"But women will be saved through childbearing..." 1 Timothy 2:15
Is 1 Timothy 2 really the text you want to get behind on how you view women?
Good luck with that!
I do not permit a woman to have authority over a man, but to be in silence - 1 Timothy 2:13
Deborah was judge because Israel was in such a bad state that none of the men were willing.
Paul's words are God breathed.
And since women flooded the workforce since they wanted to be their "own authority" they created an applicant surplus of workers. Companies could then offer less wages due to the great surplus.
There are simply too many young women who should rather be in a marriage rather than flooding the workforce
I do not permit a woman to have authority over a man, but to be in silence - 1 Timothy 2:13
Deborah was judge because Israel was in such a bad state that none of the men were willing.
That is how the ISA interlinear renders itI think Ben Witherington is right to point out that the verse (verse 12, not verse 13 as you quoted) is better rendered "I am not permitting [currently]."
Literal Renderings of Texts
If that's the correct rendering of the verse, then this was a rule for a particular situation where one woman was not teaching properly. It wasn't a ban on women being teachers or having other sorts of positions of authority.
I do not permit a woman to have authority over a man, but to be in silence - 1 Timothy 2:13
Deborah was judge because Israel was in such a bad state that none of the men were willing.
That is how the ISA interlinear renders it
Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software
(tr) NT) 1 Timothy 2:12 gunaiki <1135> {TO WOMAN} de <1161> {YET} didaskein <1321> (5721) {TO BE TEACHING} ouk <3756> {NOT} epitrepw <2010> (5719) {I AM PERMITTING,} oude <3761> {NOR TO} auqentein <831> (5721) {BE DOMINEERING} androV <435> {OF MAN,} all <235> {BUT} einai <1511> (5750) {TO BE} en <1722> {IN} hsucia <2271> {QUIETNESS;}
[/i]Bad translation. Authentein (the word translated above as "have authority over" doesn't actually mean that.
It's only used once in Scripture. The meaning of that word during the time that letter was written was "originator, as of murder."
That passage in the letter to Timothy was addressing a specific gnostic female-goddess heresy that was cropping up in the church in Ephesus.
That's not what the Bible says. That's people adding an unwarranted interpretation because they don't want to believe that a woman could be a leader. All the Bible tells us is that Deborah was a judge of Israel and a prophet to whom the word of the Lord came and through whom God delivered Israel.
The only reason people try to add stuff to Scripture with regard to Deborah is because they begin with their conclusion (women can't lead) and force the text to fit their conclusion.
Also... if it's a universal rule that women shouldn't rule over men.... Why is that not included in the many commandments God gave to Moses? And... furthermore, since when does God need men to be willing? Jonah, anyone? Paul? Don't tell me God couldn't have smacked Barak over the head and forced him to lead Israel if it was important for a penis-bearing human to do that job.
I tell you what.... you give me an explicit Scripture reference for the theory that "God only uses women when men aren't available". Until you do, though, please know that you're reading into Scripture.
There is a reason why women cannot be priests.
The role of Deborah was not as a tool of God's judgment, but as an indictment against the men who had lost sight of the position and responsibilities of biblical manhood.
That is how the ISA interlinear renders it
Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software
(tr) NT) 1 Timothy 2:12 gunaiki <1135> {TO WOMAN} de <1161> {YET} didaskein <1321> (5721) {TO BE TEACHING} ouk <3756> {NOT} epitrepw <2010> (5719) {I AM PERMITTING,} oude <3761> {NOR TO} auqentein <831> (5721) {BE DOMINEERING} androV <435> {OF MAN,} all <235> {BUT} einai <1511> (5750) {TO BE} en <1722> {IN} hsucia <2271> {QUIETNESS;}
Try Isaiah 3:12
Youths oppress my people, women rule over them. O my people, your guides lead you astray; they turn you from the path. - Isaiah 3:12
God clearly here stated that women have rule or authority is the sign of a falling, disobedient, and sinful community
"I permit not a woman TO TEACH"Are you talking Old Testament priests? The ones who served by offering animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem?
Because if those are our qualifications for priesthood... only Jews, only descendants of Levi are "qualified". Also, the disabled need not apply.
If you're talking about NT priests then you're going to have to provide some Scriptural reference for your claim that women can't be priests. We're all royal priests now.
Yes it is recorded. I just showed you in Isaiah 3:12. Which shows that women ruling is a sign of a falling empire where the men refused to do the job.Repetition doesn't make something true, magically.
People keep claiming this but no one can point to any hint, even in the actual text of Scripture that says this.
No where is it ever recorded that God said "women are only leaders when I can't find a man to do the job."
If Deborah was a judgment against the men... then why did God use her to deliver the men (and women, and children) of Israel from judgment?
That makes no sense.
And are you really and truly saying that God is not capable of raising up godly men to do His work? Did you forget Jonah? Or Paul? Or Moses?
Yeah, poor ineffective God, He just couldn't convince the male-folk to follow Him so He had to break His own rules and let a woman do the job. /sarcasm
Yes it is recorded. I just showed you in Isaiah 3:12. Which shows that women ruling is a sign of a falling empire where the men refused to do the job.
Wow. You can do better than that, Meepy. Not even posting the whole sentence?"I permit not a woman TO TEACH"
"that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and SHE TEACHES and leads"
The 12 apostles who were also all JEWISH. I guess those distinctions between Jews and Gentiles, slave and free, man and woman should remain intact. Since Jesus had 12 male apostles, that must mean he only saves men.Yea it also says in Exodus that we are a royal priesthood. Doesn't negate the issues of the hierarchical priesthood. Jesus chose 12 apostles, who were all men, not a woman among them.
The early Christian church never had priests, period.The early christian church never had women priests either and the ECF condemned them also. Only the heretical groups did like the gnostics and pagans.
There's no such thing as a "pulpit" in Scripture. Much less any evidence that the pulpit was, or could be, "ordained" at all, much less that it was "ordained" only for men.However when they teach it must always be under the authority of the bishop and she must never preach from the pulpit. The pulpit was ordained only for men. However women can teach in other areas of ministry outside of the pulpit, and as long as the bishop ok's it.
This is flaming. There are women in this thread who have stood at a "pulpit" and preached and taught. To call us "a common Jezebel" is an insult.A woman who takes it unto herself to teach the pulpit is nothing more than a common Jezebel in revelation.
Well, let's see.... Nope. Sorry, buddy, but I went and had another look and I still don't see anything in that verse that says what you're saying.Yes it is recorded. I just showed you in Isaiah 3:12. Which shows that women ruling is a sign of a falling empire where the men refused to do the job.
Again though, just repeating the story is not going to make it true. You have repeatedly refused to acknowledge that your spin on Deborah's story isn't explicit in Scripture. In fact, the story itself makes different implications.We are not puppets that God dangles around. We have free will, which means humans can make mistakes and fall into sin. Look at the Babylonian and Assyrian exiles. There were many things that the Hebrews failed to do. Hence this is where Deborah comes into the equation, since she was put in an awkward position of a falling empire disobedient to God.
What the what? Seriously? Do you expect me to take you seriously?Deborah wanted to be home and be a mother, but she was forced in a position due to the disobedience of the men at the time.
Her "nature"? Have you read Proverbs 31?Just like when men run out on their families and the mother is forced to do duties that are not acquainted with her nature.
Huh?It is totally different than say today, where rebellious emboldened women try to take the teaching pulpit unto themselves for the sake of making a statement(Jezebel types).
I'm my mom's boss. Actually and truly. I'm a lawyer and she's a paralegal.This is totally the opposite of Deborah's situation. As by nature women were never created as a type to lead just the same as children will never be boss of or lead/teach their parents. (Genesis 3:16)
This comment is a clear example why women should not preach. Because they say ridiculous things like this.The early Christian church never had priests, period.
That is not true. Women never were priests or bishops. And if they were, they were always part of heretical sects like the Montanists and say very similar arguments. All you have to do is see the early fathers view of it during the early church.There is ample historical evidence that women were bishops, deacons, pastors and such in the early (1st and 2nd century) Church. From the NT writings themselves (e.g. Romans 16, Junia the apostle and Pheobe the deacon) to engravings on tombs and meeting places of Christians, we can see that women enjoyed the same 'status' in the early Church as men
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?