Honest question of 1 Timothy 2:11-12

[Von Davidicus]

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Doesn't that mean that women sin when they sing hymns in church, or hymns that have the Alto and Soprano parts (which are women's voices) are in that regard heretical?

 

[pshun2404]

Doesn't that mean that women sin when they sing hymns in church, or hymns that have the Alto and Soprano parts (which are women's voices) are in that regard heretical?

Here is the clue...."I suffer not a woman to teach"....notice the lack of "and the Lord said" or "it is written"....

You see all the towns and villages in the area were worshipers of the Eleusian mysteries (the goddess Demeter was worshiped) just as near to Ephesus the goddess Dianna was worshiped. All major business and cultural leadership was overseen by these fertility cults, and women were held in high regard and often had religious or spiritual power over men. In their gatherings they were commonly very vocal if not in control of the conversation and direction during their services into the mysteries. Corinthian women knew this behavior as a way of life. They knew no different than to speak up and take control of the conversation. Coming into a synagogue style or ekklesia (church) style worship where the men were the Overseers (Bishops were always a male) must have been a very difficult transition.

Just some thoughts

Paul

 

[Bobinator]

Doesn't that mean that women sin when they sing hymns in church, or hymns that have the Alto and Soprano parts (which are women's voices) are in that regard heretical?

No, unless the woman has a controlling Jezebel spirit and is manipulating things during the worship and praise.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Doesn't that mean that women sin when they sing hymns in church, or hymns that have the Alto and Soprano parts (which are women's voices) are in that regard heretical?

No, women can sing in church, as well as speak with other people in church under what are normal church settings and conditions.

What Paul is addressing in this passage is a problem wherein some women--Greek women more particularly--would insist on commenting about aspects of the church with unnecessary prattle, as well as talking back to their husbands (because some of them perhaps thought they had "the right" to do so.) While women do have spiritual equality with men under Christ, Paul wanted the church do know that wives are to be in submission to their husbands, as well as to the spiritual authority of leaders of integrity.

 

[Strong in Him]

Doesn't that mean that women sin when they sing hymns in church,

No, unless you hold to a very literal reading and application of that verse.

Oddly enough, those who say they do, and who quote this verse to "prove" that women aren't allowed to preach, do not insist that women can't sing, read the Scriptures or worship God

 

[Aaron112]

No, women can sing in church, as well as speak with other people in church under what are normal church settings and conditions.

See how important the comma is !
Sorry it is not the topic of this thread -
the comma. without the comma , no women can sing in church or speak with other people in church in normal church settings and conditions.
Big difference, totally different from the meaning with the comma in place.
The comma controversy has led multitudes astray directly or indirectly.

Funny thing is, ironic, not funny, as so many false teachings/doctrines came about,
is
there is apparently no puncuation in the original.

 

[ViaCrucis]

This thread is old. But I think the key to understanding what is being said here is the use of the verb αὐθεντεῖν (authentein), "to usurp authority over" is one way it is translated, because the sense here is to dominate or wrest control away from and act as an autocrat. In other Greek writings it is even used to refer to the act of killing another by one's own hands--it is a kind of violent assault (literally or figuratively)--to dominate, to take something and act in an autocratic way over another/others.

The reason why I think this is key to understanding what's being said is because this isn't dealing with women preaching, women teaching, let alone women having a voice in the Church or engaging in the ordinary acts of worship. Because we can see, basically everywhere else in the New Testament, that women do all these things and it is considered commendable and good. In Romans 16 Paul mentions a bunch of women by name, describing them as important people in ministry, a deacon named Phoebe, an apostle named Junia, etc. In the Acts of the Apostles we have a husband and wife duo who help teach Apollos, we also have Lydia the seller of purple. In 1 Corinthians 11 Paul speaks of women preaching/prophesying as something normal.

But when we get to this passage in 1 Timothy, there is this hardline stance about women teaching, this clearly seems--taking the entire biblical counsel together--an odd case. It stands out as abnormal, rather than normal. And that seems to be because this isn't just about women being active in the Christian community. Which is why many, myself included, are of the opinion that there is a specific set of circumstances which Paul has in mind here, where some women were disrupting the good order of the church and attempting to dominate and assaulting the ordinary means of ministry. This, then, isn't even a gendered issue at its core; it's simply a pastoral issue--and fits within the general theme of the New Testament about the importance of good order in the church. It falls into the same realm of teaching as when Paul rebukes the false teachers and "super-apostles" who were causing problems in Corinth and trying to undermine his apostolic authority, and thus undermine the preaching of the Gospel.

It is about pastoral instruction on dealing with disruption and disorder, rather than saying, "Ignore everything I've ever said about women in church ministry I've ever said elsewhere, from now on, women can't do or say anything". That kind of authoritarianism isn't in keeping with a healthy and biblical understanding of church and good order in church. Women are not subject to men; women are fully autonomous members of the Christian community, "For there is ... neither male nor female"; but our individual autonomy is always tempered by discipline and, most importantly, love. Paul writes in Ephesians, "Therefore submit to one another out of reverence to Christ" and in Philippians says we ought to put others needs above our own. The Church is a meeting place of grace and love, where God's peace in Christ is realized through the preaching of the word and the administering of the Sacraments. And we live together graciously, lovingly, and ministerially toward one another as we imitate Jesus Christ our Lord.

Within that order of love, grace, and peace we do not lord over anyone, but build each other up, we serve. And if anyone seeks to become master in God's house, they are acting outside of the good order of the Church. Whether it be those men Paul sarcastically calls "super-apostles" in 2 Corinthians, or these women mentioned in 2 Timothy. God's good order for the Church is rooted in us meeting one another in our needs out of love, centered upon the recognition of God's love and grace toward us in Christ. Never in authoritarian models of control.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Stephen3141]

Here is the clue...."I suffer not a woman to teach"....notice the lack of "and the Lord said" or "it is written"....

You see all the towns and villages in the area were worshipers of the Eleusian mysteries (the goddess Demeter was worshiped) just as near to Ephesus the goddess Dianna was worshiped. All major business and cultural leadership was overseen by these fertility cults, and women were held in high regard and often had religious or spiritual power over men. In their gatherings they were commonly very vocal if not in control of the conversation and direction during their services into the mysteries. Corinthian women knew this behavior as a way of life. They knew no different than to speak up and take control of the conversation. Coming into a synagogue style or ekklesia (church) style worship where the men were the Overseers (Bishops were always a male) must have been a very difficult transition.

Just some thoughts

Paul

This is a huge argument from silence.
I cannot give such arguments, any credibility.

As for the "I" in Paul's statement, this is the first person singular
form of a verb. Are you going to go through all of Paul's teaching
in the New Testament, and degrade the authority of every teaching
in which he uses the first person singular of a verb????

Note that Paul uses a lot of active verbs, and run-on sentences.
This does not mean that it is not Paul who is urging teaching upon
the congregations. It is true that Paul is very careful not to confuse
his personal opinions, with authoritative teaching. But the way to discern
this, is when Paul points out when a teaching is his personal opinion,
NOT when he does NOT use a first person singular verb.

12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed. 15 But she will be saved through motherhood, provided women persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Ti 2:12–15.

Note that Paul is not using a local, or cultural argument.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed.

13 I charge [you] before God, who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus, who gave testimony under Pontius Pilate for the noble confession, 14 to keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Ti 6:13–14.

As in all the churches of the holy ones, 34 women should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35 But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church. 36 Did the word of God go forth from you? Or has it come to you alone?
37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or a spiritual person, he should recognize that what I am writing to you is a commandment of the Lord. 38 If anyone does not acknowledge this, he is not acknowledged. 39 So, [my] brothers, strive eagerly to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues, 40 but everything must be done properly and in order.
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Co 14:33–40.

Note that Paul also addresses the topic of women being silent, in the congregation, in 1 Corinthians
14.33-40. Paul expects that those reading these teachings, will recognize that they are the
commandment of the Lord. Very few people who quote the passage from Timothy,
also quote the parallel passage from Corinthians.

 

[Von Davidicus]

This is a huge argument from silence.
I cannot give such arguments, any credibility.

As for the "I" in Paul's statement, this is the first person singular
form of a verb. Are you going to go through all of Paul's teaching
in the New Testament, and degrade the authority of every teaching
in which he uses the first person singular of a verb????

Note that Paul uses a lot of active verbs, and run-on sentences.
This does not mean that it is not Paul who is urging teaching upon
the congregations. It is true that Paul is very careful not to confuse
his personal opinions, with authoritative teaching. But the way to discern
this, is when Paul points out when a teaching is his personal opinion,
NOT when he does NOT use a first person singular verb.

12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed. 15 But she will be saved through motherhood, provided women persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Ti 2:12–15.

Note that Paul is not using a local, or cultural argument.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed.

13 I charge [you] before God, who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus, who gave testimony under Pontius Pilate for the noble confession, 14 to keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Ti 6:13–14.

As in all the churches of the holy ones, 34 women should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35 But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church. 36 Did the word of God go forth from you? Or has it come to you alone?
37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or a spiritual person, he should recognize that what I am writing to you is a commandment of the Lord. 38 If anyone does not acknowledge this, he is not acknowledged. 39 So, [my] brothers, strive eagerly to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues, 40 but everything must be done properly and in order.
New American Bible, Revised Edition. (Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 1 Co 14:33–40.

Note that Paul also addresses the topic of women being silent, in the congregation, in 1 Corinthians
14.33-40. Paul expects that those reading these teachings, will recognize that they are the
commandment of the Lord. Very few people who quote the passage from Timothy,
also quote the parallel passage from Corinthians.

I'll admit First Cornthians 14:33–40 is another passage I have troubles with. My father has dementia, and barely knows who my mother is, so to whom can she turn? Certainly not to me; I'm her son, not her husband, and Paul permits her to tun to no-one else. Nor can I answer anything asked by my nieces; I'm their uncle, not their husband (only the eldest is old enough to marry anyways, and she's too busy to seek a husband.) Which means anything they want to know goes unanswered by the command of the Bible.

 

[Endeavourer]

Paul does not use the word for "authority" in this verse; he uses a specific word (only used once in the whole Bible) that referred to a cultural practice of abusing males/boys at the alter of Artemis, which practice in that day was referred to as "authentein":

"adolescent boys lent against the altar and underwent public flogging, sometimes to death. Those who remained standing were rewarded as altar victors. Parents and family members encouraged their sons to participate in this ‘feats of strength’ ritual to bring pride and bravery to their names. While the boys were whipped the temple priestess stood beside the boys holding a statue of the Goddess. Part of her job was to encourage the floggers to create as much blood spatter as possible so that the ‘blood thirsty’ statue of Artemis could be covered in adolescent sacrifice and the wild Goddess would be satiated."​

In your Greek lexicon, you'll see the word "authentin" in the verse, not authority, which is exousia, and which was used in every other instance in his writings where Paul was referring to authority. He specifically uses a different word here, a word weighted with local, cultural practices.

There would have been converts from the Artemis temple down the street to Christianity, so it was important that Paul established that Christianity wasn't run by a female goddess, and that cultic worship practices from the Artemis following did not corrupt the Christian worship. As well, the first part of 1 Cor 11 references a rebuttal to the cultic worship practices (or any appearances similar to the cultic worship orgies) from infiltrating the church.

In the Greek dictionary, you'll see the word "authentein" defined as: one who with his own hand kills either others or himself. This is far different from ordinary authority and you can see how it would have related to the cultic practices described above. The boys were flogged (not girls) due to the female supremacy taught in this cult. This reference did not so state, but in my other research I understood that specifically women were the ones doing the flogging, as this was a female top down cult.

Without that information, Paul's writings about authentein make no sense to use and get muddled into "authority". Paul used authority many other places and surely would have used that word here if he meant it.

Paul's words in this portion are:

gynaiki ouk epitrepō oude authentein andros
a women no I do permit not "authentein" man

There is no English word for that practice, and further, the translators either didn't do (or have) the research about these cultural practices. Some translations purposefully use a mild, smoothed out expression with the word "authority" here to further the translators' agendas.

 

[Strong in Him]

I'll admit First Cornthians 14:33–40 is another passage I have troubles with. My father has dementia, and barely knows who my mother is, so to whom can she turn? Certainly not to me; I'm her son, not her husband, and Paul permits her to tun to no-one else. Nor can I answer anything asked by my nieces; I'm their uncle, not their husband

Of course they can turn to you - Scripture says we should honour our parents and support widows.
At the wedding in Cana, Mary said to Jesus "they have no wine left", John 2:3.
Jesus chose a woman to be the first witness to the resurrection and instructed her to go and tell the news to his male disciples.

Which means anything they want to know goes unanswered by the command of the Bible.

The Bible does not command any such thing.
Where did men go when they needed their disputes settled? To Deborah the judge, appointed by God, Judges 4:4-5.
Where did the male priests go when they needed a word from the Lord? To Huldah, the prophetess, 2 Kings 22:14.
Who was it who corrected Apollos' beliefs? Priscilla and Aquila, Acts 18:26. Priscilla's name is often written before that of her husband.

 

[Matt5]

The video below is an interesting take on the issue of women and teaching. Note that English is not her mother tongue, so she doesn't always get the pronunciations quite right.

The video is 47 minutes long, which I have a problem with. If it takes 47 minutes to explain your key points then something is probably wrong. I watched all of it. I thought it was interesting.

God never forbade a woman to teach, and here is why. | 1 Timothy 2:12 EXPLAINED - YouTube

Generally, if given a chance, women will gradually take over*. Even if men are the leaders, the ideas of women will become dominate. And that is not a good thing. It's actually a really bad thing. This is why we see the entire West teetering on the edge of a cliff with major wars on the horizon, women refusing to have children and marriage in trouble.

Concerning the church, the ideas surrounding "equality" gradually undermine the teachings of the Bible. And women are leading the way on equality.

* - Women take over because there are more of them, and men are more split. You see more men at the top and bottom of society. Women are more in the middle which gives them more power.

 

[Strong in Him]

I'll admit First Cornthians 14:33–40 is another passage I have troubles with.

As for 1 Corinthians 14:33-40, the context here is worship.
Paul says there should be order in worship - only one person prophesying, or speaking in tongues, at a time.
Only 2, or 3, prophets should speak, and the others are to weigh up carefully what they say. If one person is speaking and another has a word from God, the one speaking should sit down. Only 2, or 3, people who are speaking in tongues should speak, and there must be an interpreter present. If there isn't one present, the person who wants to speak in tongues, shouldn't.

In verse 35 Paul says that if a woman wants to enquire about something, she should as her own husband at home. Why might Paul have said that? I suggest it was because there were women who were talking, calling out or asking questions in the service - maybe asking the nearest man they could find. Would Paul have told women not to do that if it hadn't been an issue? He says that the correct way to do things was for women to wait and ask their husbands at home, and not disrupt the service.

This has nothing to do with your father's care/illness and does not say, or mean, that your mother and nieces can't ask you questions.

 

[Strong in Him]

Generally, if given a chance, women will gradually take over*.

Really?

Even if men are the leaders, the ideas of women will become dominate.

Evidence?
It's still a man's world - many women have to fight to be heard, or taken as seriously as men.
Look at the topic we are discussing - some refuse to consider that a woman can be called by God to preach. It took years for the C of E to accept it. Women who are called to be ordained, or to be lay preachers, have had to defend their calling time and time again on these forums, and been told that they are deluded/disobedient, that they want equal rights etc. People don't question men in that way.
There are some places where the idea of a female teacher/doctor/judge/carpenter/mechanic would not be entertained. In some countries women are subservient, told to walk behind men, cover themselves up completely and so on.

And that is not a good thing. It's actually a really bad thing.

If it were true; yes.

This is why we see the entire West teetering on the edge of a cliff with major wars on the horizon, women refusing to have children and marriage in trouble.

What evidence do you have that women are refusing to have children?
Everywhere I look, I see the opposite: unmarried women wanting to go it alone and raise a child without a man, teenage girls thinking there is something wrong with them because they haven't slept with anyone. I'll never forget seeing an Oprah Winfrey show where a 12 year old girl was in tears because she wasn't yet pregnant!

If a marriage is in trouble, who says that that is the woman's fault?

Concerning the church, the ideas surrounding "equality" gradually undermine the teachings of the Bible.

You mean the teaching that God called women to be prophetesses, a judge, a deacon and the first witness to the resurrection? That when Paul listed the gifts of the Spirit he didn't say that some were only for men? That when Jesus said "I will build my church" he never added "and you must make sure that women stay out of leadership"? That Paul had female co-workers whom he valued? That, though the 12 were men, there were female disciples - who supported Jesus financially and followed him even to the cross?
Those teachings?

* - Women take over because there are more of them, and men are more split. You see more men at the top and bottom of society. Women are more in the middle which gives them more power.

Really?
I hope you didn't tell Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth II, Indira Gandi, Joan of Arc, Catherine the great, Cleopatra, Isabel Peron, Benazir Bhutto or Margaret Thatcher that.

 

[Matt5]

Really?

Evidence?
It's still a man's world - many women have to fight to be heard, or taken as seriously as men.
Look at the topic we are discussing - some refuse to consider that a woman can be called by God to preach. It took years for the C of E to accept it. Women who are called to be ordained, or to be lay preachers, have had to defend their calling time and time again on these forums, and been told that they are deluded/disobedient, that they want equal rights etc. People don't question men in that way.
There are some places where the idea of a female teacher/doctor/judge/carpenter/mechanic would not be entertained. In some countries women are subservient, told to walk behind men, cover themselves up completely and so on.

If it were true; yes.

What evidence do you have that women are refusing to have children?
Everywhere I look, I see the opposite: unmarried women wanting to go it alone and raise a child without a man, teenage girls thinking there is something wrong with them because they haven't slept with anyone. I'll never forget seeing an Oprah Winfrey show where a 12 year old girl was in tears because she wasn't yet pregnant!

If a marriage is in trouble, who says that that is the woman's fault?


You mean the teaching that God called women to be prophetesses, a judge, a deacon and the first witness to the resurrection? That when Paul listed the gifts of the Spirit he didn't say that some were only for men? That when Jesus said "I will build my church" he never added "and you must make sure that women stay out of leadership"? That Paul had female co-workers whom he valued? That, though the 12 were men, there were female disciples - who supported Jesus financially and followed him even to the cross?
Those teachings?

Really?
I hope you didn't tell Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth II, Indira Gandi, Joan of Arc, Catherine the great, Cleopatra, Isabel Peron, Benazir Bhutto or Margaret Thatcher that.

The fertility rate in the UK is 1.56 in 2020. You need 2.1. It's only going to get a lot worse, like in South Korea where it's at around .9

If there are literally more women voters, then what does that mean? Nothing?

But we're all equal, so women vote just like men do. Except they don't. Ever notice how funding for militaries all across the West are inadequate for the job? That's because women want those funds for their own needs. They vote for politicians who are happy to redirect money to the needs of women. Too bad better healthcare is not going to help you if the country gets wiped out in a big war.

What would happen if men made a "Ken" movie, as opposed to a Barbie one, where men dominate? Think women would riot all across the West? If it really is a man's world, then that kind of movie should be no problem, right?

What happens if you try to say things that women don't want to hear at universities? Or even at work? One Nobel prize winning scientist made a couple of jokes about women at a meeting. He literally had to flee to Japan.

Tim Hunt: ‘I’ve been hung out to dry. They haven’t even bothered to ask for my side of affairs’ | Science | The Guardian

Tim Hunt: ‘I’ve been hung out to dry. They haven’t even bothered to ask for my side of affairs’

In an exclusive interview Tim Hunt and his wife Professor Mary Collins tell how their lives fell apart after his quip about women in science went viral on Twitter

www.theguardian.com

"It's still a man's world."

Nobody says that in Saudi Arabia where it really is a man's world. You only say that when there is doubt.

Whenever there is a conflict between a man and a woman, the woman's side will almost always dominate with the police and judiciary unless the man has video or witnesses.

What about marriage? In the US, about 50% of women want Mr. 1%. Average women don't want average men. Those average women literally tell us that they don't want average men. By age 30, right now about 42% of women in the US are single and childless. That's headed upward. Eventually they have to settle, but that leads to 75% of marriages being unhappy: 50% divorce + 25% only stay for the kids.

Why do 50% of women want Mr. 1%. That's due to make-up, dress and bedding practices. If I am a 5, but with make-up and dress I'm a 7 or 8. Then I sleep with a 9 or 10. In my mind, I'm really a 10. I deserve Mr. 1%. On the YouTube channel Whatever, a table of about 5 or 6 women will say they are 10s. One by one, they all say they are a 10. In reality, they are average and probably around 5 or 6.

Here is how women rate men: If you (the man) are a 5, then you are really a 0. If you're 6, then you're a 0. If 7, then 0. If 8, then 0. If 9, then 5. If 10, then 10.

 

[Endeavourer]

Generally, if given a chance, women will gradually take over*. Even if men are the leaders, the ideas of women will become dominate. And that is not a good thing. It's actually a really bad thing. This is why we see the entire West teetering on the edge of a cliff with major wars on the horizon, women refusing to have children and marriage in trouble.

Pardon me from ROFL, but which of the current wars where untold lives have been taken, or any of the historical wars were started by women?

Ms Putin? Miss Zelinsky? Was it the Hamas women that led the decision to paraglide into a music concert? Ah, I forgot Ms. Netanyahu. And we have the females of Iran in the highest levels of government, wrapped in burqas, deciding that Iranian proxies should be attacking our service people in Iraq. Yes those ladies have cost hundreds of thousands of lives over the last several years... of course!!

In looking at the history of the world AND the church, it's hard to imagine that female leadership could have done any worse.

Don't forget that feminism was the backlash from women having been treated like property and in many cases degradingly, without (in the US) even being able to open a bank account in their own name until 1974, or serve on a jury until 1975. Men were allowed to rape their wives until spousal rape was put into US-wide law in 1993!! Do you realize how men are still treating women in the middle east?

The men of the world are the reason women had to agitate for equality. Sadly, there certainly became excesses in the movement. I must insist on females having the same societal rights as males, but am very sad to see where the movement is going now, particularly with the LGBQT having joined it, and about abortion.

 

[Endeavourer]

But we're all equal, so women vote just like men do. Except they don't. Ever notice how funding for militaries all across the West are inadequate for the job? That's because women want those funds for their own needs. They vote for politicians who are happy to redirect money to the needs of women. Too bad better healthcare is not going to help you if the country gets wiped out in a big war.

What kind of logic is this????

In the US the leadership has sent enough money to wars that could have solved most or perhaps even all of our social problems. We have never yet had a female president.

Seriously, the rest of your post made little factual sense as well. There are many marriages, by its very definition, that are not in the 1% earning bracket.

 

[Stephen3141]

I'll admit First Cornthians 14:33–40 is another passage I have troubles with. My father has dementia, and barely knows who my mother is, so to whom can she turn? Certainly not to me; I'm her son, not her husband, and Paul permits her to tun to no-one else. Nor can I answer anything asked by my nieces; I'm their uncle, not their husband (only the eldest is old enough to marry anyways, and she's too busy to seek a husband.) Which means anything they want to know goes unanswered by the command of the Bible.

I don't think that the Bible has a problem with Christian women, teaching younger girls
Even if the younger girls are not in their extended family.

 

[Stephen3141]

Here is the clue...."I suffer not a woman to teach"....notice the lack of "and the Lord said" or "it is written"....

You see all the towns and villages in the area were worshipers of the Eleusian mysteries (the goddess Demeter was worshiped) just as near to Ephesus the goddess Dianna was worshiped. All major business and cultural leadership was overseen by these fertility cults, and women were held in high regard and often had religious or spiritual power over men. In their gatherings they were commonly very vocal if not in control of the conversation and direction during their services into the mysteries. Corinthian women knew this behavior as a way of life. They knew no different than to speak up and take control of the conversation. Coming into a synagogue style or ekklesia (church) style worship where the men were the Overseers (Bishops were always a male) must have been a very difficult transition.

Just some thoughts

Paul

I don't think that Paul's teaching about women being silent in the congregation, applies
to anything but teaching, and prophesying in the congregation.

 

[Strong in Him]

The fertility rate in the UK is 1.56 in 2020. You need 2.1. It's only going to get a lot worse, like in South Korea where it's at around .9

I don't know what you're saying, and how does that fit with your statement that women are refusing to have children?

If there are literally more women voters, then what does that mean? Nothing?

Where did I say anything about women voters?

But we're all equal, so women vote just like men do. Except they don't. Ever notice how funding for militaries all across the West are inadequate for the job? That's because women want those funds for their own needs. They vote for politicians who are happy to redirect money to the needs of women. Too bad better healthcare is not going to help you if the country gets wiped out in a big war.

I've no idea what this means or how it is relevant to anything that I said.

"It's still a man's world."

Nobody says that in Saudi Arabia where it really is a man's world.

I'm sure they do, but not in public. Because the men who are in control, wouldn't like it.

You only say that when there is doubt.

If I doubted it was true, I wouldn't say it.
It's a man's world any time men and women can do the same job and men get paid more.
It's a man's world when female newsreaders and TV presenters can get forced out of a job because of their age, while men older than they are still get to work.
It's a man's world any time men get promoted, or get higher ranking positions due to their gender.
It's a man's world when, any woman who does enter a "male" profession, or one where women are in the minority, are subject to sexist comments or are the butt of jokes.

What about marriage? In the US, about 50% of women want Mr. 1%.

What on earth does that mean?

Average women don't want average men.

I look forward to you being able to prove that absurd statement.

Those average women literally tell us that they don't want average men.

Which "average women"?
Average in what? Looks? Money? Possessions? Qualifications?

By age 30, right now about 42% of women in the US are single and childless.

So?
They might choose to be. It's not a crime.

That's headed upward. Eventually they have to settle, but that leads to 75% of marriages being unhappy: 50% divorce + 25% only stay for the kids.

"Eventually they have to settle" ?? Since when has marriage been compulsory?
And are you implying that 75% of marriages are unhappy because a woman has rushed into wedlock with the first man who'll have her because she doesn't want to be left out?

What the heck does any of this have to do with 1 Timothy 2:11-12?

Why do 50% of women want Mr. 1%. That's due to make-up, dress and bedding practices. If I am a 5, but with make-up and dress I'm a 7 or 8. Then I sleep with a 9 or 10. In my mind, I'm really a 10. I deserve Mr. 1%. On the YouTube channel Whatever, a table of about 5 or 6 women will say they are 10s. One by one, they all say they are a 10. In reality, they are average and probably around 5 or 6.

Here is how women rate men: If you (the man) are a 5, then you are really a 0. If you're 6, then you're a 0. If 7, then 0. If 8, then 0. If 9, then 5. If 10, then 10.

The best thing I can say about this is - it gave me a good laugh.

At worst, it's insulting and ridiculous. You claim women only want men they can give 10/10 to? Rubbish.
Haven't you heard of love? People are wise enough to know that their partners aren't perfect - no one is. But they overlook/live with each other's faults because they love them.

None of this has anything to do with the topic of the thread.
Maybe you should stop writing ridiculous things about women and star addressing the verses in 1 Tim.