1 Timothy 2:12

[Abiel]

http://www.cresourcei.org/cbooth.html for a Salvation Army perspective.

 

[theseed]

Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology offers some insightful interpretations.

In 1 Tim. 1.3, we read that Paul was writing to Ephesus, the location of Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18.18-19, 21; 2 Tim. 4.19). The City had many educated women and men. However, Paul does not object for these reasons. He objects because of what happened in Genesis. He explains that it is the weakness of men rather than women, and so men should have the leadership role. This is what God established after the fall of Adam and Eve.

Also, we read that Priscilla helped instruct Apollos (Acts 18.24-26). And in 1 Cor. 11.5, they are allowed to prophecy.

So in 1 Cor. 14.33-36, Paul is not prohibiting the public speach of women, but denying them the oportunities to have congragational authority. He does not allow women to interpret/critique/judge prophecy. In short, women should have no authority to govern the church body.

 

[AngelusSax]

In short, women should have no authority to govern the church body.

And if God is the head of the church body, all authority rests with Him, no matter who's at the head, male or female, on this mortal coil.

 

[sculpturegirl]

I am unsure on the matter, though I tend to lean towards women not being the "head" of a church, but that there are opportunities to serve elsewhere. What gets me concerned is women demanding rights and such. As Christians, we ought to be more interested in serving than having our "rights" served.

Even being a woman, I find many, many things about feminism very very irksome and harmful to our society. Voting, owning property, education, etc. are not among those things. Plus, if you read Proverbs 31, you will find that this isn't a new idea.

 

[merryheart]

I am unsure on the matter, though I tend to lean towards women not being the "head" of a church, but that there are opportunities to serve elsewhere. What gets me concerned is women demanding rights and such. As Christians, we ought to be more interested in serving than having our "rights" served.

Even being a woman, I find many, many things about feminism very very irksome and harmful to our society. Voting, owning property, education, etc. are not among those things. Plus, if you read Proverbs 31, you will find that this isn't a new idea.

The women who I listen to on this subject are not women who are demanding rights, or seeking power - they are sincere women upon whom God has laid a burden for ministry, who feel responsible before Him not to bury the talent He has granted them, and who have struggled mightily to understand how God might have meant in one place that "yes she should", and another "no she shouldn't." Should a woman whose gifts are not the "usual and customary, socially acceptable for a woman" gifts bury them and say to God in the final judgement "but Lord, I was afraid to use those gifts for you" or should she find a way to reconcile the issue and choose to serve in the way that she is called?

 

[theseed]

And if God is the head of the church body, all authority rests with Him, no matter who's at the head, male or female, on this mortal coil.

Christ is head of the Church, neverthelesss, the NT is explicit about how the church should be governed.

 

[merryheart]

Christ is head of the Church, neverthelesss, the NT is explicit about how the church should be governed.

Yes, agreed. What some might disagree with, is the interpretation about what the NT actually says...

 

[danclang]

did someone say something about Ice cream?

 

[Abiel]

Let me speak from the less rational part of my thoughts for a while. In my heart I believe that the Galatians thing is true. No male or female in Christ. I also believe Paul was speaking into specific situations at Corinth and to Timothy. If he had been at my church this morning, and heard the men on the back row talking through the whole of the opening prayer, I guess he would have had something to say.
The Bible has been used to justify all types of repression. Time has changed things.

 

[Chapter 2]

The Bible has been used to justify all types of repression. Time has changed things.

This has nothing to do with repression, this has everything to do with obedience

 

[Gwynne]

This has nothing to do with repression, this has everything to do with obedience

Exactly. Should I obey God, or should I obey human interpretation which is fallible?

 

[FreeSpiritFaith]

If women are not supposed to be pastors, how do you explain the fact that God calls women to the role of the clergy. Are you denying that these women's callings are from God?

 

[theseed]

If women are not supposed to be pastors, how do you explain the fact that God calls women to the role of the clergy. Are you denying that these women's callings are from God?

Well, yeah they do. God's will is always confirmed in others, this is where ordination comes in.

 

[Chapter 2]

Well, yeah they do. God's will is always confirmed in others, this is where ordination comes in.

The Bible is God's revealed will, and God does not contradict Himself. Since He has CLEARLY stated why He does not allow women to teach the church at large, there is no way that He would "call" women to be pastors or elders. Women who claim that they are "called" to be pastors or elders are basically calling God a liar, since they blatently ignore God's revealed will in the Bible. Any emotional longing must be tested by scripture, and where our desires and ambitions contradict scripture, we are wrong.

 

[raphael_aa]

The Bible is God's revealed will, and God does not contradict Himself. Since He has CLEARLY stated why He does not allow women to teach the church at large, there is no way that He would "call" women to be pastors or elders. Women who claim that they are "called" to be pastors or elders are basically calling God a liar, since they blatently ignore God's revealed will in the Bible. Any emotional longing must be tested by scripture, and where our desires and ambitions contradict scripture, we are wrong.

You can say scripture teaches something 'CLEARLY' as often as you like. The trouble is that some people of good conscience and deep faith believe differently. This doesn't mean they are disobeying God. In fact, in the light that they have, they believe just as passionately as you that they are obeying God.

I am reminded of another HOT christian issue: creation/evolution. Creationists say that scripture 'CLEARLY' supports their view. Others read scripture differently regarding audience and intent and arrive at a different conclusion. They're not disobedient (or my personal favourite 'carnal' which seems to mean any view the writer doesn't agree with), or lying or demonic etc. They may be mistaken. But of course, so could you.

 

[Abiel]

That would be me then.

I call God a liar. I have blatently ignored God's revealed will. My church is likewise blatently ignoring God's revealed will in persistantly appointing women as pastors and elders. Therefore my church is a liar too.

Thanks for that.

 

[Gwynne]

Women who claim that they are "called" to be pastors or elders are basically calling God a liar, since they blatently ignore God's revealed will in the Bible.

That would be me then.

I call God a liar. I have blatently ignored God's revealed will. My church is likewise blatently ignoring God's revealed will in persistantly appointing women as pastors and elders. Therefore my church is a liar too.

Thanks for that.

Me too and mine too.

 

[Mustaphile]

This has nothing to do with repression, this has everything to do with obedience

Let's call it repressive obedience then.

Mat 11:30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

 

[merryheart]

The Bible is God's revealed will, and God does not contradict Himself. Since He has CLEARLY stated why He does not allow women to teach the church at large, there is no way that He would "call" women to be pastors or elders. Women who claim that they are "called" to be pastors or elders are basically calling God a liar, since they blatently ignore God's revealed will in the Bible. Any emotional longing must be tested by scripture, and where our desires and ambitions contradict scripture, we are wrong.

Since it is clear and not contradictory what the revealed will of God is for women, then you must agree that women *can* hold positions of authority - otherwise what will you do with
Deborah
Huldah
Miriam
Junia
Phoebe
Priscilla
etc.

In the light of the many woman who *were* under God's will exersizing authority, and in the light of the fact that God's Word cannot contradict it'self, then you must admit that the very few verses that seem to say otherwise must need a deeper look.

 

[Gwynne]

This is quite simply one of those topics where the Bible isn't all that clear about things. But few people seem to want to dig deeper and truly find the underlying themes and meanings.

As merryheart pointed out, many, many women held leadership positions in the Bible. So if God says "no they can't" in the New Testament, that would mean he changed his mind, in a negative way.

Now, that isn't very good for those who believe God is unchanging, nor is it very good who believe God is infinitely good and just.

Either God did and still does allow women a leadership position, and it was simply society that said otherwise, or God did allow it, but later changed his mind. Take your pick, but that's what the Biblical evidence shows, at face value.

Now if you look at the context, the original meaning of the words and the Bible as a whole, there really is only one positive conclusion that doesn't paint God as a liar, and that's that women have always been allowed leadership positions and always will be.

Ok... I'm being redundant... I need more sleep...