Can women be pastors/preachers

[anointedteacher]

auneeqsol said:

Hmmmm im still trying to chew the tough meat mixed with the fat ( you know the kind that you can never chew up on a fatty piece of steak...really i dont think we're supposed to eat that part, but if it's seasoned real good we'll try to ...LOL)

Im gonna leave that just like that......

Let idenify the fat and hard bones, so we can cut it off and eat the juicy tender part of the steak.

We don't want anyone to get choke on the bone or rubbery fat. Tell us what you consider fat vs meat.

AT

[auneeqsol]

Okay let's see if I can break this down:

The seasoned piece of fat = The part of the discussion that sounds so good and convincing but yet I just dont see how God would have it that way, we knowing that he loves his creation the same, male and female and that he gave them both dominion in the earth. And also why would he have them differentiate in the gifts and positions (in the body of Christ) when the word plainly says that we are many members (male and female) but one body? I mean is God actually saying that okay females since you are the weaker vessel then you can't handle these specific roles, and because men are natural born leaders then they take the lead in all things? Come on now, we are under a new covenant of grace to where we are all ministers. There is nothing specific in the scriptures that mentions that the women were not to take on these roles. Now we know that back in the bible days things werent so gender friendly, women were not as educated, so they werent respected as knowing some things, but things are different now, and its not against scripture for women to hold leading positions. In that case we can come to the conclusion that we only saw jews acting as Apostles... so what conclusion can one come to with that? That if you dont belong to his own nationality that you cannot be called as an Apostle? Come on now...
So that's what I call the fat part of the steak, it's on there with the steak , has all the same flavor, and it's good to the taste, but its not real meat, and it will not hold up basically as the "real meat" just something to chew on.

The meat= The part of the discussion that is actually word-based according to study of the scriptures and actually with understanding so that it has substance and holds weight. It will matter to God and how he is portrayed and understood by the body of Christ , so there will be no confusion in his ppl, and also no room for big I's and little U's and one gender being able to look down upon others, or control the other gender. God made us equal in his eyesight, now our makeup might be different but to him we are both his creation.

[nina]

1 Timothy 2:

Prayer for All People

2:8 So I want the men11 to pray12 in every place, lifting up holy hands13 without anger or dispute.

Conduct of Women

2:9 Likewise14 the women are to dress15 in suitable apparel, with modesty and self-control.16 Their adornment must not be17 with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothing,

2:10 but with good deeds, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God.

2:11 A woman must learn18 quietly with all submissiveness.

2:12 But I do not allow19 a woman to teach or exercise authority20 over a man. She must remain quiet.21

2:13 For Adam was formed first and then Eve.

2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, because she was fully deceived,22 fell into transgression.23

2:15 But she will be delivered through childbearing,24 if she25 continues in faith and love and holiness with self-control.

11 tn The word translated "men" here (ajnhvr, anhr) refers to adult males, not people in general. Note the command given to "the women" in v. 9.

12 sn To pray. In this verse Paul resumes and concludes the section about prayer begun in 2:1-2. 1 Tim 2:3-7 described God's concern for all people as the motive for such prayer.

13 sn Paul uses a common ancient posture in prayer (lifting up holy hands) as a figure of speech for offering requests from a holy life (without anger or dispute).

14 tc ‡ Most witnesses have kaiV tav" (kai tas; so D1 Y 1881 Ï) or simply kaiv (Í D* F G 6 365 1739 pc) after wJsauvtw" (Jwsautw"). A few important witnesses lack such words (Í* A H P 33 81 1175 pc). The evidence is for the most part along "party" lines, with the shortest reading being found in the Alexandrian text, the conjunction in the Western, and the longest reading in the Byzantine tradition. Externally, the shortest reading is preferred.

However, there is a good chance of homoiomeson or homoioteleuton in which case kaiv or kaiV tav" could have accidentally been omitted (note the ai [ai] and ai a" [ai as] in the word that follows, written here in uncial script): wsautwskaigunaikas/ wsautwskaitasgunaikas.
Nevertheless, since both the kaiv and kaiV tav" are predictable variants, intended to fill out the meaning of the text, the shortest reading seems best able to explain the rise of the others. NA has the kaiv in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

15 tn Grk "to adorn themselves." Grammatically the phrase "to adorn themselves" continues the author's words in v. 8: "I want...likewise the women to adorn themselves."

16 tn This word and its cognates are used frequently in the Pastoral Epistles. It means "moderation," "sobriety," "decency," "sensibleness," or "sound judgment."

17 tn Literally a continuation of v. 9a, "not with braided hair..." Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

18 tn Or "receive instruction."

19 sn But I do not allow. Although the Greek conjunction dev (de) can have a simple connective force ("and"), it is best to take it as contrastive here: Verse 11 gives a positive statement (that is to say, that a woman should learn). This was a radical and liberating departure from the Jewish view that women were not to learn the law.

20 tn According to BDAG 150 s.v. aujqentevw this Greek verb means "to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to" (cf. JB "tell a man what to do").

21 tn Grk "but to be in quietness." The phrase ejn hJsuciva/ (en Jhsucia) is used in Greek literature either of absolute silence or of a quiet demeanor.

22 tn This phrase uses a compound form of the same verb as in v. 14a: "deceived" vs. "deceived out, completely deceived." The two verbs could be synonymous, but because of the close contrast in this context, it seems that a stronger meaning is intended for the second verb.

23 tn Grk "has come to be in transgression" (with an emphasis on the continuing consequences of that fall).

24 tn "But she will be delivered through childbearing," or "But she will be saved in spite of childbearing." This verse is notoriously difficult to interpret, though there is general agreement about one point: Verse 15 is intended to lessen the impact of vv. 13-14.
There are several interpretive possibilities here, though the first three can be readily dismissed (1)

Christian women will be saved, but only if they bear children. This view is entirely unlikely for it lays a condition on Christian women that goes beyond grace, is unsupported elsewhere in scripture, and is explicitly against Paul's and Jesus' teaching on both marriage and salvation (cf. Matt 19:12; 1 Cor 7:8-9, 26-27, 34-35; 1 Tim 5:3-10).
(
2) Despite the curse, Christian women will be kept safe when bearing children. This view also is unlikely, both because it has little to do with the context and because it is not true to life (especially life in the ancient world with its high infant mortality rate).

(3) Despite the sin of Eve and the results to her progeny, she would be saved through the childbirth-that is, through the birth of the Messiah, as promised in the protevangelium (Gen 3:15). This view sees the singular "she" as referring first to Eve and then to all women (note the change from singular to plural in this verse).
Further, it works well in the context. However, there are several problems with it: The future tense (swqhvshtai, swqhshtai) is unnatural if referring to the protevangelium or even to the historical fact of the Messiah's birth; that only women are singled out as recipients of salvation seems odd since the birth of the Messiah was necessary for the salvation of both women and men; [c] as ingenious as this view is, its very ingenuity is its downfall, for it is overly subtle; and [d] the term teknogoniva (teknogonia) refers to the process of childbirth rather than the product.
And since it is the person of the Messiah (the product of the birth) that saves us, the term is unlikely to be used in the sense given it by those who hold this view. There are three other views that have greater plausibility:

(4) This may be a somewhat veiled reference to the curse of Gen 3:16 in order to clarify that though the woman led the man into transgression (v. 14b), she will be saved spiritually despite this physical reminder of her sin. The phrase is literally "through childbearing," but this does not necessarily denote means or instrument here. Instead it may show attendant circumstance (probably with a concessive force): "with, though accompanied by" (cf. BDAG 224 s.v. diva A.3.c; Rom 2:27; 2 Cor 2:4; 1 Tim 4:14).

(5) "It is not through active teaching and ruling activities that Christian women will be saved, but through faithfulness to their proper role, exemplified in motherhood" . In this view teknogoniva is seen as a synecdoche in which child-rearing and other activities of motherhood are involved. Thus, one evidence (though clearly not an essential evidence) of a woman's salvation may be seen in her decision to function in this role.

(6) The verse may point to some sort of proverbial expression now lost, in which "saved" means "delivered" and in which this deliverance was from some of the devastating effects of the role reversal that took place in Eden. The idea of childbearing, then, is a metonymy of part for the whole that encompasses the woman's submission again to the leadership of the man, though it has no specific soteriological import (but it certainly would have to do with the outworking of redemption).
25 tn There is a shift to the plural here (Grk "if they continue"), but it still refers to the woman in a simple shift from generic singular to generic plural.

====================

The Mechitzah - Partition

"The Mechitzah is a divider separating the men's and women's sections of the synagogue. The fundamental principle of prayer is to establish a relationship between one's self and G-d. The social dimension and distraction which sometimes accompanies mixed groups is therefore eliminated.
In some synagogues instead of a mechitzah, there is a separate women's balcony. "

But Why the Mechitzah (Partition)?

"There remains one burning question: If woman is the essence of prayer and song, why is she silent?
Where is her creativity and inspiration?
Where is her song?
Fine, she won't be part of the protocol management. But why can't her voice and presence be an inspiration in the shul (Synagogue)?

Things weren't always this way.

In the tabernacle and in the First Temple, there was no separation between men and women. Only after matters got out of hand in the Second Temple, was the community forced to create a balcony for women above, while men stayed below.

Perhaps, in the messianic era, when we return to our former spiritual status and more, we will return to the original format.

However, as human nature stands today, the reasoning of the sages of the Talmud is still very apparent: Men mingling with women, or listening to a woman's voice -- especially a woman that they know and can see -- are not necessarily carried to spiritual heights, but unfortunately often in the opposite direction.

Women don't seem to understand this -- they seem to have very high opinions of us. But if you ask men, and if they're honest with you, they'll admit that they would not be able to pray with proper concentration in a situation where they can see and hear the fairer sex.

There is a deeper perspective to all this: This is galut. Exile. The Shechinah is in captivity, not in her place. She is ignored and despised. And she is quiet there.
But in the world-yet-to-come, the messianic era that we are poised to enter, then we will hear, "Once again in the cities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of joy and the voice of rejoicing, the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride."

The Shechinah will sing once again.

===========================

This is the inner meaning of the verse, "A woman of valor will be the crown of her husband": that the feminine element will shine a delightful, secret light of the Hidden Mind...

"This is also why in the last two blessings of the marriage ceremony, we first say that, "He rejoices the groom and the bride -- placing the groom before the bride -- but then conclude, "He rejoices the groom with the bride" -- implying that the groom's rejoicing is of secondary significance to the bride's.

This is because now the bride receives from the groom, but in the time yet to come, they will be equal in their stature with a single crown.

So, too, we say, "Once again will be heard in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem…the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride."

For in the future, the bride will also have a voice. A voice reveals the hidden thoughts and emotions. In this case, we mean to say that the inner light of the feminine will come outward and be revealed.
For then, as we said, "A woman of valour will be the crown of her husband" -- even beyond the groom…

Therefore, in our time, prayer is said quietly, since the bride does not yet have a voice -- because presently the realm of Divine speech has no significance before the higher realms of thought and emotion, as a woman is treated as secondary to her husband.

But in the time-yet-to-come, after all is purified and healed, then the bride will have a great voice without limitation.
"A woman of valor will be the crown of her husband."

===================

"But all mechitzas hold us back from one another and group our prayers by gender rising heavenward.

The men's section is front and center because men have more ritual commandments in the synagogue, while women are responsible for bringing Torah into the home. Synagogue becomes one place where we can be with our own gender sex, something not without a pleasure all its own.

So you can say the mechitza exists to keep women out, that the genders are identical and all else is cultural conceit. For many of us, though, the mechitza opens a door in, perhaps into a more concentrated experience of who we are and certainly into the presence of God where holiness and much direction lie.

In prayer, we reach outside our earthly yearnings and search for something different, something that ennobles us, sets our sights high and improves us from the inside out.

In love, we find an outlet for those improvements, for our goodness, kindness, generosity. Love is arguably our most God-like activity, and also our greatest earthly reward; in its physical expression, it is said to bring God's presence to rest on us directly."

===================

(By a Jewish lady teaching Torah today)

"There are serious questions regarding the role of Jewish women in the public arena. Issues of Jewish law and tradition need to be considered in redefining the place of women in the Torah community today.11

But one thing has become clear: our sacred space is in the beit midrash, the house of study. There is no separation between women and the words of Torah. Women are incapable of spiritual passivity in the world of learning.

What about those of us who are blessed to teach Torah to other women?
We have been entrusted with the role of explicating divine commands, elucidating the omnisignificance of sacred literature, and of interpreting the eternal prophecies so that they continue to offer perspective to our lives.
The responsibility is overwhelming; the spiritual challenge -- formidable.
And yet for me, as for every teacher of Torah, nothing could be more fulfilling.

I am strengthened in my labors by the knowledge that with each passing year there are more and more learned women who join the ranks of Torah teaching. I can't think of no nobler occupation.

I have argued that women learning Torah are making a unique contribution to the way Torah unfolds in our generation. Perhaps women, using their special sensitivities, will best be able to reveal the hitherto hidden spiritual valences of Torah still awaiting discovery.

When Torah is learned by all of Israel -- men and women alike -- then it will be a Torah which enters our innermost being and will be inscribed deeply upon our hearts."

P.S.: I am not a teacher and do not pretend to be. Only one who seeks and, in doing so, trying to reach some understanding.

I think that we need to know where some things start, not assuming thant anyone does not, but to shed some light one some issues, like the current one about women in the church.

I believe that Paul's instructions regarding this matter where deeply rooted in his own Jewish experience and what he knew to be true.

His reasons were deeply rooted and spiritually sound. How they might still be applied selectively today might be up for questioning when we understand it better.

It is important, imho, to know the purpose for which Paul gave those instructions. And just as important for both man and woman to know more about it. So that it won't remain a subject of contention between the two, but the opposite, and ultimately real reconciliation.

I read this, written by a Rabbi: "If the only thing a woman wants is to be like a man, she lacks ambition!"

[Nikkol]

Nina: Thanks for sharing that... it was very interesting and informative.

[ybrown]

On the one hand, Paul restricts women in their roles in the church. Then on the other hand he commends women for their leadership roles. That's a conflict.

When the Word seems conflicting or contradictory, it’s not that the Word is lacking in clarity; it means we’re lacking in understanding; That’s a sure sign that we are trying to following the Letter rather than the Spirit of an instruction. The Letter of the Law kills, but the Spirit of the Law gives life. Trying to follow the Letter will always cause confusion, strife and misunderstanding.

Paul wasn’t giving doctrinal laws with the “women should be silent” passages. Those instructions were corrective rather than doctrinal. Paul had no problem coming at a church with an iron fist where the flocks were out of control and just plain ole’ required correction. I believe that is the lesson we are missing here. Instead of seeing the Spirit of correction being the lesson here, we see the law and literal interpretation.

That's also another thing to look out for when it appears that passages or instructions conflict. One represents the law and presents death, while the other represents the spirit and provides life.

God anoints and pours out His Spirit on both men and women for whatever He calls His "Sons" to do. The New Covenant and all that goes along with it cannot be approached with a Letter mentality; otherwise it’d be nothing more than the Old Covenant in new clothes.

Should a woman’s freedom in the church and in the Church be any lower than her position in Christ? Galatians 3:28

”There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

[Nikkol]

Women's role isn't "lesser" just different.... Women do have leadership roles... just that they aren't the same as leadership roles that men. Neither one is "better".

However, just teaching women takes a lot of work and is a great responsibility in and of itself.

[ybrown]

Nikkol, that's what I'm getting at. Who says the leadership roles are different? Who is imposing this rule?

[livinganewlife]

ybrown said:

Nikkol, that's what I'm getting at. Who says the leadership roles are different? Who is imposing this rule?

MEN who considered women secondary due to their Culture!

[krazeeboi]

We should not confuse differences in function to be differences in essence. Even Jesus is distinct from the Father and subject to Him, yet He is of the same deity ("Godstuff") as the Father.

What seals the deal for me, in the sense of universality and timelessness, is the basis of Paul's restriction of women teaching and having authority over men. He doesn't specifically mention any incident in the church as a reason (although one could have certainly been in view here), but on the basis and order of creation.

[nina]

Allow me to walk back to the Garden...

"Then Adam called his wife Eve/ Chava, for she was the mother of all life." (Genesis 3:20)


"In English, we refer to her as Eve.
Yet, that is not her Hebrew name and her English translation doesn’t carry with it any of the importance or significance of her real name, Chavah.
Furthermore, there are even some links between the word “Eve” and “evil,” blaming her for the evil brought into the world due to the sin from eating from the Tree of Life.

So what does Chavah mean?

There are three main concepts connected to the Hebrew name Chavah.

- The first comes from: because she is em kol chai - the mother of all life (Genesis 3:20).

The name Chavah is a derivative of the Hebrew word chayah, meaning “living one.” Chavah embodies both the essence of life itself and the creative ability to grant that life to others.

The idea of “mother of all life” expresses not only the ability to physically give birth, but also to create, nourish, and enhance all facets of life.
This is the ability to take something from the state of potential, develop it, and bring it to actualization through her creative abilities.

Chavah is not only the mother of life but also represents the experience of life.
It is vital to mention that this is not merely the idea of physical birth.
The concept of being a mother is being creative, birthing new realities into this world. And as we bring these lives into the world, we must do it with joy, even though the process may be a painful one.

- The second understanding of the name Chavah focuses on its connection to the word chavayah, which means experience.

Chavah is not only the mother of life but also represents the experience of life.
The marriage of the first couple, Adam and Chavah, is truly a marriage of the human experience, the human condition.

- The third meaning stems from a verse in the book of Psalms (19:3) "Night following night expresses knowledge."

The Hebrew word for expression is yechaveh, which is also related to the word chavah.

In this vein, there is a verse in the book of Job (36:2)
"Wait for me a little while, and I will show you."

The Hebrew phrase for I will show you is veachavecha, again from the same root.

This third meaning of Chavah can be understood as expression, revelation, or manifestation.

Ultimately, these three meanings work together. How does Chavah, the first woman, represent the mother of all life?

Through experience as expression and through expression as experience she mothers all life. She shapes and develops formless matter, carrying it within her until it is ready to be born.

However, the mothering process does not end with physical birth, for she then continues to nurse this life, feeding and sustaining it physically, emotionally, and spiritually.

She continues to nourish it throughout its life, helping to actualize its latent potential and helping this life to develop and experience its utmost expression.

"Then Adam called his wife Chava, for she was the mother of all life." (Genesis 3:20)

And by doing this, she is constantly giving birth to new levels of ability and depth of life experience, both within herself and within all those around her, earning the title “mother of all life.”

Paul was always concerned with order and discipline in the churches. He wanted the churches to thrive at the highest spiritual level. To achieve that, among other things, he had to give some practical instructions and spell out proper conduct in the church, but his aim was always spiritual.

When it comes to Woman in the church, his vision was the Church. He alwayss had women in leadership positions in the churches which he founded. I would venture to say that he was very aware of the purpose of Woman, and in that sense, that his instructions - in the time and culture - were probably more to protect also the holiness of that call and purpose.

What me make of it, to this day, is different and does not come from the same place he was coming from, most of the time.

Still, going back to the garden: what we call the "curse" of Eve also held the greatest prophecy, from God himself, about Woman's destiny and the fulfilment of God's overall plan.

That prophecy came to pass. Does the curse upon woman still stand? Or was the divine order of creation and its purpose reset at that time? And if it was, by denying it, aren't we fighting God himself?

[anointedteacher]

This post by keita really explained and interpreted the scripture.... This is not something keita popped up with.... I believe the Lord led her in research and study of the scripture to bring a closure to rather a woman can preach, teach, pastor and walk in leadership position in the church. It bring liberty and free those who in bondage to man made doctrine and misinterpretation of the Word.

AT

keita said:

...and here's just one of the many writings which does exactly that:

Understanding Paul and Obeying Jesus

For many people, being told that women can be called by God to any form of church leadership without limitations causes an instant “does not compute” reaction! Surely that can’t be true, they think! The women must be mistaken in thinking God is leading them into church leadership—especially leading them into the ministry.

First, I understand your feelings. In past years I’ve listened to the same sermons you have. Usually they started with Eve didn’t they? It was Eve’s fault that we’re in such a mess. Sarah was always in the “women’s role” sermon for showing respect. They left out that Sarah also stood up to Abraham and demanded that Hagar leave! Abraham wisely put it in God’s hands and then did as his wife insisted when he realized it was also God’s solution. That is the way it should be—a husband and wife freely express their opinions, talk over their options, and then they pray to God for His help, and for Him to guide their decision and to give them His own wise solution.

The sermon middle was always 1Tim. 2:9-14. We skipped through the first chapter of Paul’s letter which revealed that Timothy was left behind in Ephesus to stop "tisin” meaning “ones”—not necessarily men—from teaching false doctrines, myths and genealogies, 1Tim. 1:3,4. This point is a very important part of understanding this passage! Something had happened that caused Paul to tell the men, “...lift up holy hands in prayer without anger or disputing.” What had made the men angry? Then Paul rebuked some of the women for their low-cut immoral clothing decorated with pearls. Ephesus was the center of the worship of Artemis (see Acts 19:28), and her priestesses dressed just as Paul described. Paul stressed good deeds “appropriate for women who PROFESS to worship God”. Paul personally had doubts about the motives of these women! Next Paul advises that he lets wives/women learn quietly and submissively. The Greek word for women and wives is the same word so it is hard to tell for sure whether Paul meant a group of unconverted wives Timothy had told him about, or all the women. The wives/women in question obviously hadn’t been learning quietly, and from studying the entire two chapters we can tell that some were teaching false doctrines either publicly or privately.

In the critical verse 12, Paul writes, “I do not permit a woman (or wife) to teach or...(and what it is that he doesn’t want them teaching?) The phrase “to usurp authority over the” is all translated from only ONE Greek word: “authentein.”

This word is only in this one verse in the entire New Testament! Translators are still arguing about what “authentein” meant at the time of Paul, as word meanings change over time. The word “gay” meant something very positive in 1800 and means something very different today. Charles Trombley wrote, “It was long after Paul wrote his epistle to Timothy that authentein came to mean ‘to exercise authority,’ ‘to bear rule over,’ or ‘to domineer.’ John Chrysostom (347-407) was one of the dominant Greek Church Fathers and Patriarch of Constantinople. In his commentary on 1 Timothy 5:6 he used authentia to express ‘sexual license,’ nearly two centuries after Paul wrote Timothy. Authentein had not yet taken on the meaning ‘to usurp authority.’”[1] A teacher in the second century, Moeris, tells his students not to use the word “authentein” as it is too coarse for polite company![2]

So the latest scholarly translation of “authentein” is that it was a coarse sexual word that had nothing to do with authority at the time of Paul! These women in question were not to teach or "to _______(a coarse sexual word) men". Remember, Paul was not writing directly to the church at Ephesus in this letter, but to Timothy as man to man. He does not use the word again in any of his other letters! Were these women teaching coarse sexual practices? Certainly Ephesus was inundated with wrong sexual practices as Artemis was a fertility goddess and was worshipped in a sexual manner by both men and women.

Another proof that Paul was not discussing authority in 1 Tim. 2:12 is that Paul mentions authority in the same chapter we are discussing—1Tim. 2:2, “kings and all those in authority” and he uses an entirely different Greek word—not the mystery word “authentein”!
(Emphasis-"keita")

So the main scripture quoted to tell women they can’t teach (give Bible studies and sermons during services) is based on a scripture that contains a word that no one knows FOR SURE what it means! In many other scriptures Paul praises women in active ministry! Does it make sense to hinge an entire doctrine affecting 60% of the church on an uncertain verse that contradicts Paul’s other writings and the words of Jesus Christ?

Paul was dealing with women teaching false doctrines about a fertility goddess. In addition, Ephesian women believed they were descended from Amazon women, and even some Greek histories recorded that Ephesus was founded by Amazon women. This explains Paul’s references to myths and genealogies in 1Tim. 1:4. Amazons were an early group of women that taught that women were SUPERIOR to men—not equal, but better than men! Paul refutes this by saying, “Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived...” Here Paul advances a rather doubtful argument as Satan deceived both, but it was an argument used to counter the idea of female superiority that the Ephesian women had inherited from the Amazons.

Followers of Artemis believed women needed the help of Artemis to get safely through childbirth. To counter this, Paul tells Timothy, “Women will come safely through childbirth” (Phillips Bible, 1Tim. 2:15) if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. The phrase translated by the King James, “saved in childbearing” can also be translated “saved throughout childbearing”—saved from death during the entire process of bearing a child. Again proving that Paul is fighting false doctrines, not the teachings of dedicated Christian women! For more details and additional research about this passage see “Paul and Women Teachers” in the women’s role section.

In those “women’s role” sermons we were not told about Priscilla going on one of Paul’s missionary journeys were we? Acts 18:18. If someone mentioned that Priscilla (listed before her husband) had taught the minister Apollos, he always added that it was in their home. Yet the Greek has no mention of a house or home in Acts 18:26, and the verb used implies public teaching rather than private teaching.

The major premise of these sermons was that all women are to be subject or controlled by all men. It’s a faulty premise. Wives yielding graciously, lovingly to the gentle, caring leadership of Christian husbands is set in a family context. Nowhere are all women subject to all men!

Deborah never made it into the “women’s role” sermon because she summoned Barak and he came—she didn’t go to him. Deborah, a wife and mother, led and judged the entire nation of Israel! That was all God’s will! God’s doing! Deborah praised the “princes” who went to war under her leadership by the command of God, Judges 5:2 and 9. Apostle and prophet top the list of spiritual gifts in 1Cor. 12:28. A minister, listed simply as a teacher in the list, is listed beneath the spiritual gift of prophet. Of course all spiritual gifts are important in the church, but some have greater responsibility before God. Prophets such as Deborah received direct words of God—and being married didn’t stop God from selecting Deborah or Huldah (2 Chron. 34:22) as prophets. God doesn’t change. If we can have women prophets we can have women teacher/ministers as they “rank” below prophets. Yet rank is not a concept that God promotes, for all leadership must be loving servant leadership, Matt. 20:26.

There were female leaders such as Phoebe, (Romans 16:1), Junia or Junias (“Greetings to those outstanding apostles, Andronicus and Junias…” Romans 16:7, New Jerusalem Bible); and Nympha—who had a church meeting in her home and is the only leader mentioned by name in her town, Col.4:15 NIV.

All of these women and many more, didn’t make it into those sermons about women’s role. Neither did Euodia and Syntyche, who Paul said, “contended at my side in the cause of the gospel”, Phil. 4:2-5, NIV. The Greek phrase mentioning these two women is originally a reference to wrestling side by side in the cause of the gospel! Paul praised these women for publicly verbally wrestling for God’s Truth! Two women were publicly teaching God’s truth right beside Paul and Paul praised them for it!

Jesus said WHOSOEVER practices and TEACHES these commandments will be called GREAT in the Kingdom of heaven! Matt. 5:19. Jesus never placed limits on His women! Jesus does not forbid women from teaching and achieving greatness along with the men who teach His commandments. In the past we have not understood the context of Paul’s writings or exactly the culture he was dealing with. Almost two centuries later, Paul’s letter to Timothy is indeed difficult to understand. But however we interpret Paul, we must remember that our understanding of Paul’s writings cannot contradict the words of our Savior, Jesus! The words of Jesus are clear and apply to “whosoever”. Both men and women must be allowed to obey Jesus and be allowed to teach His ways and commandments without limitations.

None of us in the =EQUAL to SERVE= movement are arguing against men or advocating that women disrespect their husbands. But it is clear from 1 Cor. 12:11 that God gives spiritual gifts to both men and women as He pleases. A man is not lessened in God’s eyes because he acknowledges his wife’s spiritual gifts or the spiritual gifts of any woman. Did Aquilla hold back Priscilla from her role of leadership? Did Barak refuse to obey Deborah? Did Deborah’s husband, Lappidoth, prevent her from being a prophetess and the leader of Israel? We do not attack marriage or male leaders on our web site or in any paper.

The church needs more love today. If we walk daily in God’s Spirit we will have love for each other and treat each other kindly even when we disagree. Joel predicted in the last days we would see God’s spirit poured out on “my servants, both men and women”... “and they will prophesy”, Acts 2:16-18. Do you think that we are in the last days? If so, then you should EXPECT women to be serving God in a mighty way! God predicted it and IT WILL HAPPEN! My brothers and sisters in the faith, no matter how many times you have heard— or preached—the “women’s role” sermon, realize that there were women leaders in the New Testament! And God Himself promises us that there will be women called by God to the second highest spiritual gift—the very difficult job of “prophet” in the last days! Get ready. Women leaders are coming! If you are fighting against them when GOD Himself personally sends them, will God be pleased with you?

[/size]

[Jasmine]

An important statement made in that post you posted AT was:

"Translators are still arguing about what “authentein” meant at the time of Paul, as word meanings change over time"

So if words change over time, and people are still yet arguing over what it "supposedly" meant..during this DAY and AGE, usurp authority would mean what to us today??? It sure aint sex, trust me.

Since words change over time..you cannot discount that the words take on a different meaning. If I am understanding what the post is suggesting that the scripture says": Is it saying that a woman should not teach a man about sex, or teach courses on sex? hmm. lol thats so I'll hold that comment until clarification is received.


Lastly my opinion regarding this. Since translations do vary, and we can take this to mean anything. Does this scripture even pertain to "man & women"..or husband and wife.

Also, where does 1 Corinthians 11:3 fit into play with 1 timothy 2:11-15 ?

[krazeeboi]

Good questions Jasmine. Personally, I would need a wide range of sources to validate the meaning of the Greek "to have (or excercise) authority" (or lack thereof), not just one or two sources. According to a noted Greek concordance (BDAG), the word means “to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to.” Also, it is apparent that there is a connection between teaching and having authority (as we mean "to have authority" today). This is even demonstrated in secular literature of the period in which Paul penned his letter to Timothy. But what connection is there between teaching and some "coarse sexual activity," all that freaky stuff on cable notwithstanding (so I've heard)? Furthermore, look at the contrasts between verse 11 and 12. In verse 11, Paul said he wants the women to LEARN with all SUBMISSIVENESS. Then in verse 12, he says the women are not to TEACH or EXCERCISE AUTHORITY over the men. The contrasts are between learning and teaching and being submissive and excercising authority (in the most common sense). There is no contrast between submissivness (or submission) and "coarse sexual activity"--AGAIN, that freaky HBO stuff notwithstanding.

Also, I don't think the argument that brings 1 Tim. 2:2 into the picture is particularly strong either. For one, without even consulting a Greek concordance, it's obvious that "authority" in v. 2 is being used as a noun, and in v. 12 as a verb. So of course they will not be the same word. Even if one wishes to argue that the root word is different in both words, that doesn't necessarily prove that the two words are unrelated. Many words can mean the same or similar things without being derived from the same root word.

[Jasmine]

krazeeboi said:

Good questions Jasmine. Personally, I would need a wide range of sources to validate the meaning of the Greek "to have (or excercise) authority" (or lack thereof), not just one or two sources. According to a noted Greek concordance (BDAG), the word means “to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to.” Also, it is apparent that there is a connection between teaching and having authority (as we mean "to have authority" today). This is even demonstrated in secular literature of the period in which Paul penned his letter to Timothy. But what connection is there between teaching and some "coarse sexual activity," all that freaky stuff on cable notwithstanding (so I've heard)? Furthermore, look at the contrasts between verse 11 and 12. In verse 11, Paul said he wants the women to LEARN with all SUBMISSIVENESS. Then in verse 12, he says the women are not to TEACH or EXCERCISE AUTHORITY over the men. The contrasts are between learning and teaching and being submissive and excercising authority (in the most common sense). There is no contrast between submissivness (or submission) and "coarse sexual activity"--AGAIN, that freaky HBO stuff notwithstanding.

Also, I don't think the argument that brings 1 Tim. 2:2 into the picture is particularly strong either. For one, without even consulting a Greek concordance, it's obvious that "authority" in v. 2 is being used as a noun, and in v. 12 as a verb. So of course they will not be the same word. Even if one wishes to argue that the root word is different in both words, that doesn't necessarily prove that the two words are unrelated. Many words can mean the same or similar things without being derived from the same root word.

If I understand your post correctly, That is precisely my point. Since when and definitely how did we come to the conclusion that paul was talking about "course sexual activity"?

We are very gung-ho on this board about reading and taking scriptures in complete context, but I don't see what other supporting scriptures states that "usurp authority" means "course sexual activity" or even that was what paul was suggesting to timothy.

[krazeeboi]

^Yep.