Tough to understand this one in today's context

[loozcannon]

I’m very fortunate to work in a place that has a Bible study once a week.

Today we talked about scriptures that are tough to understand today. Perhaps “controversial” is a better word. The gist was that the whole Bible is the inspire Word of God and you have to accept the whole thing; not just cherry pick, ala the Jeffersonian Bible.

With that said, he wanted to broach this:

[BIBLEDRB]1 Tim 2:9-15[/BIBLEDRB]



I do understand that Paul wrote this to address a specific incident, at a specific church, at a specific time. Naturally, women have a problem with this statement, and to be honest, I’m not sure how to interpret this.

I mean I do know that a man is the leader of the household, and that each gender serves an important role for God and His Church.

Anybody out there wiser and more knowledgable than I care to address this?

Peace be with you, and God bless.

 

[mcrow]

Well, let’s start by looking at verse 8 just before this section starts. Verse 8 is the instructions to men, the part you quote is the instructions to women. Basically he’s telling both men and women to behave in a more Christian manor. Remember, a good portion of this part of 1 Timothy Paul is addressing what it seems to be a problem with the behavior in the church of both men and women. Men are the leaders of the church and apparently women were trying to assert some authority they don’t have and behaving/dressing inappropriately for a christian woman.

OTOH, Paul tells the men of the church to quit all of anger and arguements.

Just like in many places in the bible the author will give instructions to both sexes.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

I apologize if this is blunt but it’s at this point that I would just give up. It’s hopelessly misogynistic and you can’t defend it any more than you can defend the pro-slavery passages in the Bible.

 

[mcrow]

I apologize if this is blunt but it’s at this point that I would just give up. It’s hopelessly misogynistic and you can’t defend it any more than you can defend the pro-slavery passages in the Bible.

Hear we go.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

women were trying to assert some authority they don’t have

By “some authority they don’t have”, I presume you mean any authority whatsoever? The passage refers to women learning in “all subjection.”

Perhaps the meaning of “all subjection” is slightly different in the Greek?

 

[mcrow]

By “some authority they don’t have”, I presume you mean any authority whatsoever? The passage refers to women learning in “all subjection.”

Perhaps the meaning of “all subjection” is slightly different in the Greek?

This part of the book is in relation to church structure, from what I’ve been able to dig up. So, Paul is speaking in relation to the organization of the church. Even in today’s church women cannot be priests, apparently there was some sort of issues with women trying to take on some role or activity that is for male members of the church. It’s not clear exactly what activity that was. Apparently there were issues with the way some of the women were dressing as well and problems with the men fighting. He’s addressing issues with both men and women, though different issues.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Hear we go.

I’m sorry that I’ve offended you, but honestly what can one do with this? Paul is not exactly friendly towards women here. He has a very negative opinion of their intellect.

If you want to say that Paul wrote Galatians and thus Gal 3:28 then maybe you can get him off the hook for being a sexist that way?

I’m not opposed to listening to other viewpoints.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

This part of the book is in relation to church structure, from what I’ve been able to dig up. So, Paul is speaking in relation to the organization of the church. Even in today’s church women cannot be priests, apparently there was some sort of issues with women trying to take on some role or activity that is for male members of the church. It’s not clear exactly what activity that was. Apparently there were issues with the way some of the women were dressing as well and problems with the men fighting. He’s addressing issues with both men and women, though different issues.

This is probably an accurate description of what’s going on, for sure. I think that there ought to be an extreme amount of caution given to interpreting such passages, though.

Otherwise they may lead to bizarre stuff like THIS written by a Catholic, no less. (Says that women should never hold political office, teach in schools, etc., etc.)

 

[loozcannon]

Otherwise they may lead to bizarre stuff like THIS written by a Catholic, no less. (Says that women should never hold political office, teach in schools, etc., etc.)

See, that’s my point! I can definitely see the potential for this scripture (if taken out of context) to explode in a negative way!

My understanding, in this instance, is that women shouldn’t be too much concerned with their adornments, so much as they should be concerned about their works.

However, there it is in black and white, basically saying that women have no authority whatsoever, beyond procreating and child rearing.

We discussed this today, yet I felt we really didn’t get an answer. It seemed to be that everyone just acknowedged that it is the Word of God, that it’s there, but no one could give me a real answer…

 

[SonCatcher]

This is probably an accurate description of what’s going on, for sure. I think that there ought to be an extreme amount of caution given to interpreting such passages, though.

Otherwise they may lead to bizarre stuff like THIS written by a Catholic, no less. (Says that women should never hold political office, teach in schools, etc., etc.)

People would still write such drivel even in the absence of these passages.

In one place where St. Paul writes about a marriage relationship, he compares it to the relationship between Christ and the Church. It is appropriate, therefore, to interpret passages concerning marriage and gender roles in like terms.

Similarly, [too,] [Christians] should adorn themselves with proper conduct, with modesty and self-control, not with [lavish lifestyles], but rather, as befits [Christians] who profess reverence for God, with good deeds. A [Christian] must receive instruction silently and under complete control. I do not permit a [Christian] to teach or to have authority over [Christ]. S/he must be quiet. For [Christ] was first, then the Church. Further, [Christ] was not deceived, but [human beings were] deceived and transgressed. But [they] will be saved through [evangelization], provided [they] persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

 

[loozcannon]

This part of the book is in relation to church structure, from what I’ve been able to dig up. So, Paul is speaking in relation to the organization of the church. Even in today’s church women cannot be priests, apparently there was some sort of issues with women trying to take on some role or activity that is for male members of the church. It’s not clear exactly what activity that was. Apparently there were issues with the way some of the women were dressing as well and problems with the men fighting. He’s addressing issues with both men and women, though different issues.

Right. This letter was written by Paul to Timothy who was running a church. This was intended to be read by someone who we have to presume was knowledgeable, not a lay person.

You seem to be thinking along the same lines I am.

I know what I want to say but I’m having a hard time choosing the right words. Let me think on this some more. In the mean time, I do look forward to more (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[loozcannon]

In one place where St. Paul writes about a marriage relationship, he compares it to the relationship between Christ and the Church. It is appropriate, therefore, to interpret passages concerning marriage and gender roles in like terms.

Similarly, [too,] [Christians] should adorn themselves with proper conduct, with modesty and self-control, not with [lavish lifestyles], but rather, as befits [Christians] who profess reverence for God, with good deeds. A [Christian] must receive instruction silently and under complete control. I do not permit a [Christian] to teach or to have authority over [Christ]. S/he must be quiet. For [Christ] was first, then the Church. Further, [Christ] was not deceived, but [human beings were] deceived and transgressed. But [they] will be saved through [evangelization], provided [they] persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

 

[Riddle_me_this]

What you have to remember is that Paul was writing to the congregation that had a very different culture than we do today. It was at that time very disrespectful for a women to have any place of authority in the congregation.
Does God change? Of course not. None of the physical laws that he has put into place have ever changed (i.e. gravity) but people have changed and I guess they feel that God should change right along with them. Unfortunately, or maybe not, it doesn’t work that way.
But what we do know about Paul is that he respected the cultures of the people that he visited…hense the scripture at 1 Corinthians 9-19-23.
Now we also have the arrangement of submission that is pretty clear so I don’t think that God has all of a sudden changed how he feels about that.

These scriptures might help:
1*Tim. 3:2,12
1Cor. 14:33,*34
1 Cor. 11:3-10
Prov. 31:10-31

But as far as the equality goes you also have this scripture:
Gal. 3:26-28
1*Pet. 3:7

You see they have the same reward that men do but while on earth that have to be in subjection to the man the same way the man has to be in subjection to the Lord.
Men have more responsiblity and therefore more accountablity so in a sense it is a kindness for a women not to have to deal with the obligation of having authority in the congregation.

Of course religions over the years have all been know to cave to the ideals of groups even if the bible says otherwise so it is to be expected. We have to be careful not to follow that dangerous path.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

What you have to remember is that Paul was writing to the congregation that had a very different culture than we do today. It was at that time very disrespectful for a women to have any place of authority in the congregation.
Does God change? Of course not. None of the physical laws that he has put into place have ever changed (i.e. gravity) but people have changed and I guess they feel that God should change right along with them. Unfortunately, or maybe not, it doesn’t work that way.
But what we do know about Paul is that he respected the cultures of the people that he visited…hense the scripture at 1 Corinthians 9-19-23.
Now we also have the arrangement of submission that is pretty clear so I don’t think that God has all of a sudden changed how he feels about that.

These scriptures might help:
1*Tim. 3:2,12
1Cor. 14:33,*34
1 Cor. 11:3-10
Prov. 31:10-31

But as far as the equality goes you also have this scripture:
Gal. 3:26-28
1*Pet. 3:7

You see they have the same reward that men do but while on earth that have to be in subjection to the man the same way the man has to be in subjection to the Lord.

So, is it your opinion that the order of importance is:

1. God
2. Men
3. Women

?

 

[SonCatcher]

So, is it your opinion that the order of importance is:

1. God
2. Men
3. Women

?

Sorry. I just don’t see that in the post you’re quoting. Would you care to explain how you read “importance” into it?

Importance and submission are very different things (by that, I mean that one is not the opposite of the other).

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Sorry. I just don’t see that in the post you’re quoting. Would you care to explain how you read “importance” into it?

Importance and submission are very different things (by that, I mean that one is not the opposite of the other).

Can you tell me how you would you describe it? If woman submits to man and man submits to God, then we’ve certainly got a hierarchy of: God first, Men second, Women third. I don’t know what to call that hierarchy, but it sure sounds like a hierarchy, right?

 

[SonCatcher]

Can you tell me how you would you describe it? If woman submits to man and man submits to God, then we’ve certainly got a hierarchy of: God first, Men second, Women third. I don’t know what to call that hierarchy, but it sure sounds like a hierarchy, right?

“Hierarchy” is an order of rule. Specifically, “hierarchy” refers to an order established by God, so that term is relevant to Riddle’s post. When one submits, it is to an order of rule. Submission, therefore, can be to a hierarchy.

Again, however, importance is a very different thing that has nothing to do with submission or hierarchy. One cannot say, for example, “God is important and I am not.” Such a statement is heresy (the second part is the heresy). Every human person is important. Otherwise, God would not have sent His Son to redeem us.

 

[Yab_Yum]

Is absolutely everything that comes from the mouth of Paul directly inspired?

1Co 7:25 Now, concerning what you wrote about unmarried people: I do not have a command from the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is worthy of trust.

If we asked Paul what the scriptural basis was for 1Tim 2:11-15 what do you think he would say?

 

[edwest2]

I apologize if this is blunt but it’s at this point that I would just give up. It’s hopelessly misogynistic and you can’t defend it any more than you can defend the pro-slavery passages in the Bible.

Definition, misogynist: A hater of women. Noun

There are other places where Paul berates Christians for non-Christian behavior. He establishes a code of behavior for both sexes. Pope John Paul II comments further:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[Riddle_me_this]

So, is it your opinion that the order of importance is:

1. God
2. Men
3. Women

?

Absolutely not! See that is where the confusion comes in to play. Yes men bear more responsiblity as the family head under God but that by no means makes them more important to him.
Remember the bible tells us that God is not partial but because of our physical and mental makeup men are usually able to bear more than women.
Don’t forget too the order of things since Adam and Eve. It has only been in the last 100 years that women have had as much freedom as they do now and it is only in some parts of the world at that.
It was considered very dangerous for a woman to be alone in bible times and that is why Paul admonished the brothers to look after the widows and the orphans.
If a woman was married then she would be under subjection to the family head who of course would be her husband. At the same time how could she hold a position of authority over another family head in the congregation? It doesn’t make any sense.
Looking at the big picture you see things a lot clearer.