Cheryl

Hey all,

I have read what you all said and have taken it to heart. You have much wisdom in understanding and knowing about debates than I do. I would not proceed with this without help and for now I will not be considering a debate on PalTalk just because I do not have time to work on understanding the format or how the attacks will come. I do not respond to personal attacks because that is the way I learned from The Master. He did not answer when he was attacked.

Charis,

That is a really good idea and I am so glad you thought of asking me to put my responses here too instead of just at Matt’s discussion board. I struggle with having as time to really put into his board right now as my in-laws are still here. My mother-in-law is staying the week and Richard’s sister did not leave as their car broke down. I have no idea how long they will remain and I cannot be on the computer for long periods of time while my company is in my home. I should be able to get some time on line later today when they all go out for a bit.

Thanks again for a wonderful suggestion(s) as I do listen and pay attention to wisdom and suggestions from others.

Blessings!
Cheryl

Dusman,

Yup!

Okay, Greg you got me there! I should be in the kitchen right now, but these comments on this blog are so interesting!!!

Okay, back to work. Gotta get my elbows into the internal cavity of a dead bird. Yum!!!

David,

I think you are right. Matt knows how to understand complicated arguments from Atheists but he refuses to try to understand where I am coming from.

The fact is that he does not have answers to what I say so the only way to save face is to attack the person. The attack comes by saying that I am long-winded. I am not clear. I am attacking him. I have a condescending attitude. This is all a smoke screen. In fact I have been more than kind to him and complimented him on his ministry work. I have not attacked his person and I have stayed on topic. He takes a question on the passage in question (1 Timothy 2) about why he believes “a woman” to be “women” in the passage and he takes me for a tour of the bible instead of telling me from the passage in question. Then he accuses me of running in circles when it is I who stayed on topic in the context of the passage and he who went into federal headship and the role of women in marriage, etc.

It appears that his best defense is an attack. I will continue to ignore the attack and stay on topic. I suspect he will get upset with me and ban me from his discussion board. His rules say that he can do this for any reason at all with no recourse. This is the kind of “ruling” that Matt does and what he thinks is allowed to him because he is male.

Dusman,

Great words about authority and the preeminence of God’s word! This is the humility that all Pastors need to have. Even the Apostle Paul told the Bereans that they were more noble in that they checked him out by the OT scriptures!

Dusman,

I just knew there was something really weird about those Canadians . . .

Very cute! Hmmmm….just think about it this way. Canadians were created first. You guys are second. (Tee Hee)

Charis,

You said:

I am interpreting “the childbirthing” as Christ being formed in her- not salvation, but sanctification.

But Charis, remember that Paul said “She will be saved if…” This shows that the woman is not yet saved. I too understand the process of sanctification but it always follows salvation. This woman is not yet saved so Paul is not talking about the process of sanctification but the fact that she will be saved if….

Remember that we are talking about the salvation of a deceived person. Think about, for example, a Jehovah’s Witness. Can they just accept Christ by having the gospel preached to them or do they need to unlearn at least some of their false doctrine before the gospel will make sense to them and then they can have faith to believe in the real Jesus. Having lead a support group for ex-JW’s for 16 years, I know how hard some JW’s have to work to get past their false doctrine. It is difficult for them to put faith in Jesus when they have believed that he is a created being originally created as Michael the Archangel. Do you see the importance of making a deceived person sit down and learn the truth? Then, Paul says, once she has learned the truth and left her false doctrine aside so she can stay fully in the truth of God’s word, then and only then will she be in a position to be saved.

So the key here is not putting yourself in the passage. Don’t think sanctification. Think salvation of a deceived person. Go back to chapter 1 and read it as if the woman was in the group of deceived teachers who didn’t know what they were talking about. You will find these deceived ones close to the beginning of chapter 1. How will these deceived teachers be saved? One of them is separated by Paul from the others because one of them is a woman and her husband is saved but letting her continue in her deception and so Paul (and Timothy) need to get involved in a marriage situation. Watch how Paul differentiates between the deceived teachers and those who have already left the entire faith behind and are now deceivers (Hymenaeus distored the resurrection by saying that it had already happened. Check his name in the NT and you will read more about him. Alexander was also someone who actively opposed Paul in ministry. Check out the NT where Alexander is spoken about and you will see a complete difference between these two and the deceived teachers who were completely ignorant. The deceived teachers were not deceivers like H & A who were deliberate deceivers.)

Don’t worry about going onto Matt’s board right now. It will only confuse you. What you need to do right now is get your thinking fully on board with the subject of deception in 1 Timothy. You will be see things completely differently in chapter 2 if you do.

Just a reminder for those who didn’t read my comment on my latest post yesterday that this weekend is Thanksgiving here in Canada and my company arrives this afternoon so I will be off line for a few days while I play host to my in-laws. I hope you’all have a great weekend.

Blessings!
Cheryl

Yes, Thanksgiving is this weekend here in Canada.

Guys,

I will be cooking Thanksgiving Turkey this weekend so I’ll be off line for awhile. (For those of you who don’t know, it is Canadian Thanksgiving this weekend). I have an important article coming online next week (hopefully I will get time to get it done early in the week). In the meantime, go ahead and keep dialogging and encourage one another. I appreciate each one of you who has joined this community of encouragement!!
🙂

Charis,

“How come God only wants MEN to be saved? What about WOMEN?
Its a bad translation. God wants all anthropos/people to be saved.”

Amen! God wants all of us to be saved? And do you want to know more of what God wants for us?

2 Timothy 2:2 The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

See the faithful men? That is anthropos/humans. We, you and I and all of us can be faithful people who will be able to teach others too!

Charis,

“Circumcision of the heart” refers to the cleansing of sin. Do a word search on circumcision and you will find an amazing thing showing what God actually means by this.

What you need to get your head around is that “the childbearing” is not about giving birth. It is about the Messiah.

Paul’s whole letter to Timothy is filled with references to deception. There are false teachers who are deceived, there is false doctrine being taught, and there is one particular deceived teacher who is stopped. Now the Pharisees questioned whether a woman could even be saved and here we have a case of a woman spreading and believing false doctrine. Can she be saved? Paul answers in the most ingenious way possible. He links her to the first deceived woman. Paul then says that she can be saved through the Messiah just as the first deceived woman (Eve) was promised that through her would come the Redeemer. You see the one whom Satan deceived would produce the Messiah who would destroy the deceiver. Do you see the connection? The deceiver is destroyed through the woman that he deceived. Her seed (the childbearing – the Messiah) destroys the destroyer.

Now back to the situation. The woman is deceived and her husband isn’t helping, but Paul is having Timothy take control of the situation. He wants both the wife and the husband involved. The wife is involved by learning the truth. The husband is involved by encouraging her and supporting her and standing by her side so she does learn the truth. Instead of being silent, he participates as “they” (both husband and the wife) are walking together to be sure she unlearns the false doctrine and learns the truth. In that way he is helping her to find the Savior and be saved!

In any situation where a wife is a Jehovah’s Witness, what her husband does or doesn’t do will be key to helping her come out of her deception. If he does not, she will continue in error. If he takes the lead in righteous, she will be encouraged to follow.

I hope that this is starting to click a little. Take your mind off of having babies (I can’t believe you lived through having eight!) and the garden and sanctification. Think on “deception”. Now read through this passage thinking how the passage all relates to deception. Keep reading it until it starts making sense. If you leave out deception, the passage cannot make sense as it was inspired to do.

Charis,

Here is the key to understanding that Paul is not talking about every woman or about every wife. You said:

But that was just 1Tim 11-12. I still wondered about “she will be saved in childbearing if they continue”.

The fact is that “she” is singular feminine and we cannot get out from the grammar in this passage. It is not plural. It cannot refer to all women or all wives or all of anything.

You asked:

It seems to me that it cannot be Christian salvation because HER salvation is dependant upon something THEY do???
How can an individual’s Christian salvation be dependant upon “they”?

If you diagram out the closest “they” in the passage of people who are living at the time of Paul’s writing (because “they” have to do something) you get back to “a woman” and “a man” from verse 12. This is the simplest logical “they” that doesn’t do any cartwheels to force something on the text.

Now if you realize that it is only “she” whose salvation is in question, you can understand then that the other person in the “they” is saved. “A man” is saved but he is saying nothing to his deceived wife. He is letting her teach him her deception. If her now turns the tables and leads her into righteousness by making sure that she learns the truth, then he is now doing something that will result in her salvation.

Think of it this way – say there is a Christian man who is married to a woman who is into all kinds of weird new age religion. She actually thinks she is a Christian (many new agers think this) and she is bringing her false doctrine into the home and teaching him. If he takes the lead and brings her to church, he is doing something that will help her to see the truth and receive salvation. The work that he is doing by bringing her to church to hear the truth is a “work” but is a work that will cause her to hear the truth. It doesn’t merit salvation, it only brings her to the place where she can hear. The woman in 1 Timothy 2:12 needs to “hear” in order to learn. The husband must do something to encourage her to hear. To this point, he has been silent and she has been the teacher teaching false doctrine. He needs to quit being silent and speak up for the truth and if he leads, Paul is sure she will follow. Thus “she” will be saved if “they” (the husband leading the way for his wife) continue in the truth, etc. Does that make a little bit of sense?

You said:

If “THEY” is the husband and wife, then I reasoned that their relationship could be restored to a more “garden-like” state where he is not “RULING OVER HER”; the curse upon Eve is undone, when Christ is formed in her, IF THEY continue in faith, holiness, etc… IOW, if she gives up on the marriage and goes for divorce, the marriage will not not be “saved/rescued/restored” to that garden state…

However you have missed one thing. 1 Timothy 2:13-15 is not about the curse on Eve (no curse is mentioned in Genesis) or about the man’s ruling over her (nothing in the passage says this) nor is the Christ mentioned as being formed in her or that forming in her saves her. Salvation is an event not a birthing process. The garden is not mentioned only deceived and not deceived. Lots of things said and lots of things not said. Look carefully only what is said. The thing that you missed is deception. This is an absolute key to the passage right after “she” and “they”.

The word for “saved” means spiritual salvation and this is a one time happening. But how does she “a woman” get there? She needs to learn the truth (verse 11). The stopping of teaching is connected to deception (verse 14) and it has something to do with being second (verse 13). The big question is why was Adam not deceived? What happened after he was created and before Eve was created that immunized him to the deception of the serpent? That is the key not rulership or authority or the garden.

You said:

Now, as I mentioned, I project my own Christian experience into it… And my own marriage to a very traditional, patriarchal man who has used scriptures like this and other ones in a rather oppressive way 🙁

I know what you mean. I was there too. My husband received freedom too when he finally realized that he wasn’t responsible to make me into somebody I wasn’t. And he wasn’t responsible for me spiritually before God. That was a big one that helped him to stop being so hard on me.

Charis,

You said:

What if the reason God says it is not because a woman/wife is inferior, deceived, can’t teach, or doesn’t see something in her husband’s character that needs fixing? Perhaps it is for her own protection. Because a husband will simply not listen nor hear a wife who is finger wagging didactic nor attempting to forcefully exercise authority over him. It is counterproductive for a wife to deal with a husband in a manner which comes across as “parental”. It won’t “fix him”. To the contrary; he will- at least- dig in his heels if he doesn’t get downright abusive. God knows that!

While I fully agree with you about a wife trying to control a husband, I don’t think this passage is referring to all wives or all husbands. First of all I don’t think a husband should do the above either. When my husband is gentle with me and reasons with me, it is easier for me to take his side. When he is harsh, he may get his way because I am by nature a submissive person, but his harshness will make my heart hard. No one has been given an authority over another person’s will. That is the reason that husbands are not told to take authority over their wives. No husband is allowed to do that. Well, more about that when we get to the marriage posts concerning women in ministry.

Now to your next comment….

Charis,

Glad to see you back! I have been laying low myself while I finished a PowerPoint presentation. I just got it done so it is a load off my mind.

You said:

“The seminary did not allow women to take homiletics/preaching but I took hermeneutics where I learned that “context is king!”

This is exactly right. A sentence or part of a sentence may sound completely different when it is ripped from its context. If our understanding doesn’t fit with the context, then we rework our understanding. Many just ignore the context that doesn’t fit but that isn’t right.

Now as to 1 Timothy 2:12, if we are going to take this passage the complementarian way, I think the restriction would have to be for inside and outside the church not because of the “everywhere” but because of the reason given as something to do with creation. If they interpret this as the order of creation so that the man gets to teach because the first one gets to have special privileges that the second one doesn’t have, then one cannot restrict this to the church because the order of creation has nothing to do with worship but the nature of the creation. Although I believe this interpretation is very wrong for several reasons, if we took it this way as the complementarians do, we could not limit the restrictions to church.

“…which would resemble the lot of women in strict muslim countries: no woman teach any man anything, no woman have any authority over any man in any realm.”

At least the Muslims here are consistent in their belief that women cannot teach men and have no authority with men. It is because they believe women are inferior in everything, not just inferior in the place of worship.

Good thoughts everyone! I have been out of commission while I finished my PowerPoint presentation. In-laws come tomorrow and in a week and a half we will be in Pennsylvania so there was a time crunch to get everything done.

Pastor D,

Great article! That was the best soap box rant that I have read in a long time and I think we should all read the article from the link posted above. Good, good stuff!

David,

“I hear they are saying I violated CARM rules with my post because I personally attacked Matt.”

Oh, puhleese! This reminds me of the story of a man who loves to throw stones. Problem is that he lives in a completely glass house! (And as one of my friends likes to say, we all have access to windex so we can see what he is doing in there!) We can see through these tactics for what they are. I haven’t been on Matt’s discussion board since yesterday afternoon because I just don’t have the time right now. But when I was on last I noticed that Matt does not answer questions. His mode of operation is to throw a stone and then when someone responds, he is very quick to claim that he has been hit. On Matt’s blog the claim is that on our radio discussion/debate, I initiated a personal attack on Matt right from the beginning and it was I who was condescending! Again, I think this is a cheap trick and someone who lives in a glass house (radio, internet) shouldn’t be doing this because it does not bring honor to Jesus. I think the actual recording of what went on speaks for itself and your words on Matt’s blog speak for themselves too. These tricks may fool some for a period of time but eventually we will all be able to see clearly.

I went onto David’s bog site and noticed that he is getting ready to go into radio himself. From a link on his blog I found his radio blog where David has started the road to produce his own radio shows on bible teaching http://voyageradio.blogspot.com/

David is planning to teach the bible via free podcast first and then from there take his broadcasts (that he is professionally producing) to the air waves. This will be accomplished as donations come in that will allow him to buy air time and go on the radio. The equipment is costly and he is looking for the Lord’s help in getting the rest of the funds together to make his dream of radio a reality.

David’s attitude is gracious and kind and he is not like a lot of other radio show hosts who pride themselves in using cheap tricks to get a following by stirring up controversy. Honestly when Matt Slick has said that he prides himself in being obnoxious, I hear my self asking “What is that all about?” It just doesn’t seem to be the way that Jesus would do things. Jesus was never obnoxious. Strong, yes, but obnoxious – never!

So here we have David needing funds to do things the godly way. On the other side we have Matt fully funded (to this point at least) doing things on air the way an ego-filled secular radio host would do it. I am not trying to belittle Matt. He is the one who pats himself on the back for being the best looking, the smartest and the most obnoxious apologist since God created sliced bread. (Okay the last part about sliced bread I added myself to Matt’s claims. The rest of the comments I have heard from Matt throughout months of on and off listening to his radio show. I think I will be mostly “off” now since the obnoxious part has really gotten to me).

I think I would rather hear the bible and a defense of the faith from someone like David. Is there anybody out there who believes in gentleness and respect who would either be willing to help David out with the needed funds or else help him find some financial backing so he can finish the task that he has started? I think this is a good, godly project.

Don,

Thanks for all your wisdom. I will keep the Paltalk debate under consideration only if that appears to be the wise decision through the help that I get from others. It would not be a good thing to do if Matt controls everything. Once I am prepared and we would have a mutually agreed upon moderator, something tells me that Matt would rescind. He already has rescinded twice on what he said he would do (allow my DVD to be promoted on his radio show and allow me to come back if I jump through his hoops) so I would expect that his word to debate me on Paltalk is about as good as his word on the other two things.

I think this is the third time you have posted a misreading of the scriptures. What gives with this?

I think this is the third time you have posted a misreading of the scriptures. What gives with this?

No God does not curse the man or the woman. Not only does scripture not say this, this would make having children a curse and tilling the soil a curse.

Instead of a curse, God promises a Redeemer to take care of sin. He had already told Adam and Eve that they would die if they ate the fruit. Nothing else was a curse, it was a result of their now mortal bodies and the curse of the land.

It is better to read what God actually says then to “read into” scripture by reading a curse when God nowhere says such a thing. i.e. the land was cursed and the result was that Adam would have to fight the weeds and work the soil to get anything to grow. The result of the soil being cursed was hard work for Adam. Adam’s work was not the curse but the result of God’s cursing something else. The same thing for the woman. She would bear many more children as God increased her ability to conceive. That brought along hard work with all those children and the change in her cycles brought extreme pain. It was a hard thing to them to bear, but it was never called a curse.

No God does not curse the man or the woman. Not only does scripture not say this, this would make having children a curse and tilling the soil a curse.

Instead of a curse, God promises a Redeemer to take care of sin. He had already told Adam and Eve that they would die if they ate the fruit. Nothing else was a curse, it was a result of their now mortal bodies and the curse of the land.

It is better to read what God actually says then to “read into” scripture by reading a curse when God nowhere says such a thing. i.e. the land was cursed and the result was that Adam would have to fight the weeds and work the soil to get anything to grow. The result of the soil being cursed was hard work for Adam. Adam’s work was not the curse but the result of God’s cursing something else. The same thing for the woman. She would bear many more children as God increased her ability to conceive. That brought along hard work with all those children and the change in her cycles brought extreme pain. It was a hard thing to them to bear, but it was never called a curse.

Don,

Wonderful! A good short summary for my very wordy long post!

This is what I think – we all have our gifts and we all need each other. Those who have been around for awhile know that I am not known for being concise. That doesn’t mean I can’t learn to work on my weakness, but I tend to want to refute every tiny little point of difference. Our ministry partner Lorri MacGregor (ex JW/MacGregor Ministries) laughs when she thinks about how I am such a detail person and she can take an entire book and condense it down to a small 32 page booklet! So God gives me brothers and sisters in the body who have gifts that I don’t have. We work together and together we are much stronger than one mere little tiny person. We are his body and I am awed that he would allow us the opportunity to speak for him! Praise the name of the Lord Jesus!

You are a blessing to me Don!
Cheryl

Under Much Grace,

Bless your heart! Thanks for the comments. Since Matt had stopped me from speaking about the reason why I held my view on 1 Timothy 2, it is no wonder some are not convinced. However I did post this article on Matt’s discussion board and late this afternoon when I left the board, no one yet had been able to refute my exegesis. I guess we will see how that goes. The best thing about this is that I get to get the “rest of the story” out in the way that I do it best – in writing!

Thanks for helping to get the message out!

Thanks Don,

I got an email from Matt tonight. He said that he has no intention of inviting me back. But apparently over at CARM, the women’s issue is the hottest topic on his discussion board. Do you think I Rev’d it up a little?
😉

teknomom, you are amazing. Your patience is commendable! Anyways your example does show up for me in the email that is sent to notify me there is more responses. I don’t know if it shows up that way in everyone’s email box (I assume it does) but thanks! Now I know too!

By the way, I have been having some discussion with Matt on his discussion board. It’s have been great without the audio because you don’t hear an attitude. Okay, so the attitude is still there, but hey it’s better than hearing it! If any one wants to get in on the discussion, go to http://www.christiandiscussionforums.org. You will need to sign up for an account. Once you have the account you page down to the section listed for CARM radio. All the categories are on the main page and you will find Carm radio towards the bottom. You will find the women pastors section right at the top once you are in the Carm radio section. It has been interesting to say the least. So far Matt is refusing to answer questions. I do realize that he is a busy man, and I give him the benefit of the doubt. But I am persistent and I have a lot of patience. I will wait to get my answers. 🙂

Blessings,
Cheryl

Lin,
A big AMEN! It isn’t helpful to “appeal to authority” without proving where the position is wrong.

Andrea,

Thank you!!! Your words of encouragement are accepted and I appreciate them! As far as my apologies to Matt for not knowing how to debate on air and my nervousness, well that is just who I am. I readily take responsibility for my own inadequacies even as I strive to represent the Lord Jesus in a caring way. I also tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until they have finally gone past my boundaries. I was giving Matt as much benefit of the doubt that I could. I have asked him for another opportunity on the radio to finish the verses that we started and I will continue to ask him. So far he is not responding to me even though he had originally agreed I could come back if I kept my responses down to 1.5 minutes and provided him a document of what I was going to say. Well this post is the document and I have already agreed to keep my responses down. Unfortunately, he has rescinded the offer. That is too bad, because there is so much more to say and his view should be challenged.

I just have to be confident that if I am available that God will use me in some way for his glory and for the benefit of my special dear sisters in Christ who have been called onto the front lines but who are getting arrows in their um, shall we call them the “rear quarters” and this from their brothers in Christ!! I want to see the day when women are given respect and honor for their godly service to the entire body of Christ. May I live long enough, dear Jesus to see that fulfillment in this day and age!

Mary,

A BIG welcome! I hope you enjoy your way around. There is a lot of food for thought on things that you probably never thought about.

My thoughts on whether God has a “law” that forbids godly Christian women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men has 3 parts and will get you to thinking, I am sure. You can find part one by clicking here
and at the bottom of the article are links to part two and part two links to part three.

Welcome my sister in Christ! Any complementarian that doesn’t consider women who teach God’s word with authority as sinning against God is in my good books!!

🙂 Cheryl