1 Timothy 2:15

[matthew4:4]

Hmm, I have a question but I don't want to start any arguments or anything but its an important question which I would like to hear some other opinions on. I have my own ideas about it but it never hurts to remain open to things. So, do this passage and the one in corinthians show us that woman should not have the role of being pastors? Again, lets have a gentle discussion and not look at this biasedly but use the scripture for its complete truth. Thanks for your replys. Your brother in Christ, matthew

No there is nothing in the passages that says that a woman is forbidden from being a pastor. The context of 1 Timothy 1 & 2 is deception and therefore cannot be the stopping of the teaching of correct biblical doctrine by women. The context of 1 Corinthians is answering the questions and divisions of the Corinthians. In chapter 14 there is a reference to "the law" which is not found in scripture. The only "law" that was in operation at the time of the writing was in the Jewish oral law. The quote then is from the Corinthians who wanted to stop women from learning scripture and stop them from speaking forth the word of God. In 1 Cor. 14: 36 Paul takes a position contrary to the two previous verses and contradicts the claim. Is there anything in scripture that says that a woman is forbidden from being a Pastor? No. For one to take this position means that one must read into scripture something that is not stated. Can a gentile be a Pastor? We could read into scripture that all the disciples were Jews, and Jesus appointed only Jews in position of leadership. But there is nothing that says that a gentile cannot be a Pastor. We need to not go beyond what is written.

Good point but explain more on how this verse doesnt lead you to think this. It says that woman should not teach or have authority over men. I don't understand where that has anything to do with them just teaching wrong doctrine. To me its in plain language that they should not teach or have spirtual authority over men. Also in timothy 3 it says that a bishop must be the husband of one wife and it continues to say he must be this or that. It doesnt really allow for it to be he or she. I realize you cant always read into things too much but this is different from gentiles being allowed to preach as well. I dont understand what you are saying that the verse refers to so please go into more detail for me. Looking at it as it is it says woman should not speak in the church but remain silent learning in submission seems fairly clear. Thats what is says so its tough for me to understand what your view point is. Look we know that their are two different roles which men and woman have so is it possible that this might just be one role that woman do not partake of? Please elaborate a bit more for me. I'm not a very stubborn person so if you provide me with good scripture and reason I will be open to whatever you have to say. Thanks. Your brother in Christ, matthew

[inhistime]

Hmm, I have a question but I don't want to start any arguments or anything but its an important question which I would like to hear some other opinions on. I have my own ideas about it but it never hurts to remain open to things. So, do this passage and the one in corinthians show us that woman should not have the role of being pastors? Again, lets have a gentle discussion and not look at this biasedly but use the scripture for its complete truth. Thanks for your replys. Your brother in Christ, matthew

No there is nothing in the passages that says that a woman is forbidden from being a pastor. The context of 1 Timothy 1 & 2 is deception and therefore cannot be the stopping of the teaching of correct biblical doctrine by women. The context of 1 Corinthians is answering the questions and divisions of the Corinthians. In chapter 14 there is a reference to "the law" which is not found in scripture. The only "law" that was in operation at the time of the writing was in the Jewish oral law. The quote then is from the Corinthians who wanted to stop women from learning scripture and stop them from speaking forth the word of God. In 1 Cor. 14: 36 Paul takes a position contrary to the two previous verses and contradicts the claim. Is there anything in scripture that says that a woman is forbidden from being a Pastor? No. For one to take this position means that one must read into scripture something that is not stated. Can a gentile be a Pastor? We could read into scripture that all the disciples were Jews, and Jesus appointed only Jews in position of leadership. But there is nothing that says that a gentile cannot be a Pastor. We need to not go beyond what is written.

Good point but explain more on how this verse doesnt lead you to think this. It says that woman should not teach or have authority over men. I don't understand where that has anything to do with them just teaching wrong doctrine. To me its in plain language that they should not teach or have spirtual authority over men. Also in timothy 3 it says that a bishop must be the husband of one wife and it continues to say he must be this or that. It doesnt really allow for it to be he or she. I realize you cant always read into things too much but this is different from gentiles being allowed to preach as well. I dont understand what you are saying that the verse refers to so please go into more detail for me. Looking at it as it is it says woman should not speak in the church but remain silent learning in submission seems fairly clear. Thats what is says so its tough for me to understand what your view point is. Look we know that their are two different roles which men and woman have so is it possible that this might just be one role that woman do not partake of? Please elaborate a bit more for me. I'm not a very stubborn person so if you provide me with good scripture and reason I will be open to whatever you have to say. Thanks. Your brother in Christ, matthew

1 Timothy 2 says "a woman" is not to teach or authenteo "a man". It does not say all women and authenteo is not the normal word for authority. The WordStudy dictionary says this word means murderer, absolute master, a self-appointed killer with one's own hand. It is not a "good" thing and men are never given the mandate to "authenteo" anyone either. We need to research the words carefully to find out what they mean and what is the context. Paul's reason for stopping the teaching is state in verse 13 "for Adam was created first..." Paul then connects the first one created to being the one who was not deceived and the second one created with the one who was deceived. The reason for the stopping of "a woman" from teaching or "authenteo" (very, very negative word) "a man" is because of deception. Paul is not stopping godly Christian teaching, but he is stopping error. After all he did not say in chapter one that he had left Timothy behind to stop the false teachers AND the women. He only stopped the error and the ones teaching the error.

Secondly in 1 Timothy 3:1, it says that anyone who desires the office of bishop desires a good thing. The inspired word used is the term for generic people - male or female. If Paul had wanted to restrict this to males only he would have used the word that means males only. Next the term "husband of one wife" is a term for polygamy. It is a term that is a qualifier where needed. i.e. the qualification for bishop are "if" the person is a male and "if" he is married, he is not to be a polygamist; "if" he has children, he is to keep his children properly managed. The passage no more enjoins the bishop to be married and have children than it does to be male. No denomination that I know of demands that the one who wants to be bishop must have children. We can all understand that each case assumes the "if" clause.

I have produced a 4 DVD set called "Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?" where I have outlined all of the arguments that have been used from the hard passages of scriptures against a woman teaching the bible to men. I have tried to to distill down some of the reasoning here, but I am sure you can understand that it is difficult in this venue to distill down 3.5 hours of teaching.

I hope that helps,

Blessings,

Cheryl

[matthew4:4]

Hmm, I have a question but I don't want to start any arguments or anything but its an important question which I would like to hear some other opinions on. I have my own ideas about it but it never hurts to remain open to things. So, do this passage and the one in corinthians show us that woman should not have the role of being pastors? Again, lets have a gentle discussion and not look at this biasedly but use the scripture for its complete truth. Thanks for your replys. Your brother in Christ, matthew

No there is nothing in the passages that says that a woman is forbidden from being a pastor. The context of 1 Timothy 1 & 2 is deception and therefore cannot be the stopping of the teaching of correct biblical doctrine by women. The context of 1 Corinthians is answering the questions and divisions of the Corinthians. In chapter 14 there is a reference to "the law" which is not found in scripture. The only "law" that was in operation at the time of the writing was in the Jewish oral law. The quote then is from the Corinthians who wanted to stop women from learning scripture and stop them from speaking forth the word of God. In 1 Cor. 14: 36 Paul takes a position contrary to the two previous verses and contradicts the claim. Is there anything in scripture that says that a woman is forbidden from being a Pastor? No. For one to take this position means that one must read into scripture something that is not stated. Can a gentile be a Pastor? We could read into scripture that all the disciples were Jews, and Jesus appointed only Jews in position of leadership. But there is nothing that says that a gentile cannot be a Pastor. We need to not go beyond what is written.

Good point but explain more on how this verse doesnt lead you to think this. It says that woman should not teach or have authority over men. I don't understand where that has anything to do with them just teaching wrong doctrine. To me its in plain language that they should not teach or have spirtual authority over men. Also in timothy 3 it says that a bishop must be the husband of one wife and it continues to say he must be this or that. It doesnt really allow for it to be he or she. I realize you cant always read into things too much but this is different from gentiles being allowed to preach as well. I dont understand what you are saying that the verse refers to so please go into more detail for me. Looking at it as it is it says woman should not speak in the church but remain silent learning in submission seems fairly clear. Thats what is says so its tough for me to understand what your view point is. Look we know that their are two different roles which men and woman have so is it possible that this might just be one role that woman do not partake of? Please elaborate a bit more for me. I'm not a very stubborn person so if you provide me with good scripture and reason I will be open to whatever you have to say. Thanks. Your brother in Christ, matthew

1 Timothy 2 says "a woman" is not to teach or authenteo "a man". It does not say all women and authenteo is not the normal word for authority. The WordStudy dictionary says this word means murderer, absolute master, a self-appointed killer with one's own hand. It is not a "good" thing and men are never given the mandate to "authenteo" anyone either. We need to research the words carefully to find out what they mean and what is the context. Paul's reason for stopping the teaching is state in verse 13 "for Adam was created first..." Paul then connects the first one created to being the one who was not deceived and the second one created with the one who was deceived. The reason for the stopping of "a woman" from teaching or "authenteo" (very, very negative word) "a man" is because of deception. Paul is not stopping godly Christian teaching, but he is stopping error. After all he did not say in chapter one that he had left Timothy behind to stop the false teachers AND the women. He only stopped the error and the ones teaching the error.

Secondly in 1 Timothy 3:1, it says that anyone who desires the office of bishop desires a good thing. The inspired word used is the term for generic people - male or female. If Paul had wanted to restrict this to males only he would have used the word that means males only. Next the term "husband of one wife" is a term for polygamy. It is a term that is a qualifier where needed. i.e. the qualification for bishop are "if" the person is a male and "if" he is married, he is not to be a polygamist; "if" he has children, he is to keep his children properly managed. The passage no more enjoins the bishop to be married and have children than it does to be male. No denomination that I know of demands that the one who wants to be bishop must have children. We can all understand that each case assumes the "if" clause.

I have produced a 4 DVD set called "Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?" where I have outlined all of the arguments that have been used from the hard passages of scriptures against a woman teaching the bible to men. I have tried to to distill down some of the reasoning here, but I am sure you can understand that it is difficult in this venue to distill down 3.5 hours of teaching.

I hope that helps,

Blessings,

Cheryl

Ok, sry its taken me awhile to reply but I've been having some internet problems. Look Cheryl, to me it looks like you are searching into it to deep. Its written clearly what Paul says here. "And I do not permit a woman to teach, but to be in silence." First of all, this does relate to all woman because look at verse 15. "Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control." Its not just the ones teaching decieving doctrines that bear children. By this we can see it refers to all woman.

Also I'm not sure what version you use but I use the New King James which says in 3:1 "This is a faithful saying: If a MAN(not anyone) desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. Theres two things here. One is that my bible says "a man" but I'd have to go back and check the greek. Second, it says "a man" so like you were saying before, is that not speaking of all men? I believe this is speaking of all men just as much as verse 12 of the previous chapter is referring to all women. Also, my Bible does not continue to say if. Starting with 3:2 it says "A bishop then MUST be blameless, the husband of one wife..." And mine also says "one who rules his own house well." We know that the man is the head of the household, yes? So thats one more thing pointing to Bishops being men. If you dont agree their I can find the verse for you.

Also, I need to do my own research on the word authenteo but if it means what you said then were these woman trying to have this authenteo status? I don't believe Paul was using it in the way you described. He says teaching and that, so regardless they shouldnt be teaching over men. And you see Paul would have gone into more detail as to not confuse others into believing he was referring to all woman. He might have said something like I do not permit these woman to preach decieving doctrines. But even that wouldnt make sense because no one should be teaching decieveing doctrines so I'm sorry but your argument just doesnt hold up. I'm sorry but it looks like your trying to rearrange or distort things a bit to pull out your own assumption. I just dont believe this can be argued with. It doenst mean that you and other woman can't do great things for the Lord or have a higher relationship with Him than I or any other man. No, I'm sure your doing awesome things for Him but from what is taught it seems that being a pastor is just one role that woman are not supposed to take part in. For one thing, Jesus appointed a lot of different people to go out and evangelize, right? How come none of them were women? Why werent one of the twelve a woman? If Jesus wanted to put a woman in place among the twelve He would have. He doesnt care what the world would think about it because He is not of the world. Why also is there no woman pastors in the entire Bible? I know there were prophetess and a judge but no pastors. We have to follow the Bible as closely as we can so if there were no woman pastors then we need to take that into consideration.

I understand you made a 4 hour video according to this subject but a lawyer defending a guilty man can even provide enough things to get him off the hook. Look, Ill do some more research and such but I believe that Paul's words are clear and I don't believe there is any meaning beyond what its says. I believe he wanted to make it evident here. There was no reason to make it harder to understand. Anyway, thanks for the reply and I'll be praying to the Lord so that He may shine the light of truth here. That the helper of truth, the holy spirit may be at work. Your brother in Christ, matthew

Edited July 11, 2007 by matthew4:4

[inhistime]

matthew4:4 said:

Ok, sry its taken me awhile to reply but I've been having some internet problems. Look Cheryl, to me it looks like you are searching into it to deep. Its written clearly what Paul says here. "And I do not permit a woman to teach, but to be in silence." First of all, this does relate to all woman because look at verse 15. "Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control." Its not just the ones teaching decieving doctrines that bear children. By this we can see it refers to all woman.

The problem you have here is the words. They are not what you make them out to be. This is not talking about women giving birth since "childbearing" in this passage has the definite article and it is a noun and not a verb. Also verse 15 says "she" and "they". It does not say women. The "they" is not plural feminine. The word "saved" is dealing with salvation and Paul is not questioning the salvation of women in general. The salvation of women is never questioned in scripture. However since the stopping of "a woman" is linked to the deception of Eve, it is understandable why Paul questions her salvation and then says that "she" will be saved if... Nowhere in scripture are women said to be saved by having children nor is it true that women are saved through child birth if they remain in the faith. Many godly Christian women have died giving birth. Your interpretation that this refers to all women just does not fit the passage.

Also I'm not sure what version you use but I use the New King James which says in 3:1 "This is a faithful saying: If a MAN(not anyone) desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. Theres two things here. One is that my bible says "a man" but I'd have to go back and check the greek.

Yes do check the Greek and you will find that "man" here is generic and refers to anyone.

Second, it says "a man" so like you were saying before, is that not speaking of all men? I believe this is speaking of all men just as much as verse 12 of the previous chapter is referring to all women.

One must check the context to know whether it is generic referring to all men or just one man. The context in 1 Timothy 3:1 is any person who desires... The context of 1 Timothy 2:12 is set by verses 13-15. Not all women are deceived like Eve, so it doesn't fit the "any woman" understanding. Not all women's salvation is questioned so verse 15 too are not applicable to all women.

Also, my Bible does not continue to say if. Starting with 3:2 it says "A bishop then MUST be blameless, the husband of one wife..." And mine also says "one who rules his own house well." We know that the man is the head of the household, yes? So thats one more thing pointing to Bishops being men.

Also, I need to do my own research on the word authenteo but if it means what you said then were these woman trying to have this authenteo status?

Please do check the WordStudy Dictionary. It is very clear on the sinister meaning of this word. Authenteo is connected then to the reason for stopping "a woman" and that is the deception of Eve, therefore authenteo is connected to deception not status.

I don't believe Paul was using in the way you described. He says teaching and that so regardless they shouldnt be teaching over men.

You have to give the context. What reason did Paul stop her from teaching? Paul links the prohibition to deception, not to the state of her being a female.

And you see Paul would have gone into more detail as to not confuse others into believing he was referring to all woman. He might have said something like I do not permit these woman to preach decieving doctrines. But even that wouldnt make sense because no one should be teaching decieveing doctrines so I'm sorry but your argument just doesnt hold up.

He is not talking about women. The inspired word is "a woman". Paul says nothing about stopping godly teaching. Paul connects the prohibition in chapter one (stopping the deceived teachers) with the stopping of "a woman" in chapter two and the deception of Eve. There is no way one can get the stopping of godly teachers from this passage.

I'm sorry but it looks like your trying to rearrange or distort things a bit to pull out your own assumption.

Actually I am just sticking to scripture. No place does Paul ever stop godly women from teaching the truth and he never repeats a prohibition elsewhere that stops all women from teaching men. No place in the Old Testament are women forbidden to teach men. To make this passage say that, is to bring our traditions to scripture.

For one things, Jesus appointed a lot of different people to go out and evangelize, right? How come none of them were women?

Who said there were not women evangelizers? Jesus had several different groups of people. One group was the 72 who were sent out. Where does it say that these were all men? There was another group of disciples called "the women". The woman at the well was an evangelizer who brought many to see Jesus. The women at the tomb were given the responsibility of announcing the resurrection to the men.

[inhistime]

matthew4:4 said:

Why werent one of the twelve a woman? If Jesus wanted to put a woman in place among the twelve He would have.

Let me ask you - why didn't Jesus pick any Gentiles to be among the twelve? Does this mean that they have no place of teaching in the body or that they cannot be Pastors?

He doesnt care what the world would think about it because He is not of the world. Why also is there no woman pastors in the entire Bible? I know there were prophetess and a judge but no pastors.

There was a Deacon named who was a woman, but I know of no Pastor who was named. Can you give me the name of a male Pastor?

We have to follow the Bible as closely as we can so if there were no woman pastors then we need to take that into consideration.

God doesn't prohibit things and then expect that we will just figure out his prohibitions by hints. If God hasn't said that all women are not allowed to teach godly doctrine to men then we cannot just take things as "hints". God is perfectly capable of making his prohibitions clear and understandable.

I understand you made a 4 hour video according to this subject but a lawyer defending a guilty client can even provide enough things to get him off the hook. Look, Ill do some more research and such but I believe that Paul's words are clear and I don't believe there is any meaning beyond what its says.

The problem that you have with saying that it is clear is that if you take it to mean that Paul was stopping all godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men, then this would contradict other scripture. For example Priscilla taught Apollos and if women are not allowed to teach men, then she would have been at fault. Secondly Paul said that all are allowed to prophesy in the body so that all may learn. If all are allowed to prophesy including women so that all may learn, then that is teaching men. No, the bible doesn't contradict itself. We need to understand the passage in context without contradiction.

I believe he wanted to make it evident here. There was no reason to make it tough to understand. Anyway, thanks for the reply and I'll be praying to the Lord so that He may shine the light of truth here. That the helper of truth, the holy spirit can be at work. Your brother in Christ, matthew

Some of Paul's writings are difficult to understand and those who are unstable and unlearned use these difficult passages to make them say the opposite of what was written. Peter confirms this in 2 Peter 3:16.

Blessings on you my brother as you work hard to "rightly divide the word of truth".

Cheryl

[matthew4:4]

matthew4:4 said:

Why werent one of the twelve a woman? If Jesus wanted to put a woman in place among the twelve He would have.

Let me ask you - why didn't Jesus pick any Gentiles to be among the twelve? Does this mean that they have no place of teaching in the body or that they cannot be Pastors?

Yes, but we are not talking about the Gentiles and there were Gentiles teaching the scripture later on. When the Holy Spirit came it made it evident that the gift of salvation was not only for the Jews but also for the Gentiles. There is never any scripture speaking against a Gentile preaching but there is against a woman teaching it.

He doesnt care what the world would think about it because He is not of the world. Why also is there no woman pastors in the entire Bible? I know there were prophetess and a judge but no pastors.

There was a Deacon named who was a woman, but I know of no Pastor who was named. Can you give me the name of a male Pastor?

By pastor I mean Bishop, someone in charge of teaching a church and such. There were many male bishops.

We have to follow the Bible as closely as we can so if there were no woman pastors then we need to take that into consideration.

God doesn't prohibit things and then expect that we will just figure out his prohibitions by hints. If God hasn't said that all women are not allowed to teach godly doctrine to men then we cannot just take things as "hints". God is perfectly capable of making his prohibitions clear and understandable.

I'm just saying we learn certain things by example from the early Church which we should follow as close as possible. And it is clear and understandable what Paul says in this verse.

I understand you made a 4 hour video according to this subject but a lawyer defending a guilty client can even provide enough things to get him off the hook. Look, Ill do some more research and such but I believe that Paul's words are clear and I don't believe there is any meaning beyond what its says.

The problem that you have with saying that it is clear is that if you take it to mean that Paul was stopping all godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men, then this would contradict other scripture. For example Priscilla taught Apollos and if women are not allowed to teach men, then she would have been at fault. Secondly Paul said that all are allowed to prophesy in the body so that all may learn. If all are allowed to prophesy including women so that all may learn, then that is teaching men. No, the bible doesn't contradict itself. We need to understand the passage in context without contradiction.

Theres a big difference there with Priscilla. That was in private within a home not in front of the Church as a whole. We are talking about her being a person of spiritual authority such as a bishop which she was not.

Prophesying is a whole different thing. Thats is absolutly acceptable. Acts 2:17 supports that when it says "That I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daugherters shall prophesy..." I have no problem there but it can truly be labeled as teaching. It's just telling everyone something that God had shown or told you. But that person who prophesies may need someone else to tell them exactly what it means so it doesnt neccesarily mean teaching and its not it wouldnt be the type of teaching we are talking about anyway.

I believe he wanted to make it evident here. There was no reason to make it tough to understand. Anyway, thanks for the reply and I'll be praying to the Lord so that He may shine the light of truth here. That the helper of truth, the holy spirit can be at work. Your brother in Christ, matthew

Some of Paul's writings are difficult to understand and those who are unstable and unlearned use these difficult passages to make them say the opposite of what was written. Peter confirms this in 2 Peter 3:16.

Yes, I agree some things are difficult to understand(good verse by the way), but I don't believe this is supposed to be. The things difficult to understand I believe are some of those parts you read it and go huh? But this is written very plainly. Please explain exactly what you believe its referring to because it just didnt make much sense to me. Look, I'm not trying to be rude but it seems that you're trying really hard to pull things out to try to prove your point which is what you want to be right. But just because we sometimes don't like what it may say doesn't mean we can distort or worse take it for private interrpretation like 2 Peter 1:19-21 warns about.

Also, you didnt answer some of my other points but just don't forget to whenever you have a chance. Again, I'm not trying to be rude or anything like that. You seem to be a very wise woman. It would appear that the Lord has taught you many things but lets continue to look at this together because I want the truth to be absolutly clear for the both of us. God bless. Your brother in Christ, Matthew

Blessings on you my brother as you work hard to "rightly divide the word of truth".

Cheryl

Edited July 11, 2007 by matthew4:4

[matthew4:4]

Sorry but I don't know how to separate my arguments from the quotes so you'll have to read under what you had said in response to my quotes. Sorry. lol.

[inhistime]

matthew4:4 said:

Yes, but we are not talking about the Gentiles and there were Gentiles teaching the scripture later on.

However the issue of Gentiles not being in the "twelve" is certainly applicable. If we can make a big deal about no woman being in the twelve, we can certainly make the same deal about no Gentiles.

When the Holy Spirit came it made it evident that the gift of salvation was not only for the Jews but also for the Gentiles. There is never any scripture speaking against a Gentile preaching but there is against a woman teaching it.

The Holy Spirit isn't an "it" (or are you referring to the "gift"?) and we are not talking about salvation we are talking about whether a Gentile can teach or preach or pastor. As far as scripture speaking against a woman teaching, we must consider the context. There is nothing in context that would forbid "a woman" from teaching the truth. If Paul had wanted Timothy to stop the women from teaching, then he would have said that he left Timothy behind to stop some from teaching "strange doctrines" AND to stop the women from teaching men. But he didn't say this. He only stopped false teaching and in chapter two the stopping of the teaching is directly connected to deception. If you believe that this is the stopping of correct biblical teaching then you must show from the context how this interpretation is possible. Please exegete chapters 1 & 2 to show from the beginning how the teaching of correct doctrine was being stopped.

By pastor I mean Bishop, someone in charge of teaching a church and such. There were many male bishops.

Okay show one that scripture names.

I'm just saying we learn certain things by example from the early Church which we should follow as close as possible. And it is clear and understandable what Paul says in this verse.

I heartily agree with you that we learn things by example in the scripture. However we do not learn prohibitions by hints. It is not clear and understandable in the passage that Paul is stopping godly Christian teaching. If it is clear and understandable please show from the context how this could be fit in.

Theres a big difference there with Priscilla. That was in private within a home not in front of the Church as a whole. We are talking about her being a person of spiritual authority such as a bishop which she was not.

Here is where you are reading into scripture. If the passage is saying what you say it says then the stopping of teaching of women to men must stop everywhere. Why? Because Paul appeals to creation not to the structure of the church. If the prohibition is because of creation then women cannot teach men anywhere because of creation.

Prophesying is a whole different thing. Thats is absolutly acceptable. Acts 2:17 supports that when it says "That I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daugherters shall prophesy..." I have no problem there but it can truly be labeled as teaching. It's just telling everyone something that God had shown or told you. But that person who prophesies may need someone else to tell them exactly what it means so it doesnt neccesarily mean teaching and its not it wouldnt be the type of teaching we are talking about anyway.

Look again at what Paul says he says that "all" may prophesy so that "all" may learn. If 1 Timothy 2 forbids women to teach men in church, then certainly teaching through prophesy would also be included. What kind of teaching are you talking about in 1 Timothy 2? The only kind of teaching that could be meant is the words of Paul. He connected the "kind" of teaching with "authenteo" which is connected to murder by one's own hand. He also connects it to deception by tying it in with the deception of Eve. How is it possible to understand that Paul is talking about godly teaching? There is nothing in the passage that forbids godly teaching in chapter one or chapter two. How can we take this one passage out of its context and with no second passage that confirms that this is a prohibition, how can we use it to forbid the teaching by all women to men?

Yes, I agree some things are difficult to understand(good verse by the way), but I don't believe this is supposed to be.

Well, my friend, this passage has been considered by the church to be one of the hardest passages to understand. Some theologians still admit that verse 15 (which is a big key to the understanding of the passage) is still not understood. If people still stumble over the meaning of verse 15 and say they don't understand it, then how is it that we think this passage is so simple to understand? No, this passage is listed in the "hard passages of Paul" as one of the most disputed and misunderstood passages in the Bible.

The things difficult to understand I believe are some of those parts you read it and go huh? But this is written very plainly. Please explain exactly what you believe its referring to because it just didnt make much sense to me.

1 Timothy 2:12 is written in the context of a problem with false teachers. That is plain and I am sure you can pick it up too by reading chapter 1. The problem with the verse is that nowhere in scripture is there even a hint that women are not allowed to teach men. That means that this would be the first and only verse to teach such a thing. So think about it this way - if all of a sudden women are not allowed to teach men in the church, wouldn't you question why? Why is women's teaching as a whole ever connected to the deception of Eve any place else? 1 Timothy was written to Timothy and not to the church. Even though the book is very applicable for the church today, we must understand that it was written to a person. Timothy would have understood who the false teachers were that Paul wanted him to stop from teaching. The complete information about the error has not been given us although we know that the false teaching was about myths and endless genealogies. We also know that Timothy would have known what Paul meant when he said that he is not now allowing "a woman" to teach "a man". The Greek shows that the prohibition is for right now. When will the prohibition be taken off? Paul says that "she" will be saved if they.... There is a question of salvation here and Paul is stopping the teaching of one who is deceived. Will she be able to teach when she has been soundly saved and out of deception? Apparently so since Paul confidently says "she will be saved if". And if Paul had meant this for all women and for all time, he would not have stated in the Greek that "I am not now allowing". The "not now" implies that the time will come when the prohibition will be removed otherwise why did he say "not now"? The only logical explanation is Paul is prohibiting the teaching of deception and he believes that if the woman is corrected and learns the truth, then there would be no longer any need for the prohibition on this one particular woman.

Look, I'm not trying to be rude but it seems that you're trying really hard to pull things out to try to prove your point which is what you want to be right. But just because we sometimes don't like what it may say doesn't mean we can distort or worse take it for private interrpretation like 2 Peter 1:19-21 warns about.

I do not consider you to be rude. I think you are really trying to understand and apply scripture. I am too. I came to the passage not to try to make it say what I want it to say but because I am a woman teacher and I need to know if scripture is forcing me to kick the men out of my bible study. It is not my private interpretation because there are inspired words and inspired grammar that cannot be answered by the standard interpretation.

Also, you didnt answer some of my other points but just don't forget to whenever you have a chance. Again, I'm not trying to be rude or anything like that. You seem to be a very wise woman. It would appear that the Lord has taught you many things but lets continue to look at this together because I want the truth to be absolutly clear for the both of us. God bless. Your brother in Christ, Matthew

I am multitasking as I am in ministry full time and its not always easy for me to keep on these discussion boards when I can help those in the cults get their questions on the bible answered. I try hard to fit it all in but it is hard to find enough hours in the day. Anyway, what questions did I miss? Please list them so I can easily see what I have missed answering?

Your sister in Christ,

Cheryl

Edited July 11, 2007 by inhistime

[inhistime]

Sorry but I don't know how to separate my arguments from the quotes so you'll have to read under what you had said in response to my quotes. Sorry. lol.

Not to worry, I figured it out!

[matthew4:4]

Hey again,

Ok, I've heard people say oh that was only meant for the church of timothy or that was only meant for the corinthians. Lets try not to use this because as we know "all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." So if it was just meant to Timothy then why is it there?

Still, what your trying to tell me is a theory, seems like a big maybe to me. Logically, I wouldn't be able to accept that or atleast not withought further investigation but I will give my time to that for you. LOL. But can you see how I see it or how one might see it? Look, I just read 1 and 2 and I still can't see where your points come from. Yes, Paul was prohibiting the teaching of decieving doctrines which he states in 1:3-4 but when he gets up to the part about woman he is not speaking of decieving doctrines but the rights and wrongs for the woman of the church. It looks let a very simple set of rules. They should adorn themselves in modern apparel, with propiety and moderation, etc. Then it gets down to "And I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority... For Adam was formed first, then Eve. This is obviously explaining why woman do not have this particular rule over men. I see nothing having to do with decieving doctrines. It appears that it wasnt just woman teaching decieving doctrines so there would be no reason to just reprimand the woman. That's why I can't see your point. Theres really just not much basis there.

Look, my girlfriend seems to have many more gifts than I do. Shes more intelligent with math and things of that sort. She beats me in chess practically everytime we play. Shes even better at a lot of sports than I am yet she understands that the man has the role of being head of the household. We are created more dominant, more in control. Look at Genesis 2:18 "And the Lord God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him." Just like in the household the woman would be the helper not the main provider or main decision-maker but right at the side of her husband. So here comes one of my big points. If the man is supposed to be the head of a household how much more should he be the head of a church? And again I'm not saying woman can't do the same men can. Like that verse in Genesis says "comparable to him", but still the helper. This is what I believe the scripture says. I hope you consider it carefully. God bless and if you have time I'm sure I'll be able to check the site one more time tonight. Your brother in Christ, matthew

P.S.- I had an idea about the Priscilla thing. It may not have neccesarily been correct for her to teach Apollos but due to the circumstances and time it was probably not really paid much attention to. Also, it hadnt been taught yet that women shouldnt teach men so maybe they hadnt really known. Obviously there were many things in the old testament that were ok until corrected in the new testament so this could be something of the same manner. Plus this is the only example we can pull were a woman was teaching a man. Just a thought. LOL.

Edited July 11, 2007 by matthew4:4