Women should not be allowed to preach in church

[trofimus]

But this is what I said! Yes, the Greek says these things. Read my earlier post!

The issue is with which word to pick. Again, Authentein is a hapax legomena. It is only found ONCE in the bible. So, we cannot consult other uses of this word, and instead we have to use contemporaneous sources. That means, how do first century documents use this word?

But before we discuss that, we must ask the question, why did Paul use a word, found no where else in the bible? Surely if he was talking about "authority" it would have been so much simpler to just have used exousia? That is literally the word used for "authority" every other time this word can be found, at least in English.

It means that true authority that comes from God, the authority and power which only Jesus has, is NOT the word that Paul is using.

So he uses an obscure word, instead. Why? Because, he didn't want his writing to imply men have the authority over women. In fact, authentein has over 50 different uses in 1st century literature. That includes definitions like murder and copulation. So why would Paul pick this word?

Well, I think authentein is a very negative word, talking about the behaviour of the women in church. The culture in Ephesus had been matriarchal, with the women priestesses running the cult practices at the temple of Artemis. So, they obviously weren't behaving! Now, remember this is a private letter to Timothy. A pastoral letter, to be exact. Paul was discussing something that Timothy must have written to him about. Just like 1 & 2 Corinthians are a part of 4 letters Paul wrote, and there were return letters, the fact that Paul wrote 2 letters to Timothy, implied some back and forth between the two of them.

Now, if Paul had used "exousia" the sentence structure would have been had to have been greatly changed to force it to say what people are claiming it says. That is:

"A man has authority over a woman."

But no, that is not what Paul is saying. He is not talking about any nonsensical roles, or order, he is addressing a PROBLEM in the church at Ephesus. So, he talks, using a word that implies negative behaviour on the part of the women.

What was that negative behaviour? Well, we can infer form the rest of the passage, two things.

1. A woman was being disruptive. She was trying to domineer, or pretend she was in authority (like she had been at the temple of Artemis - conjecture, I admit!)

2. This woman was teaching error. One of the myths of the cult religion of Artemis, was that woman was created first. Woman was first, then men. So the last part of chapter 2 also deals with the fact that this woman has bad theology. The Greek mystery religion may have believed the woman was created first, because they worshiped female fecundity. Witness the statures of Artemis, which the layers of breasts around her image on the statues they made.


So, Paul's goal was NEVER to come up with some a theology of hierarchy of roles in 1 Tim. 2. And NEVER to imply that women can't be pastors. His goal was to find some ways to ease the problems in Ephesus. He doesn't name the women (please remember women in 1 Tim. 2:12 is SINGULAR!) because he has hopes that she can be restored.

Why do we know he hopes this? Because elsewhere, he condemned Alexander and Hymenaeus. They are GONE! But, with the woman, he says that she is to learn quietly, (like the rabbinical students). And the word "learn" is in the imperative. So, she is commanded to learn. In other words, Paul wants her to stop taking over, when she probably has no clue as to what is going on, and learn the truth about Jesus. And the logical corollary of needing to learn, is not teaching a man, which it sounds like this woman had been doing!

Finally, such an important fact is that this word is an infinitive. You simply cannot say, "a woman is not to authority." Which is what you have to do to be true to the text. Hence, adding the verb "exercise, " and coming up with "exercise authority." No, you need a VERB to make it make sense. So, you could say "rule" or "dominate." But, since the other 1st century literature always uses this word in a negative sense, probably better to use something like "to dominate" rather than neutral words like "rule."

But, as far as this using this entire passage to prove;

a. Men have authority over women.
b. Women cannot be pastors

Not so much! This is simply not a verse which sets down a universal principle for all time. To read it that way, does a terrible injustice not only to this verse, chapter and book but to the entire Bible.

Oh, Angela, so much of eisegesis... what happened to Sola Scriptura?

In this way, we can explain out almost everything we do not like.

 

[trofimus]

Well, I think authentein is a very negative word, talking about the behaviour of the women in church. The culture in Ephesus had been matriarchal, with the women priestesses running the cult practices at the temple of Artemis. So, they obviously weren't behaving! Now, remember this is a private letter to Timothy. A pastoral letter, to be exact. Paul was discussing something that Timothy must have written to him about. Just like 1 & 2 Corinthians are a part of 4 letters Paul wrote, and there were return letters, the fact that Paul wrote 2 letters to Timothy, implied some back and forth between the two of them.

You made a huge theory based on the use of one not so common word.

Paul made no mention of anything you posted in his letter to Ephesus.

He did not even correct any serious problem in the church (like in the case of Corinth) so it looks like the Ephesus church was quite a normal one, no wild Artemis matriarchal hurricanes as you try to propose...

 

[Johnny_B]

I read somewhere in regards to women being silent in church was due to how they sat in service. The men sat on one side and the women on the other. If the wife was desirous of asking her husband a question, she'd either have to get up and walk over to him or ask him openly. Either way, that would be a distraction during the service.

Not the hardline approach where a women had to literally not speak a word. If that's the case, they'd be outta line when singing.

​I was taking my view point from the synagogues I seen in Israel, they could of been set up different in the Gentile world, but remember they were not far removed from Judaism and Paul always went to the synagogues to preach, until those that wanted to stay with the Law kicked him out with his followers, then once he got most of the area saved they would kick him out of town like in Ephesus.

What is interesting is in I Corinthians 14:37 Paul says "If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord." So if you don't think what Paul just said are the command of the Lord, with women being silent in the Church, verse 38 "If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized." Makes pretty cut and dry.

 

[Johnny_B]

Angela, is 1.Timothy 2, 11-14 word of God ore not? If it is the word of God you set yourself over the word of God!
the word authenteo means not only in KJV, also in the german translations: rule, dominate, authority about, be Master over, this all are words which say that somebody is over another person.
And there is no different between a married ore unmarried woman in the text, because the word gyne also means widows ore not married woman.

Yes she was and Paul explained what women should tach in the Church, he did not leave them out, he just said they can not teach men or have authority over them, it's not that hard. But again a case of the PC movement over taking the Church and if you say women are not to teach you are some narrow minded bigot. Paul said these thing by inspiration of the Spirit.

Titus 2:1-5 But as for you, teach what accords with sound doctrine.2 Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness.3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good,4 and so train the young women to love their husbands and children,5 to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.

No one is saying that women can not teach in the Church, they just can not teach or proclaim the word of God to men as a teacher of and in authority over men. Paul even says why they should be in subjection to their husbands, "that the word of God may not be reviled. I just noticed this I Timothy 2:8-15 I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling;9 likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,10 but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness.12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve;14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

Paul says, the men are to pray, he did not say when you pray. Making the silents of the women even more to the point, if they are not mentioned to pray in every place so no public pray for women either.

 

[Johnny_B]

That's right. They shouldn't. Because men are created to be the leaders of the church. God created Adam first, then Eve. Eve was the first to be deceived by the serpent because she relied on her feelings and emotions. Women tend to be deceived easily than men. That's why they are to be submissive to their husbands and remain quiet in the church. Men are supposed to take the leadership roles within the church; pastors, elders, and teachers. That doesn't mean women can't teach. They can teach other women and children but not over men in a congregation, I believe. Read Titus 2:1-5.

This from a 24 year old women that has not let the worlds influence of women lib interpret the Scripture for her. I wonder if these discussion even happen in other parts of the world.

 

[trofimus]

That's right. They shouldn't. Because men are created to be the leaders of the church. God created Adam first, then Eve. Eve was the first to be deceived by the serpent because she relied on her feelings and emotions. Women tend to be deceived easily than men. That's why they are to be submissive to their husbands and remain quiet in the church. Men are supposed to take the leadership roles within the church; pastors, elders, and teachers. That doesn't mean women can't teach. They can teach other women and children but not over men in a congregation, I believe. Read Titus 2:1-5.

Wow! Are you single? Call me! (joking )

Its good to see a young girl going against the main cultural stream.

 

[trofimus]

This from a 24 year old women that has not let the worlds influence of women lib interpret the Scripture for her. I wonder if these discussion even happen in other parts of the world.

No, these discussion happen only in the feminized parts of the world, the rest has men in leadership.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I have a women Pastor

And sadly, she is outta line. A pastor must be the HUSBAND of 1 wife, per 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1.

 

[wolfwint]

While I agree that the consequences are unpleasant, and could therefore be seen as punishment, the argument fails when its application is extended to mean that God "intended" that husbands rule over their wives, or even that men rule over women generally. Think of it this way: if you are warning your children what will likely happen if they ride a bicycle without hands, and one does so, falls and is injured, is your warning a statement of consequence (what will happen, or will likely happen) or a punishment (because you disobeyed and rode without hands, I will ensure that you fall and are injured)? I contest that it is the former, not the latter, even though it is unpleasant for the child. To me it is a massive and critical difference.

I simply don't see that God, being both exceedingly good and wise, ever wanted men to rule over women, but rather, that men would do so because they are sinful. It completely undermines the argument that men must lead "because it's God's will that they rule over women according to Genesis 3". We live in a fallen world; there is much that is broken, including relationships between men and women. I don't see that the Church needs to perpetuate the brokenness by using flawed reasoning.

Well, lets see from the beginning: genesis 2, 20-24
And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up its place with flesh; And from the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.


We see that the man was createt first and then the woman. We find also that the woman was createt as a suitable helper for the man. There is no different in the worth in front of God, but there is a different in the responibility and tasks.

Genesis 3 happend before God chooses Israel and before Christ was revealed. So it is for all mankind.

The sin fall in Genesis 3 followed consequences for the whole creation, not only for the serpent, woman and man.
- Dead and sickness for all creation (this was not before in garden Eden)
- Destroying of the fellowship with God.
- Destroying of the relationship with the Fauna.
- Sin into the world
these were consequences which affect the whole creation.

And then gave God a special punishment for serpent, Woman and Man, because they all were guilty! Genesis 3, 14-19
And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon your belly shall you go, and dust shall you eat all the days of your life: And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. And unto Adam he said, Because you have listened unto the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree, of which I commanded you, saying, You shall not eat of it: cursed is the ground for your sake; in sorrow shall you eat of it all the days of your life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field; In the sweat of your face shall you eat bread, till you return unto the ground; for out of it were you taken: for dust you are, and unto dust shall you return.


And finally they had to leave the garden Eden!


Dino:I simply don't see that God, being both exceedingly good and wise, ever wanted men to rule over women, but rather, that men would do so because they are sinful. It completely undermines the argument that men must lead "because it's God's will that they rule over women according to Genesis 3". We live in a fallen world; there is much that is broken, including relationships between men and women. I don't see that the Church needs to perpetuate the brokenness by using flawed reasoning.

You are rigth we are in a broken world. And if you Ephesians 5 you can read how the relationship between wife and husband should be for an believer!
Still the man became the responsibility and will to pay for it.

It is to consider that after Moses receives the law and all the instructions no woman was allowed to have a religious responsibility in the tabernacle ore later in the temple. Only the male descenders of Aaron was allowed to be a priest.
And also today you will find no female Rabbi, if I am not wrong.

This so called creation order first man then woman you will find not only in 1.Tim.2,14ff but also in 1. Cor 11,1-11.
Be followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, because you remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head: for that is one and the same as if she were shaven. For if the woman is not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have authority on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.



There is no different in the worth in front of God! But in the responibility!

This creation order and the sin of Eva is the reason why woman should not teach (teaching is practising authority) ore rule/dominate/ have authority/ ore whatever for a word you will use, about man.

Now you can find in the NT mentionings of churches ore services no single clear saying that woman should teach ore can be Pastor. All verses which supporters from woman can be Pastor ore can teach/preach in the church are not clear and giving room for speculation. If the verses were clear saying a woman can preach/teach ore can be Pastors in the church, I had no problem with it. But you cant find them because they would be against that what God made cleare in Genesis 3!

That today we have many woman which teach and be Pastors and also that people are blessed through them is not a result because of it is rigth from the bible, but that they preach the word of God and that the Lord is graceful and uses our weaknesses.
On the other side there are enough man which are not doing what they should and to serve the Lord. So that the Lord uses woman too.
But from the bible it is ,in my eyes, clear that woman should not teach/preach if there are man which can do it.

 

[Dino246]

... But again a case of the PC movement over taking the Church...

... has not let the worlds influence of women lib interpret the Scripture

No, these discussion happen only in the feminized parts of the world

Three clear examples of the genetic fallacy: Neither of you has proven that the egalitarian interpretation of Scripture has anything to do with women's liberation, or feminization, or political correctness. You have simply made the assertion and brushed the issue aside.

How about dealing with the arguments for egalitarianism on their own merits? Even if the original egalitarians were somehow influenced by women's liberation or suffragettes or whomever, does that mean that this interpretation of Scripture is therefore tainted? Think again. Actually, in this case, I'd be calling you to think for the first time, because by these comments I would conclude that you haven't done so properly, yet.

 

[hornetguy]

God bless your soul. This coming from a 24year old woman in Christ from Texas in the year 2017.
I gave reputation, I wish there were more people like you in Finland.

To all you texan guys out there, put a ring on it FAST.

"they may be from Waco, or out in Lampassas, but one thing about it, they all come from Texas..." Hank Jr.... "Texas Women".....

Texas women rock.... I should know, I'm married to one.....

 

[trofimus]

Three clear examples of the genetic fallacy: Neither of you has proven that the egalitarian interpretation of Scripture has anything to do with women's liberation, or feminization, or political correctness. You have simply made the assertion and brushed the issue aside.

How about dealing with the arguments for egalitarianism on their own merits? Even if the original egalitarians were somehow influenced by women's liberation or suffragettes or whomever, does that mean that this interpretation of Scripture is therefore tainted? Think again. Actually, in this case, I'd be calling you to think for the first time, because by these comments I would conclude that you haven't done so properly, yet.

I will gladly respond when you will transform your post to basic English. You must realize I am Czech

I do not want to study terms.

 

[trofimus]

"they may be from Waco, or out in Lampassas, but one thing about it, they all come from Texas..." Hank Jr.... "Texas Women".....

Texas women rock.... I should know, I'm married to one.....

Texas women rock and Texas men roll?

 

[popeye]

No, these discussion happen only in the feminized parts of the world, the rest has men in leadership.

I hit the like button,but only for the wit.

I still love anointed preaching and singing,no matter the gender.

 

[Meggido]

And sadly, she is outta line. A pastor must be the HUSBAND of 1 wife, per 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1.

Please show us ANY version of the Bible that shows the actual word Pastor in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

 

[Meggido]

Could any of you that say a woman pastor is not Biblical and use 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 to defend your interpretation do us a favor?

Please show us ANY version of the Bible that shows the actual word Pastor is used in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

Oh and do not wage war with definitions and the usual double mouthed talk that you see.....Humm , errrr,,,, Bishop and overseer and elder actually mean Pastor, ya see.

 

[trofimus]

Could any of you that say a woman pastor is not Biblical and use 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 to defend your interpretation do us a favor?

Please show us ANY version of the Bible that shows the actual word Pastor is used in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

Oh and do not wage war with definitions and the usual double mouthed talk that you see.....Humm , errrr,,,, Bishop and overseer and elder actually mean Pastor, ya see.

Who is the head in a family? Is there any head at all?

 

[rdde]

Hi ,

Women should not be in a Spiritual position over a man in the Local Church its quit clear in scripture. But she can evangelize the unsaved. Teach other women, help organize physical helps ministries in a church setting.

Its clear Paul uses Adam and Eve as the reason why a women should not be in church leadership over a man; because Satan deceived her. The woman's work in the plan of God is not the same as the mans work. An established hierarchy does not diminish the quality or importance of a person or their work. God,Christ, Man,Woman, Child there are different works that God gave us to do in the body and a Pastor of a church is one of the mans works not a woman's. Jesus submitted under His Father " not my will but your will be done", imagine if Jesus said "I want to be the Father and I want my will done", what a mess we would have. So women and men likewise have their own works to do that God has sanctioned let us not be envious or not content in where God has us or how He made us as a man or as a woman. Let us just do our Jobs as God has given and be content.

Dan

 

[Meggido]

Who is the head in a family? Is there any head at all?

Please answer the question and no derailing the question with comparative analysis, that has no bearing on the scriptures


Now I will ask again:

Please show us ANY version of the Bible that shows the actual word Pastor is used in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

 

[Meggido]

Hi ,

Women should not be in a Spiritual position over a man in the Local Church its quit clear in scripture. But she can evangelize the unsaved. Teach other women, help organize physical helps ministries in a church setting.

Its clear Paul uses Adam and Eve as the reason why a women should not be in church leadership over a man; because Satan deceived her. The woman's work in the plan of God is not the same as the mans work. An established hierarchy does not diminish the quality or importance of a person or their work. God,Christ, Man,Woman, Child there are different works that God gave us to do in the body and a Pastor of a church is one of the mans works not a woman's. Jesus submitted under His Father " not my will but your will be done", imagine if Jesus said "I want to be the Father and I want my will done", what a mess we would have. So women and men likewise have their own works to do that God has sanctioned let us not be envious or not content in where God has us or how He made us as a man or as a woman. Let us just do our Jobs as God has given and be content.

Dan

Please show us ANY version of the Bible that shows the actual word Pastor is used in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

Furthermore, since you brought it up, please show us which scripture that defines the word Pastor as leader over people?