Book Reviews


1 Timothy 2:12 - "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent."

Here's an often tricky subject, depending on who you speak to about it.

Before I begin, it should be noted here that these words ("woman" and "man") could also be translated as "wife" and "husband", which then changes the thrust of this command quite drastically.speech_is_silver_and_silence_is_gold_wallpapers.free_review.net.jpg

This verse, and others similar, are often taken by people to mean that it only applies in a church setting (ignoring the fact that we are the Church - 1 Cor 12:27; Rom 12:5). A little while ago when discussing this topic, an argument was put forth about the 'Woman at the Well' preaching to others (men especially) as she, after speaking with Jesus, went back to her town and proclaimed the Gospel to everyone (Jn 4:39-42). Though the opponents argued that she was permitted due to the fact that she was in a town and not a church.

Advertisement

Despite that, the argument about the woman at the well being "permitted" to teach the Gospel, because it was in a town and not a church building, fails because Paul is basing his logic on the Genesis creation order - which would surely apply universally. We can see this in the very next verse and sentence in 1 Tim 2:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

So if Paul's logic and subsequent command comes from creation-order, then either everyone is subject to it in every situation, or they aren't at all.

You can't say "do it this way because Adam and Eve, God said so" and tag it with "but only here, here and here" if the argument it based on how God originally designed everything to be. The whole marriage debate is also based on a creation-order logic that God 'made them male and female' (Gen 1:27; Mk 10:6), therefore man/man, woman/woman can't marry - and the church is fighting its hardest to make that apply to all people, secular or otherwise - despite Paul saying judging those outside the church is not our business (1 Cor 5:12). So why in the instance of women being silent, should this same creation-order command from Paul be only situational and the other not?

Advertisement

Leaving aside the silence issue for a moment, those women out there who do keep to this non-authority, staying quiet thing - do you follow the preceding verse as strictly?

 ...also that the women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes... (v.9)

Do you men who follow the silence of women strictly, also follow this? How many of you make sure your wives don't have a new hairstyle, or wear jewellery or buy nice clothes? Are any women reading this wearing jewelry? Or have their hair styled? Or are wearing expensive designer clothes Surely you should cast all your personal ornaments and fancy clothes away lest you break Paul's command about modesty! Men you should stop your wives, and any woman in the church you may lead, from wearing jewellery, or doing their hair in nice styles - and you better make sure they only buy drab, second-hand clothes from charity shops so as not to fall into the trap of getting immodest, expensive clothing!

But now lets look at 1 Corinthians 14:33-35, where Paul issues a similar command, yet this time it's translated as "husbands" and "wives" rather than generic men/women:

As in all the churches of the saints, women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

OK, so, same line of thinking here from Paul it would appear. But before you say "but this is a different situation!" - see how he begins: "As in all the churches of the saints" - ALL the churches. It would seem that this is speaking of the same type of situation as in 1 Timothy, yet this time it's only directed at the married (which the 1 Tim verse could also be, due to the Greek words).

First thing though - "as the law also says": what law? Where is this in the Torah? Even if it is, why is Paul suddenly enforcing the Law when his other letters take so much time to explain our freedom from it (cf. Gal 3:1-14; Gal 5:1-15)?

Cultural and historical explanations of this aside - and common explanations such as men and women sitting separately in Jewish synagogues which then followed through to the early church, (and women/wives then trying to shout across to their husbands causing havoc and Paul calling for order, not submission) - if some men and women, and some denominations in general, are taking Paul so literally on these points, do they sit in silence? And I mean TOTAL silence? Do the wives wait to get home to talk to their husbands about the service? Because remember, it's shameful otherwise (though, interestingly, not a sin per se).

Advertisement

What if you're not married? Do single women just have to go with their questions unanswered? Why is this passage only directed at the married, whereas the other one isn't?

What if 1 Timothy 2:12 was translated with the same marriage logic as 1 Corinthians 14:

I permit no wife to teach or to have authority over her husband; she is to keep silent.

Where does the argument against women leaders go then? She could lead a church as long as her husband isn't present?

Advertisement

Do you think that maybe there's a little more going on in the background to Paul's commands here that we miss due to the time distance since its writing, and the way societies have changed, making these commands say something different now in the 21st century than they would have ever been intended in the 1st century?

Just some thoughts to ponder on. You've got to try and follow the logic of the texts, rather than pulling isolated verses out of various letters to make a point or doctrine.

Subscribe to Updates
Subscribe to:

Have something to say? Leave a comment below.

Leave a comment   Like   Back to Top   Seen 230 times   Liked 0 times

Subscribe to Updates

If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates ?

Order my new book today from Amazon or fortydays.co.uk

Subscribe to Blog updates

Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:

Subscribe to:

Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS

‹ Return to Blog

We never share or sell your email address to anyone.

I've already subscribed / don't show me this again

Recent Posts

The Temptations of Jesus: Pride

| 3 days ago | Lent

Welcome to the first part of a short series I'm writing during Lent. We’re on the first Sunday of Lent, and so I’m going to be looking at the forty days that Jesus spent in the wilderness, and the temptations he endured. A new post will be up every Sunday, and you can view the series overview here: Lent 2018. Mark 1:12-13And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him. That’s all Mark has to say on that time Jesus spent there, and John doesn’t mention the forty days at all. That leaves only Luke and Matthew which mention the temptations or any details about what happened in the desert. So let's look at the first temptation that Satan tried on Jesus. Luke 4: 1-4 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing at all during those days, and when they were over, he was famished. The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread.” Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘One does not live by bread alone.’” (cf. Matt 4:1-4) The first thing that jumps out at me here, is that the devil didn’t come to tempt Jesus until after the forty days were up. He waited until Jesus was “famished” and then struck while he was weak. What can we learn from this? That the devil is tricksy and won’t hit you when you feel like you have it all together, but will rather wait until you are in a more susceptible and weakened state of mind. Like James (1:14-15) says, we get tempted by our “own desire, being lured and enticed by it” to try and get us to fall into sin by acting upon those desires. So we need to guard our minds and keep our focus on God in those times to try and ensure that we are aware of the escape that God has given us, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 10:13 No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it. What about Jesus in the desert then? You might think that he was beyond these things and temptation couldn’t touch him. In some ways that’s true; he was fully in tune and in the will of his Father that he sets the example for us, and what we can achieve. But at the same time, he has “in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin” (Heb 4:15). This is why we can learn much from these few short temptations that Jesus faced in the desert. While on the face of it, we may think it’s unrelatable to be asked to miraculously turn stones into bread — there’s more to it than meets the eye. It’s not necessarily about the bread, or the miracle, but the insinuation that “If you are the Son of God...”, trying to do to the Second Adam what that old snake did to the first: trip him up through pride. “Thus, if the first Adam fell from God by pride, the second Adam has effectually taught us how to overcome the devil by humility.” George Leo Haydock (1774–1849) As the quote above points out, Jesus demonstrates to us how to overcome the temptation to think of ourselves too highly, or to flaunt our status (Romans 12:3), by doing the opposite and humbling himself and pointing back to Scripture. Whereas Jesus did have every right to say “I am the Son of God – there’s no ‘if’ about it!” and use his abilities to create a miracle for his own sake, that would also have been selfish and another path to the sin of pride and arrogance. Instead he sticks to the main thing that can thwart the enemy when trying to deceive us: Scripture. Although “he was in the form of God” and had equality, it wasn’t “something to be exploited” as Paul writes in Philippians 2:5-8. Let us learn from this, and kee...

Lent 2018: The Temptations of Jesus

| 8 days ago | Lent

Lent is just around the corner, and so this year I've decided to write a short series over the next 40 days looking at the forty days that Jesus spent in the wilderness, and the temptations he faced. I'll post a new blog each Sunday of Lent looking at each temptation, and then finish the series on Easter Sunday looking at “what did Jesus sacrifice?”. Series outline: Temptation one: Pride (1st Sunday of Lent, February 18, 2018) Temptation two: Worship and Glory (2nd Sunday of Lent, February 25, 2018) Temptation three: Testing God (3rd Sunday of Lent, March 4, 2018) Temptation four: Complatancy (4th Sunday of Lent, March 11, 2018) What did Jesus sacrifice?: Easter Sunday (5th Sunday of Lent, March 18, 2018) Stay tuned for the first installment in a few days time, and if you haven't already, don't forget to subscribe so you will be notified by email when each new post goes out!...

Former Muslim Explains the Trinity

| 09th February 2018 | Trinity

I saw this video doing the rounds on Facebook, and thought it was too good not to share here as well. Very few people tend to articulate the Trinitarian doctrine well enough to: a) still make sense, and b) not slip into heresy. Just reading the comments section on this video proves point b) quick enough, with many people giving their take on it (and usually espousing some form of Modalism). I won't make a big post on the Trinity now, but I may do one soon off the back of this one, as it's clearly still something believers (and non-believers) struggle to understand, or explain without heresy! For now though, sit back and take about 5 minutes to listen to this former Muslim explain one of the core beliefs of Christianity very well:   Some additional information: The man in the video is Nabeel Qureshi who has wrote a few books on his journey to Jesus from the Muslim faith; one of them being: Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus. He also has sadly died in 2017. I haven't read his books, and only just found out about him after looking up more info on this video, though his book is definitely on my wish list now....

Is there salvation for fallen angels?

| 05th February 2018 | Angels

I've seen and heard this question asked numerous times before, and I've even wondered it myself in my earlier years as a new Christian. Is there salvation for angels and can demons go back to their previous, uncorrupted state? 2 Corinthians 11:14And no wonder! Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. As far as scripture is concerned, Satan can pretend to be angelic for the sake of deceit, but that's about it. There's no mention of redemption for angels or demons — that's the long and short of it. So let's explore four areas of Scripture to see what we do know. #1 They have been imprisoned for judgement by God. 2 Peter 2:4For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into Tartarus and committed them to chains (or pits) of deepest darkness to be kept until the judgment; This judgement is eternal for them and there appears to be no second chance; their judgement is sealed: Matthew 25:41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; #2 They have been imprisoned for judgement by the saints. Not only has God set a judgement, but we who are in Christ will have the role of actually judging the angels as well. How's that for a hefty responsibly! 1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels—to say nothing of ordinary matters? #3 Judgement is final We can also see from Revelation some more details about what this judgement entails for the devil and those who followed him: Revelation 19:20And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who […] were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur. Revelation 20:10And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. #4 Salvation is for humans Salvation appears to be only something that God designed for humans, and is apparently something that makes the angels curious. 1 Peter 1:12[Salvation is the] good news by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look! Christ came as the "second Adam" (1 Cor 15:45) to rectify the problems caused by the first Adam. We humans are all "in Adam" (1 Cor 15:22), whereas angels are not. They are sometimes called "sons of God" — we are the son of Adam, therefore Jesus' sacrifice is only effective for "Adam". The writer of Hebrews sums this up for us nicely by saying, “it is clear that [Jesus] did not come to help angels”, but those in whom he shared a nature with — us! (Heb 2:14-16) Whatever sins the angels have made (other than rebelling; cf. Rev 12:4,7-9) it is not covered by the blood of Jesus as far as we know. We can infer this from what Paul teaches us about the ministry of reconciliation: 2 Corinthians 5:19that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. (Emphasis mine) The plan of salvation and the power of the Gospel to reconcile God and man appears to only apply to this world and our sins (or trespasses). The Greek word here for “world” is kosmos, which can sometimes have a broader meaning of “universe” or “creation” rather than just this planet, but in this context I'm not sure it allows for that scope of reconciliation, given the other passages of scripture we've seen about the rebellious angels (or demons) level of punishment. Either way, Scripture doesn't give us any more information on this topic than that, so anything else would be speculation, but I think we can be reasonably certain that salvation through Christ is only for humans. ...