I Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man ....
Paul argued that when it comes to order in the church they can be in authority over other women, and over children, but not over men.
Upvote
0
Women In Authority Teaching Mixed Assemblies in Church
- Thread starter Crankitup
- Start date
I Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man ....
Paul argued that when it comes to order in the church they can be in authority over other women, and over children, but not over men.
Assyrian
Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
And yet you are still avoiding any attempt at an objective comparison of Chrysostom and Epiphanius's reliability as witnesses. You throw up you hands in horror at my conclusions, rather than showing where my analysis of their comparative reliability went wrong.
And no, I doubt Epiphanius intentionally changed these women into men. Some people are so horrified at the thought of women like Junia and Priscilla in Christian leadership that the convince themselves the bible must be saying something else. Jer 17:9 ISV The heart is more deceitful than anything. It is incurable who can know it?
If you have evidence of these people in the Greek Orthodox church who disagreed with Chrysostom feel free to present it, in the meantime the Greek Orthodox Church just gets on with it and celebrates the feast day of the apostle Junia on May 11th.
Well if Epiphanius's claim were so convincing why does the Greek orthodox church paint her Icon as a woman? There was every reason for the church to adopt Epiphanius's ideas, they were as against women's ministry as he was, yet it never caught on. Odd that.
But I never said Epiphanius was purposely lying, or automatically assumed he was deceiving himself, I gave a reasoned analysis of the comparative reliability of Chrysostom and Epiphanias which you could only address by reacting in horror that I would dare question a church father's credibility. Now I can only think of two reasons for your response, either you really do hold the church fathers in such high regard that you belong in the Greek Orthodox Church, or your high view of Epiphanius is simply because teaches what you want to hear.
I really don't see how you can equate my taking objection to you automatically assuming they were lying, to my holding them in an abnormally high regard. The fact that an ECF might have said something that doesn't line up with your presuppositions seems to be enough for you to find them guilty as charged.
Your example is in English a very different language to Greek. Chrysostom not only spoke Greek he was a scholar immersed in koine Greek writings. Besides, both Epiphanius and Chrysostom agree the text says Junia/s was an apostle, the Greek was so blindingly obvious the only way Epiphanius could reconcile Junia's apostleship with his bigotry was by gender bending Junia into a man just like he did with Priscilla.
Upvote
0
Because for the umpteenth time, it has no bearing on my argument.
Hardly. Once again you appear to be seeking to misdirect through your almost insane exaggerations. Please quote where anything I said could be regarded as 'throwing my hands up in horror'.
Because for the umpteenth time, it has no bearing on my argument.
No such feast day on May 11th exists. The feast days of the Greek Orthodox Church are listed in the Synaxarion. On May the 17th there is a lower order ('Fifth Class') Feast listed in memory of "Andronicos and Junias" So it seems they actually agree with the NASB, the NIV, the Amplified, and the Rheims. Even Strong's Concordance doesn't have the feminine name 'Iounia' (Junia) in its Greek Dictionary but does have the male ('Iounias). As I've said before, this matters little to me, I only mention it as an aside to show how there is no unanimous voice regarding the gender of Junia/Junias.
I'd like to be charitable and put down your gross exaggeration here as some sort of hyperbolic device but I'm afraid I can't find any reason for it. My only other conclusion at this point is that you are once again seeking to misdirect by patently lying about what I have and haven't done. Please don't misrepresent me in future. My patience is almost expended.
Upvote
0
Assyrian
Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
The only problem is you haven't shown it has no bearing on your argument. Witness need to be reliable.
What else am I to assume when you only response to a comparison of the reliability of Chrysostom and Epiphanius is to dismiss my argument for daring to question a church father.
If Epiphanius is unreliable then you claim has no basis.
Upvote
0
Actually I have. On a multitude of occasions. It's not my fault that your brain seems to check into a 'no service area' whenever you read my posts.
LOL. How many times do I have to go over this with you? I didn't dismiss it for you "daring to question a church father." I dismissed it because it had no bearing on my argument. That is, the gender of Junia/s has no effect on my argument that for there to be order in the church women shouldn't teach or usurp authority over men. I repeat, to me the phrase 'episemoi en tois apostolois' means that Andronicus and Junia were "highly regarded by the apostles" rather than being apostles themselves. I realize that since all your other arguments for women exercising authority over men in the church have failed, you feel inclined to hang onto what you feel is your last great hope, but it is getting a bit old really.
You think that because you are entirely convinced that (1) Junia(s) was a female and (2) was an apostle, these two notions cancel out a plain reading of I Tim 2:12-13. The problem for you though is that even in the unlikely event I were to be entirely convinced of (1) you will never convince me of (2) for the reasons I've given earlier. You are entitled to your opinion of course but for me your attempts at proving some novel understanding of I Tim 2:12-13 by pointing to Junia(s) and declaring she was an apostle are an abject and rather amusing by now, failure.
Surely you have another string to your bow which you could use to win me over as a convert to your ideas about women in ministry.
At least I see from the rest of your last post that you at least recognize you got the feast date wrong. As inconsequential as that is, it at least shows your not incapable of seeing reason on occasion. I hope you can do so more frequently henceforth.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
hmmm.... Sin is sin and all sin separates us from God.
Glad to hear this because:
Acts 2:17-19
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)
17 “‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
18 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
19 I will show wonders in the heaven above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
...and what is a prophet and a prophet's purpose as seen in the Bible and by definition???
Prophet | Define Prophet at Dictionary.com
In reality, in my situation, this has been rather the opposite. Where basic theology and church fundamentals have been over looked and excluded from church focus.
Ephesians 3:14-21
14 For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15 from whom his whole family[a] in heaven and on earth derives its name. 16 I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, 18 may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, 19 and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.
20 Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Ringo84
Separation of Church and State expert
- Jul 31, 2006
- 19,228
- 5,252
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
IF Adam and Eve were actual living persons, then I would say that they were both guilty for what happened in the Garden.
Eve for eating the apple, and Adam for accepting the apple from Eve. I don't see how one is less guilty or "deceived" than the other.
Ringo
Eve for eating the apple, and Adam for accepting the apple from Eve. I don't see how one is less guilty or "deceived" than the other.
Ringo
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Tomana,
Actually, there is no indication that Eve talked Adam into anything. Although we know that Adam blamed the woman, he also blamed God. We know God isn't to blame, and likely the woman also was not to blame. This was just blame shifting in it's early stages.
Adam deliberately in rebellion choose to disobey God. He also just stood there and listened to the woman converse with the serpent and did nothing. Adam was not deceived because he knew something about the serpent that the woman did not know. After all the man named the serpent. It is because of this that the ground was cursed. Adam failed to guard and either let the serpent in when he shouldn't have, or did not warn the woman of the serpent's nature or something along that line.
In the end all, both are responsible to some degree which is why both suffered the result of their disobedience, death.
Actually, there is no indication that Eve talked Adam into anything. Although we know that Adam blamed the woman, he also blamed God. We know God isn't to blame, and likely the woman also was not to blame. This was just blame shifting in it's early stages.
Adam deliberately in rebellion choose to disobey God. He also just stood there and listened to the woman converse with the serpent and did nothing. Adam was not deceived because he knew something about the serpent that the woman did not know. After all the man named the serpent. It is because of this that the ground was cursed. Adam failed to guard and either let the serpent in when he shouldn't have, or did not warn the woman of the serpent's nature or something along that line.
In the end all, both are responsible to some degree which is why both suffered the result of their disobedience, death.
Upvote
0
It very clearly does not say that Eve talked her husband into anything. One must assume that. The fact that he listened does not mean that she said anything to him at all. There is so much missing from the story, one must be careful.
But it does say that the serpent talked, not spoke in her spirit, but talked. They conversed. Actual dialogue and communication happened, to which Adam who was standing there by her, listened.
But it does say that the serpent talked, not spoke in her spirit, but talked. They conversed. Actual dialogue and communication happened, to which Adam who was standing there by her, listened.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
God says a very interesting thing. What it does NOT say is that he listened and obeyed what she SAID. There is an element missing.
In Genesis 21:12 we see the phraseology of how that would be written. It says something to the effect that whatever Sarah is saying, to listen/heed her voice.
In Genesis 3:17 it does not indicate that Adam is responding in any way to what Eve was saying TO ADAM, only that he listened to her. In Genesis 3:6 there is no record of Eve saying anything at all to Adam, only that she gave him the fruit and he took it. Thus, it is very possible that because Adam did nothing, did not guard, did not explain or clarify, but just stood listening that is why God cursed the ground. Because Adam did not do the job he was given, now the ground that they would both eat from was going to have the thorns and thistles. It is kind of a poetic Hebrew way of thinking. The serpent gave Eve thorns and thistles in tricky thinking, so now they will both live with living thorns and thistles all their lives.
In Genesis 21:12 we see the phraseology of how that would be written. It says something to the effect that whatever Sarah is saying, to listen/heed her voice.
In Genesis 3:17 it does not indicate that Adam is responding in any way to what Eve was saying TO ADAM, only that he listened to her. In Genesis 3:6 there is no record of Eve saying anything at all to Adam, only that she gave him the fruit and he took it. Thus, it is very possible that because Adam did nothing, did not guard, did not explain or clarify, but just stood listening that is why God cursed the ground. Because Adam did not do the job he was given, now the ground that they would both eat from was going to have the thorns and thistles. It is kind of a poetic Hebrew way of thinking. The serpent gave Eve thorns and thistles in tricky thinking, so now they will both live with living thorns and thistles all their lives.
Upvote
0
Hi Crankitup,
You seem to be arguing that Paul is transcending his own culture in 1 Timothy 2:11-14 based off of Pauls words in Romans 12:2 to not be conformed to this world (NRSV). You seem to see the claim that Paul was affected by his culture to mean that he was doing the exact thing he warned not to do in Romans 12:2. Paul does say to be transformed by the renewing of your minds so as not to be conformed to this world but this is not saying that Paul was not affected by his culture. The two do not stand in opposition to each other.
As humans we are shaped by our context. Whenever we read Scripture we must take into account the context of the author, the audience, and even our own context. We are shaped by our context on very deep levels that affects our mentalities and understanding of life. As modern readers we have a different world-view than Paul did.
It seems that you would like to dismiss this type of reading, but even though you may not want to acknowledge Pauls worldview and context, we must. We must also recognize the context of Ephesians to be a letter from Paul to the church in Ephesus. He was addressing the difficulties and challenges that the church in Ephesus was experiencing. Paul wrote from his own context to an audience with a different specific context.
I understand the value of focusing on specific texts. To gain a better understanding of this text, I would suggest reading scholarly works about the context of this passage (both author and audience) so that as a modern reader you might have an enriched understanding of this passage. Just as you read Women in the church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, it would be beneficial to your studies to read other reputable books that may have differing interpretations so as to have a wider look at this highly controversial passage.
As you continue to explore the topic of women having authority in the church, I would like to humbly suggest that you include the use of other Biblical texts, both Old Testament and New Testament, to see how God has been using women and what their roles have been. Again, I would strongly urge that this includes looking at the context because the context aids in our understanding and helps us responsibly interpret the whole Bible.
-AdeleFay
You seem to be arguing that Paul is transcending his own culture in 1 Timothy 2:11-14 based off of Pauls words in Romans 12:2 to not be conformed to this world (NRSV). You seem to see the claim that Paul was affected by his culture to mean that he was doing the exact thing he warned not to do in Romans 12:2. Paul does say to be transformed by the renewing of your minds so as not to be conformed to this world but this is not saying that Paul was not affected by his culture. The two do not stand in opposition to each other.
As humans we are shaped by our context. Whenever we read Scripture we must take into account the context of the author, the audience, and even our own context. We are shaped by our context on very deep levels that affects our mentalities and understanding of life. As modern readers we have a different world-view than Paul did.
It seems that you would like to dismiss this type of reading, but even though you may not want to acknowledge Pauls worldview and context, we must. We must also recognize the context of Ephesians to be a letter from Paul to the church in Ephesus. He was addressing the difficulties and challenges that the church in Ephesus was experiencing. Paul wrote from his own context to an audience with a different specific context.
I understand the value of focusing on specific texts. To gain a better understanding of this text, I would suggest reading scholarly works about the context of this passage (both author and audience) so that as a modern reader you might have an enriched understanding of this passage. Just as you read Women in the church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, it would be beneficial to your studies to read other reputable books that may have differing interpretations so as to have a wider look at this highly controversial passage.
As you continue to explore the topic of women having authority in the church, I would like to humbly suggest that you include the use of other Biblical texts, both Old Testament and New Testament, to see how God has been using women and what their roles have been. Again, I would strongly urge that this includes looking at the context because the context aids in our understanding and helps us responsibly interpret the whole Bible.
-AdeleFay
Upvote
0
Weclome Adele.
I have limited time right now so I'll just repeat what I said further on in my OP.
Paul wasn't constrained by societal attitudes at all. Witness his confrontation with Peter who at the time WAS so constrained. No, Paul was about doing God's will whether it clashed with his culture or not.
Paul said when he wrote to the Corinthians;
I Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Where he gave commands, I take them to be from God.
........................................................
I find the idea that Paul said these things because of his culture quite bewildering really. Paul was placing a constraint. If no woman had been teaching men (or attempting to) or trying to usurp authority, why would he have felt moved to make such a command? If women were doing so, then the argument about cultural conditioning rather falls by the wayside doesn't it?
I have limited time right now so I'll just repeat what I said further on in my OP.
Paul wasn't constrained by societal attitudes at all. Witness his confrontation with Peter who at the time WAS so constrained. No, Paul was about doing God's will whether it clashed with his culture or not.
Paul said when he wrote to the Corinthians;
I Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Where he gave commands, I take them to be from God.
........................................................
I find the idea that Paul said these things because of his culture quite bewildering really. Paul was placing a constraint. If no woman had been teaching men (or attempting to) or trying to usurp authority, why would he have felt moved to make such a command? If women were doing so, then the argument about cultural conditioning rather falls by the wayside doesn't it?
Upvote
0
revanneosl
Mystically signifying since 1985
- Feb 25, 2007
- 5,478
- 1,479
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
In I Corinthians 7, Paul is careful to say which commands are from him and which are from the Lord. I wish he had been so careful throughout all of his writings.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
