“Virtually without exception, female teachers among the Greeks were courtesans, such as Aspasia, who numbered Socrates and Pericles among her students. Active in every major school of philosophy, these hetairai (high-class, intellectual prostitues) made it evident in the course of their lectures that they were available afterwards for a second occupation. But the Bible teaches that to seduce men in such a manner was indeed to lead them to slaughter and the halls of death (cf. Prov. 2:18; 5:5; 7:27; 9:18). The verb authentein is thus peculiarly apt to describe both the erotic and the murderous.â€
It becomes overwhelming clear from the the well-documented culture of Ephesus coupled with the original word meanings used in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, that this mandate is not a prohibition against all women teaching/preaching/leading in the church. It’s simply absurd to keep gifted and qualified women from teaching the truth of the gospel, leading church bodies in the ways of Jesus, or simply contributing their gifts by vocally participating in the gatherings of the entire body because of a verse that was originally a disciplinary action against women at Ephesus. who were lead astray by false teaching.
next post: the case for junia, the lost apostle
T
Theofilus
Guest
I asked a question in post #31 and now, over 60 posts later, nobody has addressed it, so I'd like to repost it.
Some here have used I Tim. 3 and Tit. 1 to support their views. If I am understanding correctly, their reasoning is that since they are required to have wives, and women can't have wives, then pastors have to be men (someone please correct me if I've misunderstood). But these verses imply more than just being male. Single men don't have wives either. Does that mean that they can't be pastors? Do all pastors have to be married? What if the pastor's wife dies, does he have to resign, since he no longer fulfills the requirement of having one wife?
These verses also mention children. What about childless men, can they be pastors? What if a man is infertile, does that disqualify him from being a pastor? What if it's his wife that can't have children, Would that disqualify him? Does adoption count? Note that in both Titus and I Timothy the word "children" is used, not "child". Does that mean that men with only one child can't be pastors?
It also says that the children must be faithful and must not be unruly. If a pastor's children decide to follow another religion or if they get in trouble with the police, does that mean that their father has to resign, since he no longer fulfilles the requrements for being pastor?
If you don't understand what I'm getting at, it's just this: If you believe that women can't be pastors based on these verses in Titus and I Timothy, because women can't be "the husband of one wife" then, to be consistent, you must also rule out single men, since they don't have one wife either. I've heard people say that women can't be pastors, but I've never heard anyone say that single men can't be pastors.
If you are going to be truely consistent, then you must also believe that pastors must have at least two children, who must be Christans and not be any trouble, since that is mentioned in the same context. Yet, I've never heard anyone say that childless men or men who have only fathered one child can't be pastors.
To all of you who believe that the verses in I Timothy and Titus indicate that women can't be pastors, my question to you is this: Do you, based on these same verses, also believe that single men, childless men, fathers of only one child, fathers of non-Christian children, fathers of "problem teenagers"and men who's children have criminal records are all excluded from holding the office of pastor?
Some here have used I Tim. 3 and Tit. 1 to support their views. If I am understanding correctly, their reasoning is that since they are required to have wives, and women can't have wives, then pastors have to be men (someone please correct me if I've misunderstood). But these verses imply more than just being male. Single men don't have wives either. Does that mean that they can't be pastors? Do all pastors have to be married? What if the pastor's wife dies, does he have to resign, since he no longer fulfills the requirement of having one wife?
These verses also mention children. What about childless men, can they be pastors? What if a man is infertile, does that disqualify him from being a pastor? What if it's his wife that can't have children, Would that disqualify him? Does adoption count? Note that in both Titus and I Timothy the word "children" is used, not "child". Does that mean that men with only one child can't be pastors?
It also says that the children must be faithful and must not be unruly. If a pastor's children decide to follow another religion or if they get in trouble with the police, does that mean that their father has to resign, since he no longer fulfilles the requrements for being pastor?
If you don't understand what I'm getting at, it's just this: If you believe that women can't be pastors based on these verses in Titus and I Timothy, because women can't be "the husband of one wife" then, to be consistent, you must also rule out single men, since they don't have one wife either. I've heard people say that women can't be pastors, but I've never heard anyone say that single men can't be pastors.
If you are going to be truely consistent, then you must also believe that pastors must have at least two children, who must be Christans and not be any trouble, since that is mentioned in the same context. Yet, I've never heard anyone say that childless men or men who have only fathered one child can't be pastors.
To all of you who believe that the verses in I Timothy and Titus indicate that women can't be pastors, my question to you is this: Do you, based on these same verses, also believe that single men, childless men, fathers of only one child, fathers of non-Christian children, fathers of "problem teenagers"and men who's children have criminal records are all excluded from holding the office of pastor?
H
Hitch
Guest
Could someone list all the priestesses of Israel ?
A
Alabaster
Guest
Excuse me while I faint.handy said:
Galatians 3:28 NLT
There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Those who oppose allowing women to hold positions of spiritual leadership must place contextual limitations on Galatians 3:28.
God is no respecter of persons:
Romans 2:11 NLT
For God does not show favoritism.
2 Samuel 14:14 NLT
All of us must die eventually. Our lives are like water spilled out on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. But God does not just sweep life away; instead, he devises ways to bring us back when we have been separated from him.
2 Chronicles 19:7 NLT
Fear the Lord and judge with integrity, for the Lord our God does not tolerate perverted justice, partiality, or the taking of bribes.
Acts 10:34 NLT
Then Peter replied, “I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.
Ephesians 6:9 NLT
Masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Don’t threaten them; remember, you both have the same Master in heaven, and he has no favorites.
He calls whom He will and gives gifts and ministries as He chooses (He is not kept in anyone's box); man must not put limitations on divine prerogatives. In Christ we are truly set free from sin and its curse, which separate from God and at the same time elevate or demean according to race, social status or gender.
Theo,
The family is God's plan. His plan is a great picture of Himself. The theme is continuous from Gen to The Revelation!
Mankind jumps in and want to change His plan all the time so sad.
My pitiful answer to you question is yes a pastor should be married and have kids.
A pastor should have one wife IMO that includes not a divorced one.
Christ has one bride Here again is the male female thing.
The family is God's plan. His plan is a great picture of Himself. The theme is continuous from Gen to The Revelation!
Mankind jumps in and want to change His plan all the time so sad.
My pitiful answer to you question is yes a pastor should be married and have kids.
A pastor should have one wife IMO that includes not a divorced one.
Christ has one bride Here again is the male female thing.
H
Hitch
Guest
Thats the same twist the same-sex marriage folks use.:biglol
theLords
Member
It's interesting that if a daughter runs up to her father and says:
"Daddy, I want to be an astronaut! a doctor! an artist! a scientist! a mathematician! the president! a soldier! an author!"
That father's reply would be nothing but encouragement.
"You can be whatever you set your mind to. With hard work you can do anything!"
But if that same little girl goes to her father and tells him she wants to do the most important work in the world, the story is much different.
"Daddy, I want to be a pastor and preach God's word and lead people to salvation!"
"Well, sweetheart, about that...."
That's not the Father God I know.
"Daddy, I want to be an astronaut! a doctor! an artist! a scientist! a mathematician! the president! a soldier! an author!"
That father's reply would be nothing but encouragement.
"You can be whatever you set your mind to. With hard work you can do anything!"
But if that same little girl goes to her father and tells him she wants to do the most important work in the world, the story is much different.
"Daddy, I want to be a pastor and preach God's word and lead people to salvation!"
"Well, sweetheart, about that...."
That's not the Father God I know.