xjwsforChrist

Why is it in the Bible? What do the female members of this forum think of it?

_________________
To fear me is to love me....

Well, I guess its in the bible because Paul wrote it.

Which part of it are you speaking about? I'm guessing the part about women being silent? Because taken as it is, it does contradict other things that Paul has said. So perhaps that letter was due to a specific issue at the time? I will let Paul (Sacramento) speak as to that matter though, because he has done more research on it I think.

(In any case, it does not really matter what Paul (of Tarsus) will personally permit or not - and his words are "I" do not permit... because Christ is the one we are to listen TO.)


Peace,
tammy

1Timothy has been viewed by many scholars as "questionable' in regards to be written completely by Paul.
It is a personal letter and deals with specific issues that Timothy was facing that Paul was helping him address.
One of the biggest issues I have with creating GENERAL doctrine from letters about SPECIFIC situations is that you are taking the writer out of a GENERAL context and stating the his minority view in a specific situation should be used as doctrine for a the WHOLE of a religion.
And that's just silly.

I think the issue you seem to want to addess is this one, yes?


First off, it is clear by Paul's other writings, namely Romans, that Paul views women as equals and even apostles:



To think that Paul was of the opinion that they could NOT teach doesn't make much sense to be honest and is out of context with his other writings.

So, did He write that? if so why?

SOme argue that it was added on, citing the fact that the sequence seems out of place considering that verse 1 of chapter 3 flows better with verse 8 of chapter 2, example:


The insertion of verses 9-15 seem out of place.

BUT what if he did write them?

IF Paul did write those words in verses 9-15 them it seems, taking in to account all he wrote elsewhere, that he was making a specific call for that specific congregation.
To view it as a general rule for all is taking it way beyond the context of the letter.

BUT and IMO, the issue is here:
Look at this verse in CHapter 3:


We know that women were deacons ( as Paul states in Romans),hence they were teachers also BUT the thing is why would Paul mention when earlier and put restrictions on them only to later make a comment like the one above?
Why mention how women must behave in chapter 2 to only go over it again in Chapter 3?

IMO, I believe that the verses in Chapter 2 are either an interpolation OR were edited to mean something other than what we have now.

That right there, Paul, reads as though Paul switched from saying what men who would be deacons are expected to be... to women who would serve as deaconesses are expected to be.

My translation in the (older) NIV, and some others does not read 'women', but rather 'their wives'. Though I see that now it reads women.

Looking it up on that blue letter bible site, the choice of what could be placed there is women... or wives... and 'their' wives seems to be the popular choice. But is that what was really meant? (and that is the issue of the lying pen of the scribes... not that someone went in with a whole set of blatant lies, but that some tweaked what was meant, according to how they interpreted or wanted it to read)

Interesting commentaries on the issue of what is meant here at the bottom of this page:

http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/3-11.htm


Peace,
tammy

I don't think that the scribes LIED as much as "wrote according to their understanding".
Yes, I admit that the possibility of ulterior motives is to be addressed and, IMO, many a times I am sure that is what happened.
That Jeremiah felt the need to point that out speaks volumes.
The thing is, WHAT parts were "edited" by the scribes and how can we know?
IMO, the simplest way is to understand that Christ would NEVER "overrule" God, His Father, so anything that seems to be "contradictory" must be analized from the point of CHRIST and the genre of what was written in the OT.
Now, as a Jew it may be that Paul was making the statement that, like in Judaisim of his time, women were NOT allowed to participate or to teach the Torah BUT, given Paul's views on women elsewhere, that seems unlikely UNLESS if at that time, in Ephesus, there were some serious issues with women in the congregation, just like in Corinth.

I think that IF we take that passage as written by Paul then we MUST reconcile it with what else he wrote in the MAJORITY and what was taught By Christ.
If He didn't, then we need to accept that, in some cases, latter editors/copyists took liberties that they shouldn't and IF that is the case, who does that effect doctrine in totality.

In this case, even if the passage is a forgery, it doesn't effect CORE beliefs BUT does effect some man-made doctrines in regards to who can or can not teach The Gospel.

YES, to this and the rest of what you said.


The only clarification that I would like to make regarding the lying pen of the scribes is this: lying=not the truth

Doesn't have to mean a deliberate lie. It can mean that... but also a mishandling, misapplication, misinterpretation... of the truth of what was said/written.

The above verse in Timothy is a good example that illustrates how this can happen. Did Paul mean the 'wives of deacons'... or did he mean women who were deaconesses? If he meant the latter, then the 'lying pen of the scribes' has helped to perpetuate something that has been used to lord over women for a couple thousand years. Especially if that was NOT the case from the beginning, as we can see that it was not from his other writings. Then it is someone altering things to make them as they think they should be, perhaps depending upon what is in THEIR hearts.



Peace,

tammy

Now, as a Jew it may be that Paul was making the statement that, like in Judaisim of his time, women were NOT allowed to participate or to teach the Torah BUT, given Paul's views on women elsewhere, that seems unlikely UNLESS if at that time, in Ephesus, there were some serious issues with women in the congregation, just like in Corinth.

Good morning....

Although I am not overly familiar with this book as I have not read in a while, this is a good point brought out by as regards women of his day, and the fact that Paul was still growing and learning and continually being disciplined himself by Holy Spirit, shown by the fact that he apologizes for his harshness and judging at times and also the fact that not all of his writings are part of the bible canon.

But instead of looking to Paul and His writings, ( which some are missing) if we look to Christ as THE HEAD of HIS BODY, which is called a WIFE, and all members belonging to HIM, placed in their position and given gifts chosen by HIM.....

It is not our place or decision to determine how the body is used.
Since Jah is not concerned with our outward appearance or vessel of flesh, but ONLY the vessel that is of spirit, AND the body of Chirst is referred to as a woman, does it really matter who teaches the CHRIST to ANYONE? As long as this good news is preached, shared, taught, does it matter?

Jah uses us all. It is foretold that in the final days he would pour out His spirit upon ALL SORTS OF FLESH. That being said what and how they proclaim this good news, prophesy, teach, share visions, dreams, healing , wisdom, knowledge etc... Is not important! If we really want to know TRUTH and receive HIS message, we'd be willing to take it from " an ass" ( Baalam) or a " stone crying out" ,
If need be!

Just my .02 cents
Love Justmom

I would also like to respond, if I may, dear Pup (may you all have peace!). While our dear brother Paul DID have move past his education and training as a Pharisee, and so had some training to undergo and things to learn from Christ, he was NOT a misogynist, as some wish ot make him out to be. Actually, the APOSTLES were more misogynistic than Paul (remember, the encounter with the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well... how SHE was concerned that our dear Lord was speaking with her as a Samaritan, but the disciples were concerned that he was speaking to a WOMAN?!).

You have to take into account the TIMES they were living in... and what was happening: the Jews (who were GREATLY misogynitic!) were looking for EVERY opportunity to have an issue with the Body! ANY small thing, any tiny "infraction" (against Jewish "law"... which was largely TRADITION)... was grounds for arrest (by the Sanhedrin) and deliverance to Rome (for the lions, etc.). So Paul was trying to help these women (and men) who FORMERLY enjoyed a certain level of freedom (due to their pride in being "sons of Abraham")... to UNDERSTAND... that their PHYSICAL freedom was now GREATLY perilized. They had SPIRITUAL freedom, yes, as sons of GOD... but by means of their new enemies, the Jews and, as a result of what was said to the Romans about them BY the Jews, the Romans.

AND... many of these were not JEWS, but people of the NATIONS who were now "one" with and so worshipping God... through CHRIST.... WITH Jews! Blasphemy!!

AND... some had worked their way INTO the Body... NOT as believers, but as moles... so as to deliver UP the Body. And so ANY broken rule, law, tradition, or custom could be and WAS used to bring charges against members of the Body. Remember, a slave of NOT greater than his master... and if they trumped up charges against our Lord, how more so those who are joined to him??

In an effort to try and keep the BODY safe, then, Paul fomented certain rules of conduct and presentation, particularly for the women: how to dress (so as to NOT bring undue attention to themselves and potential danger to the REST of the Body they associated with); how to be in public; even to not speak of the things they were learning IN public, but to learn them at home from their husbands who DID meet in public and brought such BACK to them). The rules pertaining to the men were largely related to appearances at the temple, positions of SERVICE within the Body, and control over their own households.

It might be difficult for those of us who live in the western world... and FREE countries... to understand this need. Not only do we not have to meet in secret or watch what we discuss and with whom (relatively speaking), but we can discuss openly... publicly... even globally!! Even today, in some countries, we could lose our very lives for discussing what we do! And that was the situation at the time Paul wrote what he did.

Now, did scribes come in CHANGE [some or all, but not necessarily one person or in one sitting, of] what he wrote? Absolutely. Remember, "wicked men will arise FROM AMONG YOU." And so there absolutely have been those who have tweaked or even totally rewritten things to serve THEIR purpose... including that which serves their view of women. The bottom line, though, is NOT what PAUL thought of women... whether good OR bad (and he thought good!)... but what CHRIST thought of them.

Again, then, I refer you to the account of the Samaritan woman. If you can't see what Christ felt about women, try to "see" HIS position through that account.

I hope this helps and, again, peace to you ALL!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

Shellama

Yes! And I think you have expressed this beautifully, Just Mom, thank you.


Loz x

_________________
"This is my son. LISTEN to Him!"

interesting stuff...thinking about the Samaritan woman also reminded me of what happened after resurrection, Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene and told her to bring the news to the apostles. Jesus has a way of bringing dignity to everyone.

Yes, dear Kassad (morning and peace to you!)... that and the fact that the women NEVER left him, even when their lives depended on it. Women weren't well-regarded by the Jews and much less were those who followed my Lord. It would have been nothing to have them put to death, took even less than to kill the men (the men were more likely to have a trial; the women only needed to be falsely accused of adultery and someone would have readily stoned them!).

Unlike most of the men (save one, Lazarus, to whom my Lord entrusted the care of Mary) who hid in a locked room once my Lord was put to death (they didn't get that he had to DIE... but wouldn't STAY dead - "Tear this temple down and in three days I will raise it up!" - see Luke 24:13-27, 33-35 and so feared for their OWN lives)... the women stayed, even through his impalement and death.

I don't mean this to be offensive or hurt anyone's sensitivities, but women tend to be able to manifest faith a bit more quickly than men. Save men like Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and the Prophets, some of whose faith came AFTER JAH or Christ gave them some kind of evidence, women (with perhaps the exception of Mary, who gave birth to my Lord as a son of man) tended to have it based on evidence given others or just what they heard from JAH/Christ. Rahab, as to what she'd heard about the God of Israel, Ruth as to what she heard from Naomi, the women who followed my Lord based on what he said to the MEN who were with him and what they saw him do, etc.

When he appeared to Mary, although she did not recognize his APPEARANCE, she absolutely recognized his VOICE (which is why WE ABSOLUTELY MUST LEARN TO RECOGNIZE IT, TOO, HIS VOICE... BECAUSE WE WILL NOT RECOGNIZE HIM WHEN WE NEXT SEE HIM! BECAUSE HE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WE THINK HE DOES, LIKE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE! AND SO WE MIGHT FIND OURSELVES FIGHTING AGAINST SOMEONE THAT, IF WE KNEW WHO IT TRULY WAS WE WOULD NOT BE!)

They, too, though, the women, did not understand at first WHEN my Lord was to be resurrected. When her brother died, Martha told my Lord that she knew Lazarus would be resurrected at the last day but she NO idea he would be resurrected right THEN. Once he WAS, though, THEY, the women, UNDERSTOOD. Which is why THEY hung around. They knew he had to die and be buried and so were prepared for that part. And when he appeared to them they did not doubt it was him [/i] though he didn't LOOK like the One they knew![/i]

Not only did the men not believe it, initially, but one even held out... although my Lord was right there speaking with him... until he saw the piercing marks. Which tells us that he didn't look as THAT man once knew him either, as the man, Thomas, WOULD have believed it was him. Maybe not believed that he had actually died, but certainly that it was him. Because he didn't have a TWIN who could have impersonated him... so all he needed to do was APPEAR and folks would KNOW it was him, right? Unless... he didn't look like himself. And every account of his appearance after his death indicates that he didn't!

And so how did those who finally DID recognize him do so? BY HIS VOICE! Just as you and I would recognize someone WE greatly loved but who no longer looked as we had known them (due, perhaps, to major illness, devastating injury, face transplant, what have you - it is their VOICE that we would recognize them by!).

I hope this helps. I realize that I've gone beyond Christ's view of women but I hope it shows WHY he had such a view, their tendency toward faith, most importantly, faith in his VOICE, which is the faith that saved those MEN who followed him as well: Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Samuel, the other Prophets, and the men and women who STUCK with my Lord ALL did... because of LISTENING to a VOICE.

It is not righteous that saves one but FAITH in the One who SPEAKS, which faith is manifested by LISTENING to his voice... that preserves us alive. It is what delivers us... and carries us THROUGH. Through the darkness... and thus, through death.

KISS the Beloved Son... and LISTEN to him!

Your servant and a slave of Christ, that Son,

Shellama