5 Lin,

What are the reasons 1 Corin 14 could not be used as a second witness against women teaching men? Just curious.

There are two reasons that it cannot be used as a second witness. The first reason is that it would have to be Paul’s words not a quote from the Corinthians to make a second witness and since verse 36 refutes the previous position, the “second witness” cannot stand.

Secondly if we were to take 1 Cor. 14:34, 35 as Paul’s command, it still isn’t a second witness. There is nothing in that passage that forbids women to teach men. Can women teach men in groups outside the church? 1 Cor. 14 cannot be used to prohibit that.

Lastly if we were to take the passage as Paul’s command, everyone interprets it as allowing speech to some extent. Otherwise women wouldn’t even be able to say “hello” in the church. So if speech is allowed, what isn’t allowed? The passage in Corinthians says not one word about “teaching men” as something forbidden and since Paul has already told the Corinthians they all can prophesy so that all can learn, prophesying (teaching) to men could not possibly be forbidden in this passage by Paul.

Thanks for asking! I am sure that “Paul” will have more to say when we get to this passage.

Lin,

BTW: I think these conversations are an excellent teaching tool

Thank you Lin! These kinds of encouraging words really keep me going and want to be even more productive.

10 Frank,

You said:

Since he is addressing a specific issue, limited to a certain place and time, and since no general command of the Lord Jesus exists to address, Paul, by the wisdom of the Lord granted him by the Spirit of Christ ” (i.e., “the mercy of the Lord” to which he refers), he gives an hoc rule that suits this issue and its attending circumstances.

This is a very good example of a rule that is issued for a particular circumstance.

But such is the subject and language in 1 Tim. 2:11-15, that it is clear that Paul is no longer focused on general rules arising out of the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, but is again, by the Spirit of Christ, giving a word of wisdom and a ruling that addresses the specific situation that Timothy is facing in Ephesus at the time and on which he sorely needs advice and counsel. So this something else we need to keep in mind regarding this passage.

This is excellent! I couldn’t have worded it any better myself!

4 gengwall,

So the “they” in v. 15 is not the specific man and the woman from the passage but their brothers and sisters in the church who have the ability to lead her out of her deception…hmmmm.

Verse 11 would deal with community teaching where all may teach (prophesy) so that all may learn (1 Cor. 14:31). But could “they” refer to the entire church community in verse 15? Paul will be back shortly to deal with the “they” part of this equation.

9 Frank,

The book looks like a good one. I just placed my order on Amazon.com.

7 Lin,

Of course, the Puritans were not concerned about women prophesying so they did not need to twist the meaning. :o)

It is thought-provoking to see how people interpret passages when there is no ulterior motive to cover up.

8 Greg,

The amount of extra-Biblical construction, extrapolation, and inference required to make it a universal law for the church age is staggering.

“… No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means…”
(George Bernard Shaw)

This is the reason why I keep pushing people to have an honest view of 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and test this “law” against every other universal law. An honest evaluation shows that this prohibition is not like the others. One needs to ask why we as a church have so easily taken a prohibition written in a personal letter to one person and without any connection to any existing law and without a second witness, and made it applicable to all women? If Paul had stopped one unnamed man from teaching other men, would this have so easily become a universal prohibition against men teaching other men? I think it reveals our societies underlying prejudice against women.

6 Frank,

Thirdly, other complementarians, such as Gary Crampton, (who wrote “The Bible and Women Preachers” in the Trinity Journal), have admitted that on the basis of both the major Greek lexicons and NT texts such as Colossians 3:16-17, this distinction often made between “prophecy” and teaching has little, if any, biblical authority and so is invalid.

Thank you for sharing this with us. I am sure that many will find enlightenment with your comments regarding prophecy and teaching.

5 Frank,

Your encouragement is very much appreciated!

“What were the prophets in the OT and NT doing, when they were not predicting future events?” And what I discovered, and revealed in that article was that they were expounding and applying the Word of God that had been given through their predecessors, the Law of Moses or the Gospel of Christ.

Excellent observation!!

Sorry I didn’t get to the comments again today. It was another busy day for me but I did manage to get the next installment of the conversations with Paul up http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2009/03/25/round-4-interview-with-the-apostle-paul/

Chris,

I have one more comment for you. Why don’t you answer Paula’s questions? I appreciate that you ask questions because it gives me and others the ability to give a reason for why we believe as we do. However I notice that you are unwilling to give a reason for your reading into the Genesis account. Those who make statements about what scripture says should also be willing to defend those statements by pointing to specific scripture, specific grammar and specific reasoning processes that defend their point of view. I expect this from myself and from my readers. If you continue to ignore Paula’s requests to explain where you are getting the hierarchy arguments from the Genesis account, then I may have to send “Paul” over to your house to have a one on one conversation with you. 😉

26 Chris,

My next conversation with “Paul” should be quite enlightening regarding your questions. I prefer to put my comments in the form of a post instead of just in the comment section since all will see the argument because not all read the comments section.

You may be interested to hear that Rebecca Groothhuis has commented about my work on the hard passages of scripture regarding women in ministry that I have several “home run” arguments. I have also been in contact with Daniel Wallace who says that he has respect for me and because of this he agreed to review my DVD set. I greatly appreciate his willingness to review my work beyond what he already has read in print on the internet. He also has a copy of my latest work on the Trinity and I look forward to hearing back from him as he has the time to review all of the material.

So on the next post, we will explore Paul’s reasoning for why he wrote the passage in question as he did and what clues he provided that prove he was not stopping all godly women from teaching any man the truth of God’s word.

To all:

There have been some real challenges in our lives the last few months and we are considering whether God would have us move to a bigger center where we would have more room for our ministry offices and the freedom to construct our video studio. We are cramped where we are right now and need to add an addition but we do not know if we should go to a place where the renovations have been already complete or build where we are. We are torn between the two. Moving again would be a challenge but it also would take us where our grandchildren are and even closer to the US/Canada border which is necessary for us to minister in both countries. We have also met a new pastor where we are who is warm, welcoming and who gives us reason for wanting to stay where we are. If anyone is inclined to pray for us, we are asking God for wisdom to make the right choice.

gengwall and all,
I have been out of commission for a few days and hope to start the catch up process tomorrow. I love the good questions and you can be assured by Paul is planning a trip back to answer the mystery!

56 Pinklight,

I don’t understand this. Why do you say that the woman was made in man’s image? I can only say that she was made in God’s image. How and where does the image of man come into play?

Image and glory go together. It is because man is made in God’s image that man is the glory of God. Since woman is the glory of man and we know that she was made from his DNA, his very own body, we can also say that she is made in his image. She is like him, made to be his mate, therefore she is in his image and is his glory.

Does this make sense?

Marion,
Welcome! Thanks for asking this question.

I was raised as a complementarian so I too believed that it was my husband’s responsibility to gather the family for bible reading and prayer. I felt guilty taking his “role”, but whenever I stopped, nothing happened or we would have a few times of bible reading and prayer and then nothing. Nagging helped but not much. Later I read something that said that if I just stopped “usurping” his role, he would eventually see the need and the family would have its proper leadership back. So I stopped. I never took the lead back. Now my kids are grow and have kids of their own. When I finally stopped we lost that family devotion time and we never got it back.

Since that time I have learned that there is nothing in the bible that talks about the husband as priest of the home. It is not the responsibility of just one person to bring the Lord into the daily life of the home. I feel bad that I too tried to get my husband to do something that was my responsibility as well and we all could have benefited as a godly example for my grandchildren if I would not have listened to those who told me that what I was doing is unscriptural.

What I have learned since I was a young mom is that my husband does best in speaking about spiritual matters when I take the lead and he can participate. He is very good at participating. His family never had family devotions. My family always had family devotions and so it was something I dearly missed when I stayed on the side lines.

The way I look at it now is that God gave one of us the strong desire for family bible reading and prayer. That one person was me. I then had a greater responsibility to fulfill my mandate or at least an equal responsibility. What I should have done is just kept up the family devotion time and let my husband participate. This is where he felt comfortable and the children saw him as a role model by his participation. He didn’t need to lead. I was capable of that. When we all work out our own gifts, the body is encouraged and we all grow. I no longer think that things are someone else’s responsibility. If I am the one who has the desire, I take responsibility. This is the biblical way and it doesn’t put my husband down because he has not been gifted the way I have.

I hope this helps a little!
Cheryl

Pinklight,
Maybe Paul should ask Doug that question 😉

Alison,
Welcome! I am so glad that you find the dialogs helpful. When I used to do this in ministry years ago, people seemed to understand the concepts better when it was presented in a real life dialog instead of just in an article. I guess this format works well too with the issue of women in ministry.

Lin,
I think there was so much presented by Paul in this last dialog that he didn’t think the point about authenteo would do anything to change the “whole”, but I am sure when he sleeps on it, he will find one more objection 🙂 and give Paul one more opportunity to shed light on this passage before they move on.

Greg,
Thanks for the encouragement!!

Don,

Then you have an anomaly with 1 Tim 2:12. But if there is a single command anywhere else, you do not and have failed to show your claim.

This is exactly what I have challenged many to do. I have never even seen one command that is not repeated. So I challenge people to show me a universal command that is not repeated because I can find the repeat quite easily. At this point I have never been shown a universal command that has no second witness. This does make 1 Timothy 2:12 to be an anomaly and this should raise a huge red flag to those who desire to know the truth. We need to ask ourselves why there would be just one command that has no second witness. It is a true universal command or have we misunderstood what Paul is saying?

Frank,
Amen and amen!

Good work Paula! You fight this battle while I bring the interpretations to “Paul”. “Paul” will take the reasoning process and dismantle the argument. I may not be as fast as I would like because of other ministry obligations, but the answers will be in my “Paul” dialogs and I think the format will help a great many people to “get” it.

I will let others comment here for now as my whole next post will be on the “a woman” “women” concept along with the connecting “for”. Interview with Paul part 3 coming your way soon 🙂

Frank,

Your application is faultless! You have taken what I taught and applied it exactly how scripture supports this concept. Bravo!

pinklight your comments are good. Could you please post them at http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2009/03/16/interview-with-the-apostle-paul/ so that your words will be read on the newer post? Thanks.

Chris, I put your comment into moderation so that you could move it yourself since you posted after I asked for new comments to be put on the newer post.

Let’s keep the current comments on this post. Some comments have been placed on a very old post of mine and those comments won’t be seen by many so please post them here. Or you can post them on the interview #2

For a more complete listing of my exegesis below is the most complete form of my view.
http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/09/30/the-rest-of-the-story-1-timothy-211-15-and-matt-slick/
Please do not post comments on the link above as not many will see the comments as the older post.

Okay, everyone, I am asking that all comments be taken to my post at http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2009/03/16/interview-with-the-apostle-paul/ so that all can follow the comment stream instead of having an important part of the issue buried in an old post.

“Chris” passes the test. He isn’t the slickster in person. A moll? Maybe, but definitely not the one who has vowed to harm me in anyway he can.

Looks like Paul will be around a little bit longer on 1 Timothy 2:12 to answer a few more questions 😉

Lin,
This is a good question, but if the patriarchists are correct, which part of 1 Timothy 2:12 permits a woman to teach a man in the presence of another man? It would be giving permission by a man to do something that apparently God forbids.

The real issue is how patriarchal types can give a woman the ability to teach at all. As far as spirituality goes, it appears to be case closed. Of course we know that women can teach other women how to clean the house and love their husbands. 🙂

“Chris”,
Email me back on the email I just sent you. I need proof that you are not slickster.

It is also time to take the challenge and prove your case. If not, go back to CARM and let the “staff” know that you failed.

“Chris”

Um, why would MS or DS need to hide?

Because he was supposed to leave me alone but apparently has no idea how to keep a promise. http://www.mmoutreach.org/slick.htm As if you didn’t already know.

By the way “Gynophobia” is likely only something that invisible slick people get. Everyone else should seek out a second diagnosis!

I am still laughing. Paula, you are a funny gal! Just a note – I just changed a setting on my blog and that changed the time. It made it look like you posted about an hour after I did, but you posted about the same time as I did with the time change that I made.

Paula,
LOL!!!!!!