What's your take on 1 Timothy Chapter 2 about?

Question

women should not be preaching above men?

Answer 1

The topic of women's roles in the church is discussed more fully elsewhere in the bible.

From 1 Corinthians (ESV Translation)
1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
1Co 14:35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

The instructions which Paul is giving to the Corinthian saints do not apply to them alone. These are the same instructions that have been addressed to all the churches of the saints. The uniform testimony of the NT is that while women have many valuable ministries, it is not given to them to have a public ministry to the whole church. They are entrusted with the unspeakably important work of the home and of raising children. But they are not allowed to speak publicly in the assembly. Theirs is to be a place of submission to the man. This rule is positive, explicit, and universal. There is no ambiguity in the expressions; and there can be no difference of opinion, one would suppose, in regard to their meaning.

The expression as the law also says has reference to the woman's being submissive to the man. This is clearly taught in the law, which here probably means the Pentateuch primarily. Gen_3:16, for instance, says “your desire shall be for your husband. And he shall rule over you.”

It is often contended that what Paul is forbidding in this verse is for the women to chatter or gossip while the service is going on. However, such an interpretation is not supportable. The word here translated speak (laleo) did not mean to chatter in Koine Greek. The same word is used of God in verse 21 of this chapter, and in Heb_1:1. It means to speak authoritatively.

14:35 Indeed, women are not permitted to ask questions publicly in the church. If they want to learn something, they should ask their own husbands at home. Some women might try to evade the previous prohibition against speaking by asking questions. It is possible to teach by the simple act of questioning others. So this verse closes any such loophole or objection.

There is, therefore, no inconsistency between the argument in 1 Cor. 11: and the statement here; and the force of the whole is, that on every consideration it was improper, and to be expressly prohibited, for women to conduct the devotions of the church. It does not refer to those only who claimed to be inspired, but to all; it does not refer merely to acts of public preaching, but to all acts of speaking, or even asking questions, when the church is assembled for public worship.

No rule in the New Testament is more positive than this; and however plausible may be the reasons which may be urged for disregarding it, and for suffering women to take part in conducting public worship, yet the authority of the apostle Paul is positive, and his meaning cannot be mistaken; compare 1Ti_2:11-12.

If it is asked how this applies to an unmarried woman or a widow, the answer is that the Scriptures do not try to take up each individual case, but merely set forth general principles. If a woman does not have a husband, she could ask her father, her brother, or one of the elders of the church. Actually, this may be translated, “Let them ask their men-folks at home.” The basic rule to be remembered is that it is shameful for women to speak in church.

14:36 Apparently the Apostle Paul realized that his teaching here would cause considerable contention. How right he was! To meet any arguments, he uses irony in verse 36 by asking: Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you only that it reached? In other words, if the Corinthians professed to know more about these matters than the apostle, he would ask them if they, as a church, produced the word of God, or if they were the only ones who had received it. By their attitude they seemed to set themselves up as an official authority on these matters. But the facts are that no church originated the word of God, and no church has exclusive rights to it.

14:37 In connection with all the foregoing instructions, the apostle here emphasizes that they are not his own ideas or interpretations, but that they are the commandments of the Lord, and any man who is a prophet of the Lord or who is truly spiritual will acknowledge that that is the case. This verse is a sufficient answer to those who insist that some of Paul's teachings, especially those concerning women, reflected his own prejudices. These matters are not Paul's private view; they are the commandments of the Lord.


That depends upon your definition of "women's rights". If you mean that somehow women and men exist at the same hierarchical level in God's eyes, that is not correct. Just as the President of the U.S. exists at a different hierarchy than I do, he is still a human being, as I am.

The bible states that a woman is to be submissive to the man. This is clearly taught in the law, which here probably means the Pentateuch primarily. Gen_3:16, for instance, says “your desire shall be for your husband. And he shall rule over you.” Yet this does not mean women are somehow a second class of humankind.

We all have roles in life. Christ the Son, the Second Person of the Trinitarian God, accepted His functional role as secondary to God the Father. But nowhere did Christ give up his ontological role as being fully God the Son. Likewise, men and women have roles defined by God in this life, but nowhere is God expecting us to give up our common humanity.

I recommend you review the following excellent website to learn more about women and the bible:

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/femalex.html

Answer 2

1 Timothy 2:11-12 proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created (1 Timothy 2:13) and the way in which sin entered the world (2 Timothy 2:14). God, through the Apostle Paul’s writing, restricts women from serving in roles of spiritual teaching authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors, which definitely includes preaching to, teaching, and having spiritual authority over men. There are many "objections" to this view of women in ministry / women pastors. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11-14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education was a qualification for ministry, the majority of Jesus' disciples likely would not have been qualified.

Answer 3

Not true. Joyce Meyers is awesome and right on the money.
Jesus's mother Mary was the first to be blessed by seeing Jesus after his Resurrection not a man.

I think because of customs and if the audience is a mixture of men and women that a male saying the exact same thing as a women would have a great audience impact. Only for the reason that the men would listen better than they would for a women.
This is an ignorant thing, don't get me wrong, but men are more accepting of other manly direction than a women.

Answer 4

It's pretty clear what it means. Paul believed that women were subservient to men. It's not like this was some radical new idea, of course - yet Paul, in writing his "inspired" letter to Timothy, made it a part of the Canon; therefore women *are* subservient to men, and there's nothing more to be said about it. (Never mind that scholars dispute the authenticity of many of "Paul's" letters - they're in the Bible!) Some "Christian" women simply accept this and try to pretend it's some kind of honor ("women should be in submission," says "Debbie," above). Others try to deny the obvious sense of the passage ("it was a remedy to those who were teaching false doctrine - who were women in this case," says "Prays towards Funkytown"). Others agree that that's only Paul's opinion of women; but of course, once you admit that personal prejudices may have entered into Scripture, you've rather knocked the bottom out of Christianity.

No, sorry, "Christian" women - it's a "shame" for you to speak in Church, even if it's condoned by the heretics that make up your own Church's congregation. "Paul" has spoken, and who are you to argue with Saint Paul? Of course, nobody says you have to go to Church in the first place!

Answer 5

It'll really take more to answer this than the allotted space will allow.

So, bottom line----men and women have different positions and responsilbilities before God. Women can teach and 'preach'. Just can't direct a congregation.

Answer 6

In first-century Jewish culture, women were not allowed to study. When Paul said that women should LEARN in quietness and submission, he was offering them a new opportunity!

Paul did not want the Ephesian women to teach because they had not yet gained enough knowledge or experience.

Remember, Paul's co-worker, Priscilla, taught Apollos, the great preacher. So obviously, Paul did not forbid women to teach. It was likely that he was only forbidding Ephesian women to teach.

Answer 7

I believe you must have in mind of what 'slavery' is on this case. If any one sells himself (IE: a Hebrew servant) to a agreement of servitude for (anything rationale) he could serve for 6 years and within the 7th his agreement will likely be up. If the Hebrew servant entered the agreement through himself then he'll be loose through himself. If he had a spouse upon getting into the agreement then he and his spouse could be loose. If the grasp 'gave' him a spouse and she or he had youngsters the opposite servant (feminine) and her youngsters could nonetheless belong to the grasp. The guy can cross loose. You neglected a side of this regardless that, as though the person desires to stick with the household that he made he can serve the grasp always. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What does this imply in these days? Not so much. In the tradition of the time females had been already moment elegance to guys. Men ran the sector in that tradition. And even in these days side of this stays with the concerns of glass subjects in industry. More exact, whilst is proudly owning one other man or woman EVER justifiable. If you pay one other guy's debt OR that guy desires some thing from you (like a daughter for a spouse) then he can be just right for you for a time to acquire it. If you're the only with the vigor to provide that factor then it could make experience that (in that tradition) you could be their grasp. You are the one who they serve. In trendy international they would simply come to be 'owing' you some thing else. Quid Pro Quo to be able to talk. In trendy normal age slavery exists in a miles distinctive sort. The early America's variant of slavery used to be simply improper. There had been no rights given. Indentured servitude and early America slavery weren't one within the identical factor. Even past those 2 examples of servitude there are extra methods and patterns of agreement carried out to human lives. Should a person be pressured into servitude for obviously no rationale. Definitely no longer. Good to notice that those verses have NOTHING to do with pressured servitude. As for possession of a man or woman, we will see the final result within the core a long time carrying on with into in these days. Those who serve a grasp belong to him (that grasp). In the case of servants or slaves there ARE rights granted them. Not all masters are following all that they ought and so we've got legislation to punish as good. If a country used to be subjugated through one other they are going to very had been annihilated. Does this make slavery a variety of kindness? Perhaps, its nonetheless one lesser anguish over one other. Its rough to combine this inspiration into trendy society however the perspective of the abusive grasp continues to be gift, even within the different solutions. Here is the exceptional side - The query of servitude and slavery displays a unique subset of features inside scripture and who it used to be given to. Much of the Old Testament is recorded historical past. This offers us a appear into who the Creator is and what the Creator permits and the way He expects us to regard one one other. For the Christian it is a well historical past lesson however includes little program into the brand new day. What we will take from it's that God desires us to regard each and every different good. I believe the higher query that would had been requested is "When God permits slavery or servitude, what are the principles which might be to be adopted?" Study that one.

Answer 8

If you can open your mind, and see it in it's historical light, and the fact that it was a remedy to those who were teaching false doctrine (who were women in this case) then you will see what it really is. Notice the word always does not appear? The epistles Paul wrote are all like this, addressed to his audience to correct the mistakes that were being made at the time. (see especially Ch. 1:3)

Answer 9

because it was a cultural thing in those days. In the synagogues, Jewish men did not speak to women -- or to Samaritans (JN 4:9); women and men also sat separate from each other in synagogue as well....less distraction.

Answer 10

I don't have the Bible in this room with me but some of the best preachers are / were women and I'm sure God approves. He put the anointing on them. The ones I have in mind are Kathryn Kuhlman, Marilyn Hickey, Paula White, Gloria Copeland, Joyce Meyers, etc, etc.

Answer 11

1 Timothy is a disputed letter. Scholars believe it is an attack on a 1st century movement known as asceticism. The letter is disputed because the earliest possible date we see bishops, elders, and deacons is in the 1st century. Therefore it cannot be Paul's writing, and in Paul's letters he makes no distinction between men and women.