Women should not preach/teach verse reference

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zundrah
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Anniejoe:
It was protestants who removed things from the Bible, Zundrah.

I was saying that the Catholics constructed the New Testament and decided what went in it and what didn’t.
Although Martin Luther did add that word one pesky word,* alone*, to the verse “you are saved by faith.”
If what Luther said was true then the New Testament should only have to be several sentences long.
It is very true that the Catholic Church gave all of us, protestant and Catholic, the Bible. If you are referring to the hundreds of texts that were examined and set aside as not inspired or heretical, yes, of course certain things written during the ancient period aren’t in the Bible. Caesar’s commentaries on the Gallic Wars aren’t in there, either. What’s your point?
Point is, some of what is in there could easily be forgeries.
 
Point is, some of what is in there could easily be forgeries.
__________________


No, Zundrah, with all respect to your opinion, they could not “easily be forgeries”. Because the Church did not just randomly choose texts that supported some agenda they were trying to promote. Instead, each piece of evidence was very careful subjected to rigorous investigation through a variety of methods. You can easily educate yourself about this; if you’re being sincere, I can assure you that you will find the Canon can be defended academically. You can easily satisfy yourself as to the authenticity of the Canon if you are genuinely seeking confirmation that they are authentic and authoritative. If you are just out to discredit statements you don’t agree with, no one can stop you. You are free to believe whatever you wish. But if it is your contention that the Canon includes forgeries, scholarship is not on your side.
 
No, Zundrah, with all respect to your opinion, they could not “easily be forgeries”. Because the Church did not just randomly choose texts that supported some agenda they were trying to promote. Instead, each piece of evidence was very careful subjected to rigorous investigation through a variety of methods. You can easily educate yourself about this; if you’re being sincere, I can assure you that you will find the Canon can be defended academically. You can easily satisfy yourself as to the authenticity of the Canon if you are genuinely seeking confirmation that they are authentic and authoritative.
I’d like to know what exactly gives the Church reassurance that some of Paul’s letters are perfectly acceptable.
 
I’d like to know what exactly gives the Church reassurance that some of Paul’s letters are perfectly acceptable.

Excellent; wanting to know the truth is the first step to finding it.
 
I’d like to know what exactly gives the Church reassurance that some of Paul’s letters are perfectly acceptable.
Hmm… Have you been reading stuff from “nazarenes” and/or messianic jews, by any chance?
 
Hmm… Have you been reading stuff from “nazarenes” and/or messianic jews, by any chance?
I was trying to find out if any denominations have ever rejected some of Paul’s literacy works, and the only result was Messianic Jews. When I read up on why they reject some of it, from my point of view their argument wasn’t very strong, at least most of it wasn’t anyway.
 
I was trying to find out if any denominations have ever rejected some of Paul’s literacy works, and the only result was Messianic Jews. When I read up on why they reject some of it, from my point of view their argument wasn’t very strong, at least most of it wasn’t anyway.
Okay, I was deeply immersed in their nonsense (nazerene/messianic jews) once upon a time and it was also the only place I had ever heard the anti-paul stuff so I thought I’d ask.
 
My post count currently reads “666” so please pardon me while I post a random jumble of smileys to remedy that…

:crying::knight2: …:stretcher:…:knight1::knight1: :nun2::blackeye::nun2:
 
My post count currently reads “666” so please pardon me while I post a random jumble of smileys to remedy that…

:crying::knight2: …:stretcher:…::knight1: :nun2::blackeye::nun2:
Glad we could be of service!!!😃
 
:knight2::knight1::knight1::knight1::knight1::knight1::knight1::knight1:
 
Zundrah,

I don’t know the Church teaching on these particular verses, but it’s my understanding that St. Paul was addressing a particular problem that had arisen in the church in Ephesus concerning a group of women who had set themselves up as teachers of a false doctrine.
Yes - here is more detail on this subject. This is a reprise of a previous post I wrote a few years back.

1 Tim. 2:12-15 (KJV)
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [13] For Adam was first formed, then Eve. [14] And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. [15] Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Frank Viola in his book titled, “The untold story of the New Testament Church’” tells of the historical situation in Ephesus where Timothy was assigned. I have edited down his comments to just those of women’s issues – they were very severe.

Timothy and Paul were dealing with a kind of pre-Gnostic heresy that had come into the church via the male teachers. According to Gnosticism, full salvation comes through special knowledge – gnosis – that only the initiated possess. In Ephesus this is what they were teaching…

Eve is both a mediator and redeemer figure who preexisted Adam. Man came into existence because of a woman, and he was given enlightenment through the woman. Since Eve was the first to take a bite from the Tree of Knowledge, she is the bearer of special spiritual knowledge (called gnosis).

Women are called to lead people to the illuminating gnosis, which was represented by the Tree of Knowledge. Redemption completely reversed the effects of the fall so that men are no longer subject to earthly authorities and women are no longer subject to their husbands.

Those accepting this heresy preferred the leadership of women over men. Male teachers were the first to spread this heresy in Ephesus. But it finds fertile ground among the women in the Church. Remember that the first and second century Churches were home cell groups. It was impossible to address the Church all at one time. Actually women who had opened their homes to the Church had a lot of control over the cell groups in that day.

The homes of the Ephesian women provide a network by which the heresy is spread rapidly through gossip, Some of the women are teaching the heresy in the Church meetings and are lording it over (dominating) the men. They have also accepted the ideals of the “new woman” [which was the Roman equivalent of “women’s lib.”] They are dressing in an immodest and exploitive way (like that of prostitutes) and are defying other accepted norms regarding marriage and family.

There is also a problem with respect to how the widows are being cared for in the Church. Some of the widows have adopted the heresy and others have family members who are able to care for them. Still worse, some of the younger widows who decided not to remarry are acting promiscuously. Consequently, Timothy wants to know which widows the Church ought to be responsible for. Paul wants to go back to Ephesus – but he cannot – he writes the pastoral epistle of 1 Timothy to address all these problems of which this post has not recorded all of them. In any case the situation with the women in particular was very grave and out of control.

One of the difficulties with the interpretation of the afore mentioned scripture is the Greek word “Authentein” (To dominate or rule over). It is only used once in the Bible so there is no frame of reference for this word inside of scripture. Words change in meaning over the years and this is a point in Kroger’s book titled “I suffer not a woman” This author believes - as does Viola - that this passage was written in answer to heretical Gnostic error, which was invading the Church.

Here is an edited comment based on Kroeger’s Book.

“In light of the authentic meaning of the word “authentein” and of the social context within which Paul wrote his letters to Timothy, let me offer what I believe is an appropriate rendering of the text in Timothy. I believe Paul is saying, “I am not allowing (present tense for that situation) a woman to teach or to proclaim herself the originator of man (authentein).”

Do you see how this translation offsets false doctrine?

“The word that is frequently translated “silence,” “hesuchia”, also means harmony, peace, conformity or agreement. I therefore suggest Paul goes on to say, “she must be in agreement,” meaning agreement with the scriptures and with sound teaching in the Church.”

He continues in this vein saying, “Adam was formed first then Eve.” This statement militates against the doctrine of Eve as progenitor. He also says “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was! And sinned!” This statement directly contradicts the notion that Eve was the “illuminator,” and carrier of new revelation (gnosis).

"This translation is the most legitimate because it fits the social context, is true to the Greek, speaks to the troubled situation, and lines up perfectly with all of Paul’s other teachings and practices concerning women.”

Conclusion: Paul was addressing this Gnostic heresy in the Ephesian Church and if you take it literally - as a lot of people do - it suppresses women unjustly and out of the exclusive context of the Ephesian situation in Paul’s day. It is also contradictory to the attitude of Paul throughout his days of ministry as he always saw women as his co-laborers in the Lord.
 
Yes - here is more detail on this subject. This is a reprise of a previous post I wrote a few years back.

1 Tim. 2:12-15 (KJV)
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [13] For Adam was first formed, then Eve. [14] And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. [15] Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Frank Viola in his book titled, “The untold story of the New Testament Church’” tells of the historical situation in Ephesus where Timothy was assigned. I have edited down his comments to just those of women’s issues – they were very severe.

Timothy and Paul were dealing with a kind of pre-Gnostic heresy that had come into the church via the male teachers. According to Gnosticism, full salvation comes through special knowledge – gnosis – that only the initiated possess. In Ephesus this is what they were teaching…

Eve is both a mediator and redeemer figure who preexisted Adam. Man came into existence because of a woman, and he was given enlightenment through the woman. Since Eve was the first to take a bite from the Tree of Knowledge, she is the bearer of special spiritual knowledge (called gnosis).

Women are called to lead people to the illuminating gnosis, which was represented by the Tree of Knowledge. Redemption completely reversed the effects of the fall so that men are no longer subject to earthly authorities and women are no longer subject to their husbands.

Those accepting this heresy preferred the leadership of women over men. Male teachers were the first to spread this heresy in Ephesus. But it finds fertile ground among the women in the Church. Remember that the first and second century Churches were home cell groups. It was impossible to address the Church all at one time. Actually women who had opened their homes to the Church had a lot of control over the cell groups in that day.

The homes of the Ephesian women provide a network by which the heresy is spread rapidly through gossip, Some of the women are teaching the heresy in the Church meetings and are lording it over (dominating) the men. They have also accepted the ideals of the “new woman” [which was the Roman equivalent of “women’s lib.”] They are dressing in an immodest and exploitive way (like that of prostitutes) and are defying other accepted norms regarding marriage and family.

There is also a problem with respect to how the widows are being cared for in the Church. Some of the widows have adopted the heresy and others have family members who are able to care for them. Still worse, some of the younger widows who decided not to remarry are acting promiscuously. Consequently, Timothy wants to know which widows the Church ought to be responsible for. Paul wants to go back to Ephesus – but he cannot – he writes the pastoral epistle of 1 Timothy to address all these problems of which this post has not recorded all of them. In any case the situation with the women in particular was very grave and out of control.

One of the difficulties with the interpretation of the afore mentioned scripture is the Greek word “Authentein” (To dominate or rule over). It is only used once in the Bible so there is no frame of reference for this word inside of scripture. Words change in meaning over the years and this is a point in Kroger’s book titled “I suffer not a woman” This author believes - as does Viola - that this passage was written in answer to heretical Gnostic error, which was invading the Church.

Here is an edited comment based on Kroeger’s Book.

“In light of the authentic meaning of the word “authentein” and of the social context within which Paul wrote his letters to Timothy, let me offer what I believe is an appropriate rendering of the text in Timothy. I believe Paul is saying, “I am not allowing (present tense for that situation) a woman to teach or to proclaim herself the originator of man (authentein).”

Do you see how this translation offsets false doctrine?

“The word that is frequently translated “silence,” “hesuchia”, also means harmony, peace, conformity or agreement. I therefore suggest Paul goes on to say, “she must be in agreement,” meaning agreement with the scriptures and with sound teaching in the Church.”

He continues in this vein saying, “Adam was formed first then Eve.” This statement militates against the doctrine of Eve as progenitor. He also says “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was! And sinned!” This statement directly contradicts the notion that Eve was the “illuminator,” and carrier of new revelation (gnosis).

"This translation is the most legitimate because it fits the social context, is true to the Greek, speaks to the troubled situation, and lines up perfectly with all of Paul’s other teachings and practices concerning women.”

Conclusion: Paul was addressing this Gnostic heresy in the Ephesian Church and if you take it literally - as a lot of people do - it suppresses women unjustly and out of the exclusive context of the Ephesian situation in Paul’s day. It is also contradictory to the attitude of Paul throughout his days of ministry as he always saw women as his co-laborers in the Lord.
Is there any proof supporting this historical theory?

The simpler and (in my opinion) more likely explanation is that Saint Paul had a disdainful (or outright contemptuous) view of women similar to how most Jewish males at the time regarded women. Him working with and praising individual women could just be the kind of hypocisy and exception making that real people so often engage in:shrug:
 
I simply cannot, no matter which way I look at it, accept some of those verses in Paul’s writings. I have no problem with anything, anywhere else. It struck me that the only issues I’ve had with Catholic teaching is always in Paul’s text. Nowhere else.

You think I will go to hell for this?
I too have a problem with St. Paul. I think much of his writings regarding women are just based on the way women were viewed back in that time. It was not from Jesus. Jesus never said anything to indicate women should be viewed in such low regard. Paul’s teachings - as related to what he knew of Jesus is all good. The rest, I just skip over before I let it irritate me. Some of it is pretty ridiculous IMO. It was just the times he lived in. That was the way all Jewish men viewed women. Kinda like the way Muslims view women nowadays. They can’t pray in same room, are only good for giving birth, etc.
Now if Jesus came to me in a vision and said, "Yes, daughter, this IS what I too teach and what you should follow." Then I would go get a veil and wear it to mass every day and learn to keep my mouth shut more, etc.
 
If it wasn’t “low regard”, then how would you describe it? Give me the appropriate adjective. Again, I’m not picking on St. Paul alone. It was the way all Jews viewed women. I don’t claim to be an expert on Islam. I read the Quran many years ago and it was very similar to the bible - but with subtle twists. And some parts vastly different. But I don’t remember everythin in it of course. I have known many Muslims however and know well enough how they view women and much of it IS based on their Quran and tradition.
 
Hi - not sure to whom that was directed but I am not a modernist. 🙂
Just talking about the backdrop of St. Paul’s times when he wrote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top