1Timothy2 Challenge

[BrendanMark]

But 1 Tim 3:2 goes on to say that He must be the husband (andra) of but one wife etc. Very male oriented. Trying to put modern gender politics into NT scripture and worldview never quite fits, IMHO.

 

[Neopatriarch]

The challenge:

Is there someone, anyone who can prove that Paul stopped more than 1 specific woman from teaching 1 specific man in the 1 Timothy 2 passage?

Prove from the 1 Tim 2 passage that Paul stopped women in general from teaching men.

Timothy2, the real challenge is for you to prove that Paul stopped just one specific woman from teaching one specific man.

How is it that at least 99.999% of the church throughout history has understood 1 Timothy 2:12 as applying to women (plural) when, as you claim, it refers to just one specific woman and her husband? Is the reading comprehension and grammar of 99.999% of the church sooo bad that they've completely missed the grammar issue to which you refer? It doesn't smell right.

I've written a wordpress blog post to refute Timothy2's argument that just one specific woman and her husband are in view in 2:12:

"A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12" (sorry, I can't link to it yet, but you can easily find it with a web search).

I believe Timothy2's arguments originate with Cheryl Schatz, but, if I'm wrong, I'd be curious to know who the originator is.

 

[MrPolo]

"A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12" (sorry, I can't link to it yet, but you can easily find it with a web search).

If I may help out our new member...here is the link:

A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12

 

[CmRoddy]

CmRoddy, you might be interested to read here:



Women In Ministry Blog Archive Does “husband of one wife” disqualify women from being a Pastor?

Umm... that's all well and good, but it does not explain away what it plainly says about the qualifications of elder. He is basing an entire belief upon the begin of what Paul wrote rather then the entirety of it.

You still have not explained how a woman can be:

• Be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6)
• Manage his own household well, care for God's church (1 Tim. 3:4-5)
• Keep his children submissive (1 Tim. 3:4) and his children are to be believers (or “faithful&#8221, not insubordinate (Titus 1:6)

 

[NorrinRadd]

...

You still have not explained how a woman can ...:

• Be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6)

By the traditional understanding of 1 Cor. 7:7 -- viz, that Paul was unmarried and childless -- Paul himself was unqualified for the role of elder/overseer, even though it is pretty clear that he commonly functioned in such a role.

• Manage his own household well, care for God's church (1 Tim. 3:4-5)

Can you prove to me that the word you have chosen to highlight -- "his" -- is actually present in the Greek?

Col. 4:15 and 2 Jn 1:1 certainly imply that Nympha and the unnamed "chosen lady" were able to do the job.

• Keep his children submissive (1 Tim. 3:4) and his children are to be believers (or “faithful”), not insubordinate (Titus 1:6)

Can you prove to me that the word you have chosen to highlight -- "his" -- is actually present in the Greek?

Since Paul was unmarried and childless, he himself did not meet the "qualifications" he laid out here; in spite of this, he commonly functioned in oversight roles.

 

[Neopatriarch]

If I may help out our new member...here is the link:

A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12

Yes. Thanks man.

 

[CmRoddy]

By the traditional understanding of 1 Cor. 7:7 -- viz, that Paul was unmarried and childless -- Paul himself was unqualified for the role of elder/overseer, even though it is pretty clear that he commonly functioned in such a role.

First of all, nowhere does it say that Paul "functioned in such a role" as elder. This is nothing but pure eisegesis. Paul was an Apostle which was a unique function of the early church that doesn't exist today.

Secondly, Paul is not speaking about the office of elder in 1 Cor. 7, he is speaking to men in general. To once again assume that Paul is doing this is to perform eisegesis. Your claims about Paul in both cases are unsubstantiated.

Can you prove to me that the word you have chosen to highlight -- "his" -- is actually present in the Greek?

Col. 4:15 and 2 Jn 1:1 certainly imply that Nympha and the unnamed "chosen lady" were able to do the job.

First of all:

1 Tim. 3:4
He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity
​

τοῦ ἰδίου οἴκου καλῶς προϊστάμενον, τέκνα ἔχοντα ἐν ὑποταγῇ μετὰ πάσης σεμνότητος·
​

Yes, the term is present in the Greek. Now, while the same term can be used in reference to a woman, the only way to know is to look at the context. Since the context dictates that the position of elder (the subject of the passage) can only be male ("husband of one wife" or literally "a one woman man") this verse, along with the one below, cannot be referring to both men and women.

Secondly, to (*sigh* once again) assume that Nympha was an elder simply because there was a church in her house is once again performing eisegesis to be able to find a way out of what 1 Tim. and Titus teaches about the eldership. Nowhere does it actually say that she was an elder and no where will you find an example of a female elder in the New Testament.

Thirdly, 2 John 1:1 does not teach that a female was an elder. A simple word study would reveal this.

In 2 John 1:1, the term "elder" (an adjective) is "presbuteros" (Grk: πρεσβύτερο&#962. It is speaking of the literal age of the person as being older (c.f. Acts 2:17). Nowhere is this particular term used of the office of elder. It always referrs to those who are "of age" and not of the office of elder (i.e. overseer/bishop/elder).

However, the tem used for "elder" in both 1 Timothy and Titus is "episkopos" (Grk: ἐπίσκοπο&#962. While "presbuteros" above is an adjective, "episkopos" is literally a masculine noun. So now you have to explain how a woman can hold the position that literally describes a man.
​

So once again, you are simply assuming into the text what isn't there.

Can you prove to me that the word you have chosen to highlight -- "his" -- is actually present in the Greek?

The context of that verse ("husband of one wife") demonstrates that the rest of it ("having children who believe") means that it is speaking of "his" children.

Since Paul was unmarried and childless, he himself did not meet the "qualifications" he laid out here; in spite of this, he commonly functioned in oversight roles.

And once again, you are assuming that Paul was an elder. Please demonstrate that Paul held the office of elder from the NT and not from your need to slip out of what it plainly taught about elder qualification.

Paul was an Apostle and wrote on how to lead a church. He never actually stopped to do the leading of a particular church as elder.

 

[razzelflabben]

Umm... that's all well and good, but it does not explain away what it plainly says about the qualifications of elder. He is basing an entire belief upon the begin of what Paul wrote rather then the entirety of it.

You still have not explained how a woman can be:

• Be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6)
• Manage his own household well, care for God's church (1 Tim. 3:4-5)
• Keep his children submissive (1 Tim. 3:4) and his children are to be believers (or “faithful”), not insubordinate (Titus 1:6)

Now personally, I haven't studied this specific question, but I have listened to some who have and they make a very good point, one that admittedly needs confirmed, but anyone who is currently inclined can do so...the argument....the textual word used is one about faithfulness, not gender, therefore it is not necessarily saying, husbands and wives. but rather spouses, something that doesn't translate well into our lang... So, there is a thought for you to ponder...

 

[CmRoddy]

Now personally, I haven't studied this specific question, but I have listened to some who have and they make a very good point, one that admittedly needs confirmed, but anyone who is currently inclined can do so...the argument....the textual word used is one about faithfulness, not gender, therefore it is not necessarily saying, husbands and wives. but rather spouses, something that doesn't translate well into our lang... So, there is a thought for you to ponder...

Actually, it does speak of gender and faithfulness, as I have demonstrated in my post above yours.

 

[razzelflabben]

Actually, it does speak of gender and faithfulness, as I have demonstrated in my post above yours.

I must be missing something, all I see in that post is that your entire understanding relies on the word "his"....now when I was in school (eons ago) we were taught that when gender was not specified, it was always masculine...which basically means, that if I do not wish to specify man or woman, I use man, we see this in scripture as well.

 

[CmRoddy]

I must be missing something, all I see in that post is that your entire understanding relies on the word "his"....now when I was in school (eons ago) we were taught that when gender was not specified, it was always masculine...which basically means, that if I do not wish to specify man or woman, I use man, we see this in scripture as well.

That's all well and fine, razzel, but my post stands unchallenged.

 

[razzelflabben]

That's all well and fine, razzel, but my post stands unchallenged.

If I don't understand your point, how can I challenge it? What I understand of the argument does not fit with grammatical structure, and therefore, seems flawed. If man/his/ etc. can be interchangable with mankind/humans, the argument has not grounds to stand, or am I missing something? That was the question, what am I missing?

Edit: the thing is this, this same issue came up in my life, not all that long ago, in the end, after discussion, study, prayer, and more thought, I had to dismiss it as irrelavant to the point of the letter, so if I am missing something, I would love to know what....

 

[LJSGM]

This verse is speaking to women who are still learning. In the context WHEN the woman is learning, the woman should learn in quietness, ect....Now, I know that from another verse women were being taught via their husbands and most likely pertaining to the OT. I don't believe this situation exists much any longer.

 

[CmRoddy]

If I don't understand your point, how can I challenge it? What I understand of the argument does not fit with grammatical structure, and therefore, seems flawed. If man/his/ etc. can be interchangable with mankind/humans, the argument has not grounds to stand, or am I missing something? That was the question, what am I missing?

Edit: the thing is this, this same issue came up in my life, not all that long ago, in the end, after discussion, study, prayer, and more thought, I had to dismiss it as irrelavant to the point of the letter, so if I am missing something, I would love to know what....

The point is this: The term "elder," as it is used in 1 Timothy and Titus, is never used to describe a woman and is always male. Unless you can demonstrate how this is false (as NorrinRadd attempted to with 2 John 1:1 but failed because it isn't the same greek term) then your position is still unsubstantiated.

 

[CmRoddy]

This verse is speaking to women who are still learning. In the context WHEN the woman is learning, the woman should learn in quietness, ect....Now, I know that from another verse women were being taught via their husbands and most likely pertaining to the OT. I don't believe this situation exists much any longer.

Would you care to tell us how a woman can:

• Be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6)
• Manage his own household well, care for God's church (1 Tim. 3:4-5)
• Keep his children submissive (1 Tim. 3:4) and his children are to be believers (or “faithful”), not insubordinate (Titus 1:6)

Unless this can be done, you have no case and 1 Tim. 2:12-13 simply helps support the fact that the position of elder/overseer/bishop is restricted to men alone.

 

[LJSGM]

The point is this: The term "elder," as it is used in 1 Timothy and Titus, is never used to describe a woman and is always male. Unless you can demonstrate how this is false (as NorrinRadd attempted to with 2 John 1:1 but failed because it isn't the same greek term) then your position is still unsubstantiated.

Elder means older. There is a lady called the "elder" lady in scriptures.

As far as deacon or servant, I know you like to throw this out, but it does mention women.

1 Timothy 3
11In the same way, the women are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

It does not have a possessive of "their" wives, so he's most likely not speaking of "their" wives.

He speaking of the qualification or guidelines to being an overseer/elder/deacon for women and I'll emphasize that he says "IN THE SAME WAY"

 

[CmRoddy]

Elder means older. There is a lady called the "elder" lady in scriptures.

Yes, one of the terms for elder means "older" and that term is "presbuteros" (Grk: πρεσβύτερο&#962. I addressed this issue on the last page, apparently you missed it. It is speaking of the literal age of the person as being older (c.f. Acts 2:17). It always referrs to those who are "of age." It may describe the person in the office (as in the person's age), but it does not describe the office and qualifications thereof.

However, the tem used for "elder" in both 1 Timothy and Titus is "episkopos" (Grk: ἐπίσκοπο&#962. While "presbuteros" above is an adjective, "episkopos" is literally a masculine noun. So now you have to explain how a woman can hold the position that literally describes a man.

They are both different words. You are basing your belief on the English rather then the Greek.

As far as deacon or servant, I know you like to throw this out, but it does mention women.

1 Timothy 3
11In the same way, the women are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

It does not have a possessive of "their" wives, so he's most likely not speaking of "their" wives.

He speaking of the qualification or guidelines to being an overseer/elder/deacon for women and I'll emphasize that he says "IN THE SAME WAY"

First of all, I don't "like to throw this out" at all. You simply don't like my explanation of this misuse of Scripture. Let me copy/paste what I posted before (which has never been challenged, only dismissed).

The word "deacon" διάκονος (diakonos) and its cognates occur 31 times in the NT and is used in many different ways. Paul calls himself a minister (diakonos) of the gospel in Col. 1:23, 25. Paul went to Jerusalem to serve (diakonos) the saints, (Rom. 15:25). Mary spoke to the servants (diakonos) at the wedding in Cana (John 2:5). It is used of serving tables (Luke 17:8 and Acts 6:2). Jesus came not to be served, but to serve (diakonos), (Mark 10:45). The government is called a minister (diakonos) of God (Rom. 13:4). Tychicus is a minister (diakonos) of the Lord (Col. 4:7) as is Timotheus (1 Thess. 3:2).

Source: Matt Slick [link]

You are taking the broad meaning of the word and applying the meaning you think it should mean to a specific situation.

In 1 Tim. 3:11, Paul is simply saying that women should act in the same way and be "dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things." However, to say that because of this verse women are allowed to be elders and deacons is to make Paul contradict itself in several places within the same letter. You also seem to ignore the very next verse.

1 Tim. 3:12
Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.
​

This uses the same exact grammatical structure as the requirement for elder in v. 2. The position of both deacon and elder is to be held by men and not women.

 

[razzelflabben]

The point is this: The term "elder," as it is used in 1 Timothy and Titus, is never used to describe a woman and is always male. Unless you can demonstrate how this is false (as NorrinRadd attempted to with 2 John 1:1 but failed because it isn't the same greek term) then your position is still unsubstantiated.

so is "elder" the only teaching position in the church?

 

[CTyer]

And here is a refutation of Neopatriarch's misguided and unsuccessful "refutation" of Cheryl Schatz' exegesis on 1 Tim 2:12, for those who choose to read it.

Women In Ministry Blog Archive Neopatriarch fails to refute Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12

Calvin Tyer

If I may help out our new member...here is the link: A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12

Timothy2, the real challenge is for you to prove that Paul stopped just one specific woman from teaching one specific man.

How is it that at least 99.999% of the church throughout history has understood 1 Timothy 2:12 as applying to women (plural) when, as you claim, it refers to just one specific woman and her husband? Is the reading comprehension and grammar of 99.999% of the church sooo bad that they've completely missed the grammar issue to which you refer? It doesn't smell right.

I've written a wordpress blog post to refute Timothy2's argument that just one specific woman and her husband are in view in 2:12:

"A Refutation of Cheryl Schatz on 1 Timothy 2:12" (sorry, I can't link to it yet, but you can easily find it with a web search).

I believe Timothy2's arguments originate with Cheryl Schatz, but, if I'm wrong, I'd be curious to know who the originator is.

 

[LJSGM]

Yes, one of the terms for elder means "older" and that term is "presbuteros" (Grk: πρεσβύτερο&#962. I addressed this issue on the last page, apparently you missed it. It is speaking of the literal age of the person as being older (c.f. Acts 2:17). It always referrs to those who are "of age." It may describe the person in the office (as in the person's age), but it does not describe the office and qualifications thereof.

However, the tem used for "elder" in both 1 Timothy and Titus is "episkopos" (Grk: ἐπίσκοπο&#962. While "presbuteros" above is an adjective, "episkopos" is literally a masculine noun. So now you have to explain how a woman can hold the position that literally describes a man.

They are both different words. You are basing your belief on the English rather then the Greek.



First of all, I don't "like to throw this out" at all. You simply don't like my explanation of this misuse of Scripture. Let me copy/paste what I posted before (which has never been challenged, only dismissed).

The word "deacon" διάκονος (diakonos) and its cognates occur 31 times in the NT and is used in many different ways. Paul calls himself a minister (diakonos) of the gospel in Col. 1:23, 25. Paul went to Jerusalem to serve (diakonos) the saints, (Rom. 15:25). Mary spoke to the servants (diakonos) at the wedding in Cana (John 2:5). It is used of serving tables (Luke 17:8 and Acts 6:2). Jesus came not to be served, but to serve (diakonos), (Mark 10:45). The government is called a minister (diakonos) of God (Rom. 13:4). Tychicus is a minister (diakonos) of the Lord (Col. 4:7) as is Timotheus (1 Thess. 3:2).

Source: Matt Slick [link]

You are taking the broad meaning of the word and applying the meaning you think it should mean to a specific situation.

In 1 Tim. 3:11, Paul is simply saying that women should act in the same way and be "dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things." However, to say that because of this verse women are allowed to be elders and deacons is to make Paul contradict itself in several places within the same letter. You also seem to ignore the very next verse.

1 Tim. 3:12
Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.
​

This uses the same exact grammatical structure as the requirement for elder in v. 2. The position of both deacon and elder is to be held by men and not women.

It is you that are trying to use these verses to restrict women instead of it's intented use of restricting polygamy.

It's so obvious to me (and probably everyone else) that it's shocking to me everytime anyone tries to use this argument (which is few and far between thankfully).