Women Pastors

I have serious issue with Paul's reasoning for why a Woman should not be in leadership. Read this verse in 1 Timothy the second chapter. 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

The reason this bothers me is yes, Eve was indeed deceived.
But Adam was not deceived, which meant he basically said to God, take your command and shove it where the sun don't shine. Adam blatantly went against the Command of God. And if that makes him a qualifier for a Preacher, I want NO PART of that type of church.

OKAY. This might get me some trouble, but being a man I've always read it that women are different than men.

in this case, in that Eve was deceived and Adam wasn't. As shown by this there is a quality in all women that makes them not fit to have authority over men in Church.

OKAY. This might get me some trouble, but being a man I've always read it that women are different than men. in this case, in that Eve was deceived and Adam wasn't. As shown by this there is a quality in all women that makes them not fit to have authority over men in Church. It also says that Adam was formed first. Don't abandon or disregard proper teachings. Paul was an Apostle and is affirmed through Peter in writing in the New Testament, there is no Biblical reason to disregard what he has to say.

Women are indeed different from men, in every cell of their bodies. However, you won't find "leadership" in either gender's cells.


That isn't what the text says. What the text says is Eve was deceived... and nothing whatsoever is said or implied that all women or any other women are susceptible to deceit or have any other quality that makes the unfit to have authority. See my comments to Wolfwint regarding authentein.

We don't even know how Eve learned she should not eat of the Tree. Adam might not have been clear or thorough enough. But the Bible shows us Adam was there when Eve was being deceived. If he's the head of this marriage and held most responsible, why did he allow Eve to be deceived?

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.

Paul is just throwing Eve under the bus here when Adam was there and could have stopped it. And this is the qualification Paul used for why Women cannot preach. Paul sounds more like a Pharisee in this portion of scripture than anywhere else.

I think it's implied in the text that because Eve was deceived women are unfit to have authority over men in Church.

How is he throwing Eve under the bus?

I think it's implied in the text that because Eve was deceived women are unfit to have authority over men in Church.

2 sides here.
Which is worse, being deceived, or not being deceived and just basically saying to God I could care less about Your Command?

He's saying being deceived is worse than telling God and His Command to go take a hike. Haven't we all believed a lie once in our lifetime. So we've all been deceived?

Paul believed a lie and murdered hundreds of Christians. He was deceived more than most of us.

Not really. He just wrote that Eve was deceived but not Adam. That's his reasoning, other than Adam being formed first.

Not really. He just wrote that Eve was deceived but not Adam. That's his reasoning, other than Adam being formed first.

We disagree on that, and surely mere implication can't be the basis for doctrine and practice.

That's what my original post is saying. Paul used Eve being deceived to disqualify ALL WOMEN from being a preacher.
And he did this while "ignoring" the obvious about what Adam did.

I don't know how you couldn't see that implication.

1 Timothy 2:11-14 (KJV)
11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

May I encourage you to look further into the cultural context. "Paul is wrong" is a dangerous conclusion, and there is a better one.

That's what my original post is saying. Paul used Eve being deceived to disqualify ALL WOMEN from being a preacher.
And he did this while "ignoring" the obvious about what Adam did.
I believe Paul is wrong.

I changed the post and removed that so I can re-examine it.

And I also believe culture played an important role here.
Women were still considered property. Basically a slave. That would immediately disqualify them.

It's not that I don't "see" the implication, but having done my homework (extensively) on this subject, I "know" that is not what Paul is saying.

Well that was his reasoning. Preaching would be teaching in a sense, so yes, I suppose he would be saying that a woman should not be doing that in church and part of his reasoning is that Eve was deceived and not Adam. I don't know how he was ignoring anything Adam did.

I would presume that you have some understanding of the Jewish culture around 60's AD, roughly 30 years after the DBR and Ascension of Jesus. The Gospels allude to it when they say 4,000/5,000 men but never including women and children (property). When Paul wrote this, women were still property of their husbands. And as already mentioned, many foreign women were leaders and some were priestesses in their pagan rituals. I think Paul is using Genesis 3 as an easy way to kill multiple birds with one stone, sort of theory.