Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Silence, Women..

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Silence, Women..

    1Tim. 2:8-15

    I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. 11Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

    Please read the following article by Douglas Moo who concludes that "the restrictions imposed by Paul in 1 Timothy 2:12 are valid for Christians in all places and all times." After doing so, comments are more than welcome.

    https://bible.org/seriespage/9-what-...timothy-211-15

  • #2
    Summarize.
    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
      1Tim. 2:8-15

      I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. 11Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

      Please read the following article by Douglas Moo who concludes that "the restrictions imposed by Paul in 1 Timothy 2:12 are valid for Christians in all places and all times." After doing so, comments are more than welcome.

      https://bible.org/seriespage/9-what-...timothy-211-15
      This letter was given to Timothy for particular issues that were being dealt with at the church of Ephesus. Which is how Paul's letters are structured. I doubt he was creating church policy here. Unless you want to take 1 Tim. 2:15 as church policy as well. I don't think you want to start teaching that women are saved through childbirth.
      Last edited by Jesse; 01-04-2016, 12:22 PM.
      "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jesse View Post
        This letter was given to Timothy for particular issues that were being dealt with at the church of Ephesus. Which is how Paul's letters are structured. I doubt he was creating church policy here. Unless you want to take 1 Tim. 2:15 as church policy as well. I don't think you want to start teaching that women are saved through childbirth.
        I think he is. If it was localized instruction then he likely would have given a localized reason for the command, but he does not. Paul refers to the universal condition of women by reference to the fall, and therefore his instruction has universal application.

        My view is that "childbearing" is Paul's redirection of a woman's compulsion to teach. Instead of leading men, she should leading her children. The curse of labor has practical redemption in her ability to raise godly children.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
          1Tim. 2:8-15

          I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. 11Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

          Please read the following article by Douglas Moo who concludes that "the restrictions imposed by Paul in 1 Timothy 2:12 are valid for Christians in all places and all times." After doing so, comments are more than welcome.

          https://bible.org/seriespage/9-what-...timothy-211-15
          Originally posted by Jesse View Post
          I don't think you want to start teaching that women are saved through childbirth.
          Although many people argue over what this means -- I find several points interesting:

          1. The Greek verb "I am not now permitting" does not imply not an infinite extension -- rather it means what it says: "I am not currently permitting..."

          2. The story of Adam & Eve, given the culture surrounding the epistle, could just as well be referring to proper use and limits of authority, as opposed to the proper gender of a leader. In fact, I tend to believe this interpretation explains much more regarding the text and fits better with the actual story of creation.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by nico View Post
            I think he is. If it was localized instruction then he likely would have given a localized reason for the command, but he does not. Paul refers to the universal condition of women by reference to the fall, and therefore his instruction has universal application.

            My view is that "childbearing" is Paul's redirection of a woman's compulsion to teach. Instead of leading men, she should leading her children. The curse of labor has practical redemption in her ability to raise godly children.
            All the epistles are focused on 'localized' instruction. There are no two ways about it. (Timothy was a real person and a real leader, dealing with real issues)

            There are universal principles that are called upon, however, to address those 'localized' issues.


            The interpretative question here is whether Paul is making the point of excluding women for all time (text literally does NOT say this) -- or whether is was due to some local issue.

            With that issue in play, the question then becomes whether the women at the time were 'disqualified' from exercising or usurping authority due to the fact that they were women, or due to the fact that the women in context were new to the faith...(with their understanding limited -- just like Eve who learned second hand)

            Comment


            • #7
              And here's JPH on that here.

              Glenn Miller gives more detail.

              He makes the following points:

              Verse 11 is a non-issue, and actually provides limited evidence for preparation for a teaching ministry.

              The women are to "learn in silence." Despite the negative connotations this phrase brings to our ears, in the first century "silence" (hesychia) was a positive attribute. It did not necessarily entail "not speaking," as is evident in Paul's use of the word earlier in the chapter (I Tim 2.2; compare 2 Thess 3.12). Rather, it implied respect or lack of disagreement (as in Acts 11.18; 21.14). As a result, the rabbis and the early church fathers deemed quietness appropriate for rabbinical students, wise persons and even leaders." (WS:WIC:128)
              The phrase "in submission" is closely related to this notion, and together the two images call up the memory of Mary, "sitting at the feet of Jesus" in rabbinical student style (cf. Luke 10.39).
              The interesting thing about this is that this was used of "future or current teachers"! Rabbincal students were generally preparing for a teaching ministry, 'wise men' and 'leaders' ALREADY were in teaching/authority roles. So, the very cast that this imperative is set in suggests a FUTURE teaching ministry for those women who learned in the proper fashion of students.
              The "learning/teach others" cycle is 'standard' in Paul: And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who (nb: generic 'anthropos') will also be qualified to teach others. (2 Tim 2.2).
              This becomes a bit more obvious when we compare the 'life-style' teaching given women in more traditional roles (Titus 2.4-5: Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.). There seems to be a sort of 'teacher-track' in view in I Tim 2, and a 'lay person' track in the Titus passage.
              And also,

              Now, if we try to peace this together, certain things seem to emerge:
              There were false teachers, at least one of whom must have been a woman, that taught a reverse-bible story about adam/eve.
              These teachers argued for their position that women preceded men, and also did not suffer from 'deception'.
              They therefore would have claimed to be a source of 'purer' revelation than the apostolic circle and the OT scripture (a standard "Gnostic" claim).
              Paul deals with this situation (1) defensively first--TEACH the women the Word; and (2) offensively--Forbid these false women teachers (also characterized by immodesty, pomp, and bragging of godliness) to teach/proclaim this doctrine, and make sure they take their place in the 'classroom' with the other people being discipled according to the Word.

              What this would mean for our study, is that this passage does NOT restrict women's role in the early church, but only the roles of FALSE TEACHERS--in this case, with the special case of women heretics.
              Remember also the I Cor 14 passage...If I was correct in my understanding of that, then Paul's scope of the 'not teaching' is ALREADY restricted to a VERY specific context confronting the Ephesians. He, accordingly, could not be issuing a 'gag order' without contradicting his earlier argumentation in I Corinthians (assuming that he had not changed his mind for some reason, of course, but we have no reason to assume that.).
              -The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
              Sir James Jeans

              -This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
              Sir Isaac Newton

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View Post
                And here's JPH on that here.

                Glenn Miller gives more detail.

                He makes the following points:



                And also,
                Thanks for sharing that Quantum Weirdness. It saved me from having too . Like I said, Paul was speaking of a particular situation that was happening in the church of Ephesus. Paul's letters are always within this context, as phat8594 mentioned.
                Last edited by Jesse; 01-04-2016, 07:07 PM.
                "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by phat8594 View Post
                  1. The Greek verb "I am not now permitting" does not imply not an infinite extension -- rather it means what it says: "I am not currently permitting..."
                  Is it, "I am not permitting now" or "I am permitting not now"? In my mind the first phrase use "not" to modify "permitting"; the second one has "not" modifying "now." I guess you have in mind the first phrase.
                  The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                  [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    Summarize.
                    Hopefully the points in the article will be covered organically as the discussion unfolds. I'll do my best to shore up the substance of Dr. Moo's argument.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Friends, I'll be away from the thread for a bit so there'll be a delay in my responses/interactions. QW, I'll read both articles and get back to you. I have skimmed Glenn Miller's article before and wasn't persuaded, but I'll give it a closer look.

                      Thanks.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by phat8594 View Post
                        All the epistles are focused on 'localized' instruction. There are no two ways about it. (Timothy was a real person and a real leader, dealing with real issues)

                        There are universal principles that are called upon, however, to address those 'localized' issues.
                        I don't disagree with you here.


                        The interpretative question here is whether Paul is making the point of excluding women for all time (text literally does NOT say this) -- or whether is was due to some local issue.
                        Where do you get the "literally does NOT say this" part? I'm curious where he textually denies the universal applicability of the command. For sure, Paul "literally" says that the reason women should not teach is because she was created second to Adam and that she was deceived by false doctrine which led to the fall, hence she should not be instructing men.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by nico View Post
                          Where do you get the "literally does NOT say this" part? I'm curious where he textually denies the universal applicability of the command. For sure, Paul "literally" says that the reason women should not teach is because she was created second to Adam and that she was deceived by false doctrine which led to the fall, hence she should not be instructing men.
                          He doesn't deny the universal applicability -- rather the command, based on the wording and grammar, does not even imply a universal applicability of the command. IOW, the text doesn't say that it is universal -- rather if anything it means "I do not currently permit..."

                          So what that means is that for those who see this as universal (for all women, for all time, in all circumstances), they will need to show how we go from 'Not currently permitting' to 'Never permitting'

                          I hope that makes sense...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by phat8594 View Post
                            He doesn't deny the universal applicability -- rather the command, based on the wording and grammar, does not even imply a universal applicability of the command. IOW, the text doesn't say that it is universal -- rather if anything it means "I do not currently permit..."

                            So what that means is that for those who see this as universal (for all women, for all time, in all circumstances), they will need to show how we go from 'Not currently permitting' to 'Never permitting'

                            I hope that makes sense...
                            It does make sense, and I think I understand the argument you are trying to make. When you say in english, "I do not currently permit," it implies a temporal condition. However, the Greek does not translate to include the word "currently", as if that temporal modifier were inherent in the text. The translation as it stands "I do not permit" is exactly what it should be. He does not need to include a temporal modifier such as, "I do not ever permit" because it isn't necessary. He is simply stating that he doesn't permit it, much the same way I would say, "I do not permit my children to disrespect their parents".

                            I could understand the desire to include a temporal modifier in the english translation if the immediate context surrounding the verse was suggesting a temporal command. However, Paul immediately follows the command with a universal, timeless reason why women can't teach. It clarifies what the present indicative means. Namely, that the command will always have present applicability.

                            What are your thoughts on Paul's reason for including vv. 12-15?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by nico View Post
                              It does make sense, and I think I understand the argument you are trying to make. When you say in english, "I do not currently permit," it implies a temporal condition. However, the Greek does not translate to include the word "currently", as if that temporal modifier were inherent in the text. The translation as it stands "I do not permit" is exactly what it should be. He does not need to include a temporal modifier such as, "I do not ever permit" because it isn't necessary. He is simply stating that he doesn't permit it, much the same way I would say, "I do not permit my children to disrespect their parents".
                              Well, this is where we get into multiple issues at hand.

                              1. Greek grammar does not always match English - and sometimes English translations can misconstrue a meaning. In this case, this is a present active indicative verb which literally means "I am not (now) permitting". So Paul isn't really talking about a universal principle (he gets to that later), but rather is merely describing what he is currently doing.

                              2. The Greek verb here "I am not (now) permitting" is never once used in any other Greek literature to reflect a permanent ban. So for us to assume that it is a permanent ban, would mean that we are going against the textual evidence that we have to translate/interpret the word 'I am not permitting'.


                              Originally posted by nico View Post
                              I could understand the desire to include a temporal modifier in the english translation if the immediate context surrounding the verse was suggesting a temporal command. However, Paul immediately follows the command with a universal, timeless reason why women can't teach. It clarifies what the present indicative means. Namely, that the command will always have present applicability.

                              What are your thoughts on Paul's reason for including vv. 12-15?
                              Well, I guess it depends on whether you think Paul never thinks women should teach of whether you think Paul is giving a reason of why he currently does not believe women should teach (in the context of the letter).

                              I personally see Paul referring to the created order, not as a reason why women are subject to men (in the context of creation, we actually see that subjugation is actually a curse of the fall) - but rather why new believers should spend more time learning rather than teaching. Given the culture of Ephesus and the context of the letter, it would not be odd for high status women to come into the church and immediately think they had authority. (as was the case with the pagan religions)

                              So the question is whether Paul is appealing to Genesis to show that:

                              1. The created order shows a created subjugation of one sex to another (i.e. women for all time should never (as in never, ever) teach men)
                              or
                              2. The creation story shows how it is important to properly learn from those with first hand accounts before teaching others / exercising authority.


                              As for #1, if we look back at the creation story (something Timothy and the Early Church would have been aware of) we actually see something different. We don't see subjugation...in fact, the subjugation and domination comes AFTER the fall, as a consequence of sin:


                              Genesis 3:16
                              To the woman he said,

                              “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
                              in pain you shall bring forth children.
                              Your desire shall be for your husband,
                              and he shall rule over you.”


                              Now as for #2, what is interesting is that the creation account actually only has God telling Adam to not eat of the fruit:
                              Genesis 2:15-18
                              The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

                              Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”

                              And of course, when Eve talks to the serpent she gets the commandment wrong:
                              Genesis 3:2-3
                              And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’

                              IOW, she probably should have learned it better....This is why Paul does not stop at 'being formed first', but continues to say:
                              1 Timothy 2:14
                              and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

                              And it is also why Paul started off talking about the women as such:
                              1 Timothy 2:11
                              Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness.


                              So again, the problem wasn't the gender, but usurping of authority. Likewise, any new believer (male or female) should not usurp authority and should learn quietly with all submissiveness. As shown by Eve, it is those who are newest to the teachings who are most likely deceived. Being female wasn't Eve's problem -- as if she was deceived simply because she was a woman -- but rather she was deceived (as opposed to Adam) because she was not firmly grounded in the word of God before taking authority and eating of the tree.
                              Last edited by phat8594; 01-06-2016, 12:05 AM.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                              35 responses
                              166 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                              4 responses
                              49 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                              Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                              10 responses
                              119 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post mikewhitney  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                              14 responses
                              71 views
                              3 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                              13 responses
                              58 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Working...
                              X