TL

“I am appalled at the silence of shepherds who are not speaking out.”
“Everything is about male leadership and male superiority even when the wife needs help, but it is not so when God helps us. It totally mind boggles me to think that people swallow this kind of stuff without an understanding how God is being dethroned and the male is elevated in the process of this false doctrine.”

It’s about power and authority being kept in the hands of men. But when this happens even the men find themselves in precarious positions because in a hierarchy the one above you can take away your spot below him and make you start at the bottom again. Thus, when one finds a spot that they can move in, they must always be sure to give enough deference and homage (obeisance) to the one above to keep them happy with them.

The hierarchist picture of the obeisance of Christ to God forgets that God the father gives God the Son the SAME deference, honor and respect. It is NOT one way as they want it to be. Thus they never talk about how God/Eloheim or God/Father applauds the power and authority of the Son. And of course the Holy Spirit is pretty much left out of this picture. It’s all about the Father and Son. One would think that God is either only the Father with His side kick Son or that God is only two persons instead of three. The Holy Spirit just doesn’t have a place in their efforts to bind all power and authority to the Father. This may be because according to Scripture from Genesis to Christ, it is the Holy Spirit that carries power as His primary job.

“it seems that a simple “husband submit to your wives as unto the Lord” would have saved a lot of women (and men because of their greater burden of “responsibility” than was necessary) a lot of pain and suffering over the years.”

It seems to me that the Holy Spirit is often not that plain. Rather, we must have a readiness of heart to see and then we will see what Jesus and the apostles are really saying. This way the obstinate cannot just write of the NT admonitions as foolish radical talk.

“BTW – I’m not saying that Paul is giving a fictitious example. I am saying that Paul is using a specific example to address a generic issue.”

oh, OK. That is possible. 🙂

The more I dig into Scripture, the most often I am coming to things where I find I must say something to the effect that we don’t know precisely how this was meant. It could be A or B or both. Changes how I teach.

“Second, what should Timothy do with other couples who might be in the same boat?”

Well, you would use the example of this couple as an idea what to do with anyone else that had the same problem. We do that with all of Scripture. All of the real life examples are for our benefit to learn from. I wouldn’t go so far though, as to say that Paul gave a fictitious example. However, you could assume that Paul made a point to speak of them because there were others doing the same. That is a possibility.

I don’t know gengwall. The concept of using an example fictitionist person or persons does not fit Paul’s ways of writing IMO. I think he was talking about a real woman who needed to learn and be quiet while learning and not authentein anyone. Who the anyone is could be a husband and could be a teacher and even could be a husband teacher. But again I don’t think it’s a fictitionist person, but someone in particular that Timothy and Paul were privy to.

“Surely a false teacher in any situation would be practicing spiritual “authentein” over their listeners and would require the same sinister term for this type of authority that Paul used in 1 Tim 2.”

This is why some of us are wondering if the reason that Paul chose that unique word was because of it’s sensual connotations as well. Perhaps, the woman it was referring to was practicing some of the temple sexual dominations.

And actually come to think of it, Paul wasn’t setting “legal” standards for all women in the previous verses in 1 Timothy 2 either. Verses 8-10 had to also be addressing certain circumstances. We are not to be expecting men to always pray lifting up their hands. Nor can we expect women to never braid their hair or wear pearls or expensive clothing. These are all addressing issues that Timothy was dealing with.

Craig, also my take on the learning in quietness is that she learn from one of the teachers, because the phrase resembles the way students are spoken of while learning. But it could be either way. She could be needing to learn in quietness and submission from her husband or she could be needing to learn in quietness and submission from a teacher. There doesn’t seem to be enough information to nail it. After all it was a particular situation that Paul was speaking into. He was not setting standards for all women as he was in the previous verses.

Jennifer, that is very sweet of you to say that. 🙂

Craig, my view is that Paul is talking to Timothy about a variety of issues affecting daily life. This would cover behavior in Christian meetings, in homes, and everywhere. I get this because of this verse….

3:14 These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The house of God, the outcalled of the living God, is comprised of the body of believers. It is not a place but a people. And we need to know how to conduct ourselves where ever we go because we ARE the temple(s) of God. He resides in us.

“I just wanted to check whether you think that v 11, 12b also refer to just this wife and husband at home? (Or do v11, 12b refer to what should occur in the church meeting?)”

Verses 11-15 are not about church meetings. They are about a certain situation to which Timothy was privy. Paul was giving advice to Timothy on how to handle a particular woman teaching error. The primary point and answer was that she was to LEARN, and she was to learn in the standard attitude of a student, quietness. Quietness is not eternal silence. Vs. 2 says that we are to lead a quiet and peaceable life, not a silent life. Same word.

“what is absolutely clear is that “the woman” of vss. 14 and 15 is the very same woman in vss. 11 and 12. Logically and gramatically that is the only conclusion that the text supports.”

When I was a new Christian and I first read this section of Scripture, not having been indoctrinated by churchianity, I also read the switch to singular as to a single woman and also read the ‘they’ as to husband and wife. It was later when I heard the things the churches taught, that I became confused. Listening to all the stuff the hierarchalists preach is confusing. My only salvation from their confusion was to divorce the things they said from my brain and start over with the Lord discussing it and researching it with God.

We can do amazingly complex things with small sections of Scripture to confuse. However, when we make a list of everything that Scripture has on the subject we see that the pieces don’t fit in the hierarchalist interpretations. They have to adjust Scripture. They will say things like:

1. “Deborah wasn’t really a primary Judge of the Nation, or she was only chosen because there were no good men, or really Barak did it all she just supported him, or she only made private counsels not public, or she may have made judgements but didn’t teach Scripture.” All of those statements are wrong, but the hierarchalists have to say them in order to support their theory that God doesn’t want women to teach, preach or lead men.
2. “Miriam wasn’t really a leader of God’s people, or she only led the women in worship and didn’t do anything else, or because her brother was the primary leader of the 3 of them she was just following them. “None of those statements is true either.
3. “Abigail was sinning when she went against her husband’s leadership, even though she saved their whole household from death she is not a good example of a godly wife.” Not true because she was praised for her wisdom and godly behavior in spite of the ‘fool’ her husband was.
4. “ Huldah didn’t really lead the nation because her advice was only given to the King. “ What is missed with Huldah is that she was sought out by the King to teach them what the Scriptures meant and what to do about it. She was sought out instead of Zecharia and Jeremiah.

They do the same twisted reasoning with all the women of the NT starting with Anna, the first to prophesy over baby Jesus. The hierarchalist position on women only holds when people do not search the Scriptures for themselves.

“Concerning Lexicons – how do you gauge which one is giving the most accurate rendering of the Greek word?”

Lots of research. Most of them are decent except when it comes to controversial issues. The best ones do not rely upon the Bible for examples of usage, but rely upon the way the word was used in the era of the NT or OT. Scott and Liddell is good. I also have New International Dictionary of OT and NT Theology that has good research. There are also many studies on individual words by reputable scholars that will help. Cheryl has a good set of research tools she uses.

“So how do I know whether the Greek words given in a Lexicon are the right word or not?”

It’s the right word, just missing the ends for tense, case, etc. The problem is more likely the definition given. Some lexicons are influenced by traditional interpretations and thus assign the meaning of obedience to hupotasso and it’s forms. But that is incorrect. Some lexicons are more accurate than others.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/tit2.pdf

The Blue Letter Bible is only giving you the root word. Hupotassomenas is a form of the word. Endings indicate things like tense. Check the Scripture 4 All link above.

“I agree that Titus doesn’t say women can ONLY teach women, but it seems equally wrong for Egals to read into the passage that women CAN teach men from these verses.”

All believers are told to teach the truths of God. Thus there is no reason for women to have to have permission to do that which we are all to do. The HS does not prefer one group over another but chooses people according to His own standards.

Thus really all that is needed is a strong case that God does not want women to teach, preach, or speak the truths of the Scripture to men. And there is no such admonition in all of Scripture.

Holly, 127

Titus 2:5 says for wives to be being under-set (hupotassomenas), which is a form of hupotasso for submit. It is not obedient, which is from hupakou, meaning to listen, heed. Wives are never told to be obedient to their husbands, only submissive and that submissiveness is in the same manner as Ephe. 5:21.

May I point out that the only one anyone needs permission from to do any of the works of the HS from is God. He calls. He equips. We do not have permission from the Lord to decide who should do what or when. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line of history, Christians decided that we could determine who should do what and where.

I meant the brain responds to the information the muscle spindles send. 🙂

Holly 106,

That is exciting news. In my world profession I am a professional massage therapist. One of the things we learn right away is that the muscles are in a symbiotic nervous relationship with the brain. The brain doesn’t really of it’s own instigation tell the muscles what to do. Rather the brain responds to the information the brain sends. Thus, when muscles are stuck in chronic pain, we have many techniques to trick the muscles into sending happy comforting messages to the brain, so that the brain through the nervous system will help the muscles to relax. Much more complicated than many have assumed.

Holly, #91

That’s actually how I’ve always read it.

Craig, while it may seem unlikely to your friend that ‘a man’ is really A man rather than many men, we are not privy to the actual situation. It is because some think it is unlikely that ‘a woman’ is really ‘A woman’ that some have changed it to ‘women’ in their interpretation. But we really must not mess with the written word that way. First, let’s establish that it does say “A woman” and “A man” and then fuss over whom the A woman is and the A man is. The woman is likely one of the people referred to in chapter one teaching error. The man is likely one of three. Either he is her husband or he is a teacher or he is someone else she’s been specifically harassing with her teachings. I’ve not heard any other plausible ideas. Cheryl is convinced the ‘a man’ is the woman’s husband.

Holly #74,

that would be awesome. Links, books, whatever….. 🙂

Cheryl,
Your poor backyard. 🙁

Today my front yard is going to be dug up to get to a piece of pipe that needs to be replaced. I sympathize with you.

“they have absolutely no evidence that authentein means what they say it means.”

And that is the point we’ve been trying to make with them since the first time someone noted that the word used was authentein and not exousia. For some reason the comps/patris do not want to acknowledge that the word has a sketchy history, or that Paul must have had a particular reason for using such an unusual word.

Craig,
glad to hear that you are hanging in there.

===========
Everyone,
I’m having some trouble discussing the second coming of Christ with a full preterist. I think I’ve got some good points such as there is no history within the early church of such an event and Paul, Thomas, and John were still alive in 70AD and would have written about it. As well, there are tons of events that haven’t yet been fulfilled. If anyone knows of some good Bible research refuting the concept that Christ came in 70AD, I’d appreciate it. I’m still working on curriculum for the giftings of the Spirit. Sorry about the off topic request. 🙂

I’ve known a few churches that have a reasonable mix. But IMO it is the mixing along with other things (like singular leadership, no manifestations of the HS, pastor doing all the preaching/teaching, etc.) that has limited the true spiritual effectiveness of churches.

WOW! construction work with digging and major remodeling is both stressing and rejuvenating. New beginnings.

Prayers are gone up for your success.

“Any type of “authority” would be bad- for either men or women to exercise over the other. All the discussion about the meaning of “authentein” may be interesting but not critical to their position.”

Craig, #51

There are different kinds of authority. The worldly authorities of privilege and control are the ones that I believe Scripture speaks against.

Matt. 20 “25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. 26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Lording over and exercising authority OVER is what we should not do with one another. Rather we are called to minister to one another the spirit and truths from God. We are to provoke one another to good works, bring healing, support, honor, encouragement, correction and so forth.

There is an authority in speaking and acting within the unction and manifestations of the Holy Spirit. It is a power that is greater than any worldly privileged positions of control over others. It is only achieved in holiness and the love of God.

Our problems come when churches are organized according to worldly requirements. There is a strong mix in most all churches of worldly authorities and spiritual authority. It would be difficult to correct and perfect.

“They say that a person who’s been in jail for years can’t handle it when they no longer have the “security” of the four walls caging them and the dictation of the wardens governing what/when/how they conduct their lives on a daily basis. I wonder how many women might feel that way when they discover that they are actually free and equal in Christ, in every way, contrary to what they’ve been taught all their lives.”

Very astute observation. And that is a reasonable response. Normally, children, both male and female, are supposed to be given authority over their own lives in small doses so that they can learn the disciplines of making good and right decisions.

Holly,

Don’t fret. 🙂

The problem with thinking that the Son of God has/had less authority than the God the Father and the Holy Spirit, means that they are not one in essence, will and authority. Eloheim, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are miraculously of the same Will, the same Authority and of the same essence. The fact that God somehow sent His Son into the world through the virgin birth to take on human flesh does not change who God is in essence. Jesus’s humanity had to learn suffering and thus discipline to do God’s will. But Jesus as God in the flesh had all the same authority so that He was able to say that essentially “you see me, you see the Father”. And amazing statement.

It’s complicated. But I would not say that God the father has more authority than God the Son. Read Hebrews 1.