1 Timothy 2:15

[OopsMartin]

...what being equally made in God's image really means. It certainly doesn't mean that women's domain is managing the man's castle while men are Lords of the earth doing the business of the world.

No? Got me laughing how you put it.

There is a new cultic group that puts it that way. they believe that men are more in God's image than women are. Sad.

[inhistime]

methinkshe said:

To be honest, Inhistime, I believe that you are trying to justify your position as a woman preacher in the church. Fair enough if God has called you to preach to men; that is not inconsistent with His actions, as when he called Deborah to be a Judge. However, I do believe that there is a perfect pattern of authority, a general principle of order, that God has revealed to the church, the bride, that is only fully appreciated through understanding the relationship of Jesus (male) to His bride (female) the church. That is not to say that deviating form God's perfect pattern is sin, but it is to say that if we so deviate then we are likely to fall short of the perfection and beauty that is available in Him. Up to you, Inhistime. You can continue until judgment day to attempt to justify your usurpation of husbandly authority, but in the end you wil not answer to me, only to God.

Ruth

Ruth, where did you get the idea that I am a woman preacher in the church? I am not comfortable with public speaking at the best of times so it amazing to find myself called a woman preacher in the church. How could I be justifying a position I don't have?

In my ministry in working with the cults, I find it interesting that often the ones who cannot give a scriptural answer for their beliefs will turn to attacking the person instead of reasoning through the scriptures. They will attack one's motives even though God says that we are not to judge the heart. No one but God himself is privy to the motives and thoughts of a man's heart. I have a great amount of patience with them because I know that they have been deceived. I love them enough to give them the truth even though I may be attacked in the process.

It is interesting to me that as a Christian you are taking a place of judgment over me even though you do not know me at all. You say that I am usurping my husband's authority. What evidence do you have to make such a statement?

I think that in these discussions we need to be reminded that we are all part of the body of Christ. We are to love one another as Christ loved us. Let's not judge motives or accuse each other of sinful actions without evidence. It is our privilege to love one another and teach each other the truth from God's words using the inspired words and the inspired grammar.

Blessings,

Cheryl

It is always interesting to see Christians take that kind of a stance, Cheryl. but it happens all the time on discussion forums. Must be what was behind the Holy Wars. Thank goodness we aren't discussing these issues in person.

On a lighter note I would love to have a woman like you for a wife only about 20 years older. If I were interested in getting married again. And I wouldn't dream of trying to control or "take authority over" her. I think it must have taken many years for me to fully grasp what being equally made in God's image really means. It certainly doesn't mean that women's domain is managing the man's castle while men are Lords of the earth doing the business of the world. It is likely that these ideas are what is behind the idea that 1 Tim. 2:15 means women are saved by taking the role of child bearer and raiser.

Men and women should use the gifts, skills, and strengths God gave each of us for the betterment of all. Anyone that wishes to hinder one person from using their skills and gifts is hurting the whole of humanity. They just don't know it. Not all women will be wives and mother; not all men will be husbands and fathers. Marriage is a beautiful covenental relationship that not every human is able to engage or maintain adequately. Above it all, we must serve the Lord. God is foremost, without whom we would have no skills to share and without whom we would have no spiritual gifts to bless others with. While it may be difficult for some to maintain married life and serve God to our fullest, we can do it.

You may be right and since I have almost no experience with discussion forums I will accept your words that this happens all the time. However it seems to me that there should be a gracious spirit whether we are dialoging in person or only through writing. One of the things that Jesus commanded us to do was to love each other. Non-believers should certainly see that love coming through us otherwise we look just like them.

On your lighter note, I am amazed that you are interested in someone about twenty years older which would make her 74 years old! Yes marriage is meant to be a beautiful covenantal relationship and when both partners respect each other and seek to serve each other for the best of the other partner, it marriage relationship properly reflects the church and her head. I have seen men exercise their "headship" in the role as ruler which is so prevalent today and I have seen the unhappiness that comes when a woman is treated like she is to remain in a childlike state having no authority to make any decision for herself. God never meant for a woman to lose her identify in a marriage. The two becoming one is a unity of equals with each one preferring the other. There is safety in a loving relationship and when men love their women this way, they will not give preference to their own desires nor will they treat their women as unpaid servants. Thankfully many complementarian marriages have a basic egalitarian relationship where both make the decisions together. More and more people are seeing this as the loving way to work out a one-flesh union.

The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men. The men will agree that women can spiritually serve other women and children, but their view is the same as John MacArthur's when he said that the highest spiritual source of a woman will always be a man. This puts women in a lesser category even with other women and this type of preferential treatment is not Christ-like nor is it biblical. I think that it is right to challenge this view. I try really hard to challenge with love and with dignity and respect because this is the way that I like to be treated too.

[firehill]

...what being equally made in God's image really means. It certainly doesn't mean that women's domain is managing the man's castle while men are Lords of the earth doing the business of the world.

No? Got me laughing how you put it.

There is a new cultic group that puts it that way. they believe that men are more in God's image than women are. Sad.

The wordage sounds similar to William E. Mouser, the five aspects ideology.

[Neopatriarch]

So, attempting to create a subcategory of false teachers who knowingly lie to people from the category of false teachers who ignorantly teach people seems impossible. The teachers are either ignorant or they are not. Context tells us it is the former.

I am amazed that you can say this. Did you not read the entire book of 1 Timothy. How could you have missed chapter four?

Let me try this one again. 1 Timothy 6:2-4 says, "Teach and urge these things. 3 If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, 4 he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing."

Take a blank sheet of paper and draw a circle on it, and then draw several stick figures inside it. Let these stick figures represent anyone who teaches a different doctrine. Paul says these people understand nothing. So, inside this circle write "people who are ignorant". Next draw a circle inside of the big circle and be sure to include a couple of stick figures inside this smaller circle. Then write inside this smaller circle write "people who are not ignorant".

Now explain to me how this makes any sense.

I will grant that there are people who are ignorant and who are liars as well, but all people who teach a different doctrine are ignorant even if they are also liars. Perhaps you should refine your distinction so that you just have false teachers who are outright liars and those who are not liars, lying being a wilful deception. If this is the case, then you should be trying to justify this distinction rather than merely a distinction between false teachers who are ignorant and those who are not.

Well, all for now.

-Neopatriarch

[OopsMartin]

You may be right and since I have almost no experience with discussion forums I will accept your words that this happens all the time. However it seems to me that there should be a gracious spirit whether we are dialoging in person or only through writing. One of the things that Jesus commanded us to do was to love each other. Non-believers should certainly see that love coming through us otherwise we look just like them.

On your lighter note, I am amazed that you are interested in someone about twenty years older which would make her 74 years old! Yes marriage is meant to be a beautiful covenantal relationship and when both partners respect each other and seek to serve each other for the best of the other partner, it marriage relationship properly reflects the church and her head. I have seen men exercise their "headship" in the role as ruler which is so prevalent today and I have seen the unhappiness that comes when a woman is treated like she is to remain in a childlike state having no authority to make any decision for herself. God never meant for a woman to lose her identify in a marriage. The two becoming one is a unity of equals with each one preferring the other. There is safety in a loving relationship and when men love their women this way, they will not give preference to their own desires nor will they treat their women as unpaid servants. Thankfully many complementarian marriages have a basic egalitarian relationship where both make the decisions together. More and more people are seeing this as the loving way to work out a one-flesh union.

The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men. The men will agree that women can spiritually serve other women and children, but their view is the same as John MacArthur's when he said that the highest spiritual source of a woman will always be a man. This puts women in a lesser category even with other women and this type of preferential treatment is not Christ-like nor is it biblical. I think that it is right to challenge this view. I try really hard to challenge with love and with dignity and respect because this is the way that I like to be treated too.

Ah well, on your lighter note, I thought you were younger. Your video looks like a young fortyish.

"The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men."

that was an asture observation. Yet, that was the very lesson that God taught Adam, that he needed the woman, which meant she had something to offer him besides her presence. After all, the animals gave him silent presence; silent in the sense of no equal discourse.

[inhistime]

So, attempting to create a subcategory of false teachers who knowingly lie to people from the category of false teachers who ignorantly teach people seems impossible. The teachers are either ignorant or they are not. Context tells us it is the former.

I am amazed that you can say this. Did you not read the entire book of 1 Timothy. How could you have missed chapter four?

Let me try this one again. 1 Timothy 6:2-4 says, "Teach and urge these things. 3 If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, 4 he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing."

Take a blank sheet of paper and draw a circle on it, and then draw several stick figures inside it. Let these stick figures represent anyone who teaches a different doctrine. Paul says these people understand nothing. So, inside this circle write "people who are ignorant". Next draw a circle inside of the big circle and be sure to include a couple of stick figures inside this smaller circle. Then write inside this smaller circle write "people who are not ignorant".

Now explain to me how this makes any sense.

I will grant that there are people who are ignorant and who are liars as well, but all people who teach a different doctrine are ignorant even if they are also liars. Perhaps you should refine your distinction so that you just have false teachers who are outright liars and those who are not liars, lying being a wilful deception. If this is the case, then you should be trying to justify this distinction rather than merely a distinction between false teachers who are ignorant and those who are not.

Well, all for now.

-Neopatriarch

Let me try to draw again the distinction for you. The group who are deceived are to be dealt with in a completely different manner than the ones who are the deceivers. It isn't just that the deceivers are liars - they are deceivers. Let's take just Paul's two letters to Timothy and draw out the distinctions from there.

The deceived

- are not named

- are not allowed to teach

Edited July 1, 2007 by inhistime

[inhistime]

You may be right and since I have almost no experience with discussion forums I will accept your words that this happens all the time. However it seems to me that there should be a gracious spirit whether we are dialoging in person or only through writing. One of the things that Jesus commanded us to do was to love each other. Non-believers should certainly see that love coming through us otherwise we look just like them.

On your lighter note, I am amazed that you are interested in someone about twenty years older which would make her 74 years old! Yes marriage is meant to be a beautiful covenantal relationship and when both partners respect each other and seek to serve each other for the best of the other partner, it marriage relationship properly reflects the church and her head. I have seen men exercise their "headship" in the role as ruler which is so prevalent today and I have seen the unhappiness that comes when a woman is treated like she is to remain in a childlike state having no authority to make any decision for herself. God never meant for a woman to lose her identify in a marriage. The two becoming one is a unity of equals with each one preferring the other. There is safety in a loving relationship and when men love their women this way, they will not give preference to their own desires nor will they treat their women as unpaid servants. Thankfully many complementarian marriages have a basic egalitarian relationship where both make the decisions together. More and more people are seeing this as the loving way to work out a one-flesh union.

The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men. The men will agree that women can spiritually serve other women and children, but their view is the same as John MacArthur's when he said that the highest spiritual source of a woman will always be a man. This puts women in a lesser category even with other women and this type of preferential treatment is not Christ-like nor is it biblical. I think that it is right to challenge this view. I try really hard to challenge with love and with dignity and respect because this is the way that I like to be treated too.

Ah well, on your lighter note, I thought you were younger. Your video looks like a young fortyish.

"The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men."

that was an asture observation. Yet, that was the very lesson that God taught Adam, that he needed the woman, which meant she had something to offer him besides her presence. After all, the animals gave him silent presence; silent in the sense of no equal discourse.

Hey thanks for thinking I am a young fortyish. I will take that as a compliment and remind my grandchildren when they observe all the white hairs! My oldest granddaughter says that my hair is "peachy-white". I guess you can't see that as well on the screen as she can a few inches from my face.

My passion is not only for the cults but to help Christian women who have been marginalized and have been silenced by men. God has given so many of them awesome gifts for the use of the entire body of Christ and these gifts are what we need in this very dangerous time. I have been blessed to have many men come alongside me after they see the gifts that God has given me. When they need someone in the spiritual battlefield, they call on me. In those times their prejudice just seems to disappear and for that I am most grateful.

[Guest Biblicist]

Now once again I ask you to show me from the context of the complete passage starting with chapter one and show me how you can fit in the forbidding of godly Christian women from teaching correct doctrine to men. I will be waiting for this exegesis. It is important because it wouldn't be fair to attribute sin to godly women teaching the truth of God's word just because they don't discriminate against who comes to listen to them teach. It is a serious matter to tell women they are in sin. Please prove your case from the context and show how we can all understand that Paul is restricting true teaching and not just the teaching of error from one who is deceived.

Blessings on your efforts,

Cheryl

The rest of this post was well done. It is obvious you have done your research.

This part though. . .

Women are the decieved and can be taught. . . [clearly stated in God's word]

Men are the decievers and should be avoided. . .

Decievers can not be taught and should be avoided. . .

Women can not teach men who are decieved.

Am I correct in that assumption?

It is one thing to say that a husband and wife can study God's word and glean useful information from it and learn from each other. It is another for a woman to try to teach a group of men, not knowing who is the deciever and who is not.

I really don't understand how this argument has anything to do with the OP though?

[methinkshe]

You may be right and since I have almost no experience with discussion forums I will accept your words that this happens all the time. However it seems to me that there should be a gracious spirit whether we are dialoging in person or only through writing. One of the things that Jesus commanded us to do was to love each other. Non-believers should certainly see that love coming through us otherwise we look just like them.

On your lighter note, I am amazed that you are interested in someone about twenty years older which would make her 74 years old! Yes marriage is meant to be a beautiful covenantal relationship and when both partners respect each other and seek to serve each other for the best of the other partner, it marriage relationship properly reflects the church and her head. I have seen men exercise their "headship" in the role as ruler which is so prevalent today and I have seen the unhappiness that comes when a woman is treated like she is to remain in a childlike state having no authority to make any decision for herself. God never meant for a woman to lose her identify in a marriage. The two becoming one is a unity of equals with each one preferring the other. There is safety in a loving relationship and when men love their women this way, they will not give preference to their own desires nor will they treat their women as unpaid servants. Thankfully many complementarian marriages have a basic egalitarian relationship where both make the decisions together. More and more people are seeing this as the loving way to work out a one-flesh union.

The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men. The men will agree that women can spiritually serve other women and children, but their view is the same as John MacArthur's when he said that the highest spiritual source of a woman will always be a man. This puts women in a lesser category even with other women and this type of preferential treatment is not Christ-like nor is it biblical. I think that it is right to challenge this view. I try really hard to challenge with love and with dignity and respect because this is the way that I like to be treated too.

Ah well, on your lighter note, I thought you were younger. Your video looks like a young fortyish.

"The saddest thing that I find in the Christian community is an attitude that women have nothing spiritually to give to men."

that was an asture observation. Yet, that was the very lesson that God taught Adam, that he needed the woman, which meant she had something to offer him besides her presence. After all, the animals gave him silent presence; silent in the sense of no equal discourse.

Hey thanks for thinking I am a young fortyish. I will take that as a compliment and remind my grandchildren when they observe all the white hairs! My oldest granddaughter says that my hair is "peachy-white". I guess you can't see that as well on the screen as she can a few inches from my face.

My passion is not only for the cults but to help Christian women who have been marginalized and have been silenced by men. God has given so many of them awesome gifts for the use of the entire body of Christ and these gifts are what we need in this very dangerous time. I have been blessed to have many men come alongside me after they see the gifts that God has given me. When they need someone in the spiritual battlefield, they call on me. In those times their prejudice just seems to disappear and for that I am most grateful.

Any woman who has been marginalised or silenced by a man has not known the true Gospel of Jesus, nor has the man who has inflicted the marginalisation and silencing. It is one thing for Paul to offer directions vis-a vis order in church and another thing entirely for his directions re church to be interpreted as a carte blanche for men to lord it over women in absolutum. I do not believe that that was ever his intention. As a woman, I am neither silenced nor marginalised by men - however, I do prefer to allow men to take up teaching positions in church, not the least because men have a tendency to be lazy if given half an opportunity, and when women step into the gap they do so at the expense of a lot of male folded hands! I watched this morning in our church fellowship as three very competent women led the service, preached the sermon, conducted worship and lead in prayer. And I wondered what all those lazy men were doing (and there were plenty of them) leaning back in their seats! It seemed to me that they had become over-reliant on capable women to do the job for them and were far too comfortable in taking a back-seat. Also, and you probably will not agree with this, but it is my honestly held opinion, I never appreciate a woman's teaching as much as I do a man's - it always seems to be overlaid with emotionalism at best, and to be patronising at worst - better suited to Sunday school. Men, on the whole, are more likely to take a position from reason than from emotion - which suits me just fine. I offer this as a general observation and personal preference, not as a rule, because there are always the exceptions to the rule.

One other question for you, Inhistime: why was Jesus born as a man and not as a woman? I'd like to hear your understanding.

Ruth

[inhistime]

Now once again I ask you to show me from the context of the complete passage starting with chapter one and show me how you can fit in the forbidding of godly Christian women from teaching correct doctrine to men. I will be waiting for this exegesis. It is important because it wouldn't be fair to attribute sin to godly women teaching the truth of God's word just because they don't discriminate against who comes to listen to them teach. It is a serious matter to tell women they are in sin. Please prove your case from the context and show how we can all understand that Paul is restricting true teaching and not just the teaching of error from one who is deceived.

Blessings on your efforts,

Cheryl

The rest of this post was well done. It is obvious you have done your research.

This part though. . .

Women are the decieved and can be taught. . . [clearly stated in God's word]

Men are the decievers and should be avoided. . .

Decievers can not be taught and should be avoided. . .

Women can not teach men who are decieved.

Am I correct in that assumption?

It is one thing to say that a husband and wife can study God's word and glean useful information from it and learn from each other. It is another for a woman to try to teach a group of men, not knowing who is the deciever and who is not.

I really don't understand how this argument has anything to do with the OP though?

No, you do not understand me. I am not putting all women in the deceived category and all men in the deceivers column. I am saying that Paul shows that there are two kinds of people and these people need to be treated differently. In the deceived category is one specific woman whom Paul does not name because she is deceived and Paul tells Timothy what to do with her.

Scripture also tells us about one woman who is a deceiver. This woman is named. In Revelation 2:20 it says:

But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.

This is a deceiver who teaches and leads. She specializes in immorality and she leads people astray concerning the "deep things" of Satan. The church is not told to "teach" her truth because she is a deceiver. You cannot teach deceivers because they distort the truth deliberately.

Now in 1 Timothy 2:11, 12 Paul is not talking about all husbands and wives. He is talking about one specific couple. The grammar is so specific in verse 15 that one cannot understand this passage as plural "women" without doing violence to the inspired words and the inspired grammar. Paul says "she" singular feminine will be saved if "they" plural but not feminine... We MUST know who the "she" is before the question of her salvation makes any sense. When we understand that Paul is stopping a specific woman who is one of the group of the deceived spoken of in chapter 1, then we can understand why she is to be stopped from teaching, why Timothy is told that she must learn, why she is compared to the deceived Eve, why her salvation is in question.

I have given the challenge to exegete the first two chapters of Timothy to Pastors and many complementarian Christians who believe that women are under restrictions regarding their godly teaching. I have asked them all to show me from the context how Paul is stopping godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men. I have yet to have even one who tried to do that. What does this failure show? It shows that the ordinary person cannot give reason for the restricting of godly Christian women teaching correct biblical doctrine from the complete context of the passage. Yet God's character is such that he has always given his restrictions multiple times and in many ways so that we are not ignorant regarding his commandments. The stopping of godly Christian women teaching correct biblical doctrine to men is not consistent with God's laws. This supposed restriction is never repeated, it is not supported by the context and it was never practiced in the early church. There is no history of Paul ever stopping a godly teacher or godly teaching from anyone especially a woman. The church needs to rethink this ungodly tradition. God himself has said that he would initiate enmity between the woman and the serpent. As a result Satan especially hates women. His goal is to stop women from being effective in the gifts that God has given them. He wants them silenced and he wants them oppressed. When we say that we have no need for a woman's teaching, we are guilty of saying that one part of the body is not needed for us. In other words a man will say that a woman can be used for other parts of the body (women and children) but HE doesn't need her. 1 Cor. 12:21 says:

And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you"; or again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."

Notice that the eye says "I" have no need of "you". He is not saying that others don't need you but that I don't need you. But God says that one cannot say that. God is the one who distributes the gifts to the body and we cannot tell him who God is allowed to distribute the gifts to and we cannot tell him that we refuse to be ministered to by one of the members because they are a woman. God says that we do not have permission to say that. When we refuse God's gifts because we are prejudiced, we are in essence rejecting God.

I pray that some day the entire body of Christ will embrace and use the gifts of women. When that day fully comes we will go out as the church triumphant because we will be mature and ready to do battle against the enemy.

Edited July 1, 2007 by inhistime