Featured Roles of women

Indeed. Charles Spurgeon said of Mary Magdalene:

"I feel it no small privilege to be the means of bearing God’s message to this congregation...But what an honor to have a message for the apostles!....a preacher to preachers! I dub her Doctor of Divinity indeed, for she has to instruct these mightiest of messengers in the faith. Note the message. Did ever man preach a better sermon than this woman preached?....Angels told of the incarnation, but Magdalene told of the ascension. She must be made to do, alone, what a company of angels had been made to do before, to proclaim another step in the Savior’s pathway to redemption!....May the Lord raise many a Mary Magdalene in the midst of this church, for His name’s sake. Amen."

 

Rightly dividing the word of truth is not easy and we have a history of being mistaken in our interpretations. Note how Jesus made a mockery of the teachers of the word in His day. If you are born into a society where women are thought to be subservient to men, then to suggest this might not be the message of scripture, triggers the warming of tar and the plucking of feathers.

When my mother was born, women could not vote. Now-days when asked why women are inferior to men in spiritual insight, you are likely to be greeted with twaddle. Perhaps a thoughtful study of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 might be enlightening, if we could separate facts from presuppositions.

 

I see no body wants to engage in an effort to study a controversial passage. Too bad.

Is the message women should not adorn themselves with externals like braided hair, or is the message women should not only adorn themselves with externals, but should adorn themselves with internals such as godly character and compassion? Two very different understandings, which one is biblical?
1

 

When first we read through a passage for study, one of the questions we ask ourselves is "What is the least God is saying." For example when Peter says Jesus knows "all things" is the idea that Jesus knows everything about everything, or only that Jesus knows everything about Peter? The least God is saying is Jesus knows everything about Peter.

Thus if we use the minimalist approach to bible study, it is sort of like learning with a quiet demeanor, rather than a belligerent attitude of expansive assertions. Speculation is the mother of false doctrine

How is a woman saved through child-bearing? Our first observation is the follow-on phrase "if they continue .... This probably refers to whether a person has been born anew. Enduring to the end proves they were born anew, but does not provide salvation.

Now the curse, Genesis 3:16 makes child-bearing difficult, even including disability or death. But through that travail women will be saved, provided they are born anew. That certainly is a minimalist view, but is it the intended message?

 

8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Van, Not every mention of the word "saved" refers to salvation of the soul.
Basically, this passage is saying that if a woman nurtures the "inner man", endeavoring to live a holy life, instead of exalting herself and focusing on her outward looks, she is being a Godly woman. And if she ultimately raises Godly children, her life has not been wasted: on the contrary, the value of her contribution is immeasurable. She is the "Proverbs 31" woman and is NOT inferior to men in any way.

 

Typically, students who were “minimalists” resulted in students who didn’t finish course work, dropped out, were lazy, slovenly, careless, compromised in character and typically unlikeably unhygienic.

Just a thought toward things taken in a minimal fashion.

Isn’t that what Calvinistic thinking does? Minimizes the love, blood, grace... to only a few?


Hmmmm.

 

Yes, we need to consider what the word translated "saved" was meant to convey. The view I expressed was supported by the "if you continue" set of verses. I think Paul always used (every mention) the word to refer to spiritual salvation, rather than saved from physical suffering or death.

But even though our study brought us to differing views, thanks for engaging in actual bible study and discussion.

 

Hi Agedman, the minimalist method of bible interpretation has nothing to do with the level of effort put into the study. No need to drag in a subject change (Calvinism) when the topic is the role of women and the study of 1 Timothy 2:9-15

Through that travail of child-bearing, women will be saved, provided they are born anew. None of the suffering in this life should deter us from seeking the riches of God in the afterlife. And to that end we should adorn ourselves with godliness.

 

It would seem by your response to both sheepwhisper and me that you are endorsing some human effort in attaining salvation.

The salvation of eternal consequence (eternal life) is not gained nor attained by the slightest human effort, it is by grace alone.

Paul is using the same language phrasing as found in 1 Corinthians 3:15. The emphasis is “through” not “by.”

In 1 Corinthians one whose works are burned up is still saved but “through” (passing in spite of) and the same in 1 Timothy. The “through” is “in spite of” and not “by.”

There is a curse from God in childbearing. Not just the birth pains, but the whole from conception is filled with discomfort.

Prior to modern hygiene and medicinal helps, women suffered greatly throughout the gestation and more particularly the birth.

The “trial by fire” of child bearing brought no “means of salvation,” rather the sustaining grace of
God was evidenced “in spite” the trauma, the hindrances, and even entering the shades of death.

Ultimately the ongoing curse of God upon women will be overcome “through” (in spite) of the sorrows they endure, and each childbirth is a picture of that final determination of God in bringing the final resolve to all sorrows.

Just as believers work is tried by fire to validate the worth, so too is the woman suffering under the curse, but God is abundant in Grace to bring such through both the sufferings of childbirth (even loss) just as a God is faithful to bring the believer through that final purging.

Not as a “means by” but as a “succeeding in spite.”

 

Agedman, I am tired of you addressing me, claiming falsely that I endorse unbiblical positions.
Did I say a woman would be saved if she brought up children? Nope
Did I say "by" Nope
Your whole post presents a false misrepresentation of my position.

And then the position you take is the one I presented.

Folks, pay no attention to those who misrepresent others.

 

Returning to the study of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, does anyone have another view that women will be saved:
1) eternally through the suffering of child-bearing, i.e. in spite of the suffering of child-bearing. (two votes)
2) from a worthless life by being a godly women, bringing up believing children.(one vote)

 

Almost all translations render verse 9 "not with braided hair" but a few read "not just with braided hair." The most widely accepted of these is the WEB, one of my favorites. It has a long foot note explaining why adding "just" more accurately translates the intended meaning of "not." I like this insight because it meshes well with all the verses that say externals do not matter, only our internal commitment to Christ. The folks of Matthew 7 presented an external "Lord, Lord" picture, but inside Christ never knew them. Besides, I braided my little girl's hair many a time.

 

So you did not post “we need to consider what the word translated "saved" was meant to convey“ that is taken from above?

What I would agree with in your presentation in post #24 you seemed to stray from in post #28 where you state:

Perhaps, it remains that you do not embrace “the means of” definition and held to the “in spite” but in the critical area we have a history.

An aspect that neither of us has mentioned (that I remember of the posts on the thread) is the grace of God to both the just and unjust.

Perhaps that is for another thread.

Do not be weary, for although we may disagree, we have much we do agree.

 

Agedman, considering whether "saved" in 1 Timothy 2:9 refers to eternal salvation (being born anew) or being delivered from some difficulty in our present life is a valid question, and does not in any way, shape or form suggest a faith plus works salvation. You misrepresent my view, period. Paul always used the word to refer to eternal salvation, and coupled with the "if you continue" phraseology which proves rather than provides salvation, confirms eternal salvation as the intended message.

Now if you care to address the role of women, rather than defend off topic smears, have at it.

 

Tick-toclk

 

Often, the bible addresses the norms of culture, not with wholesale rejection, but with baby steps to lead us from the present darkness toward the future light. There is no difference between male and female in Christ. As role models, women are to fulfill that role as if to the Lord, but that does not mean they should not seek freedom from injustice. During my lifetime, the premise of "separate but equal" was found to be wanting. Just what is the least God is saying in 1 Timothy 2:9-15?

 

Saved is used in the NT in terms of deliverance, to rescue, bring through, keep safe, ... not always is the use placed in terms of the eternal.

Acts 27:31 is an example where Paul uses what the English translates saved as bringing through to safety.

“sozo” in all the forms are used over 100 times in the NT. Certainly, most uses have a link to eternal values, but not all. Some, as in the case of the use in 1 Timothy, give a statement in which the eternal is not the complete thinking, but that the deliverance is available no matter or “in spite” of whether one lives or dies, the trial “by fire” will pass, one is saved.

The great song, “How Firm a Foundation” wonderfully portrays the aspects of the NT salvation. Here is one verse given for the readers’ benefit:

"When through fiery trials thy pathways shall lie,
My grace, all sufficient, shall be thy supply;
The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design
Thy dross to consume, and thy gold to refine.”​

The believer may live through the ordeal, or the believer may die as they pass through the ordeal, but the believer is saved through (not by the means of) the ordeal in spite of the trauma’s demands.
.

Rather, as you do so rightly state, the matter of “through child bearing” is not that which saves, but that which the believer is brought through (saved) as all who are saved will be brought through their traumas safely. Such will endure to the end, not to gain, but because they have already gained and are therefore saved.

So even when results of the curse is pressed upon the believer (as the trauma of child bearing) the hope of the believer is safe.

 

I agree completely with post #37.

 

Just what is the least God is saying in 1 Timothy 2:9-15?

 

If we take a word meaning for word meaning approach to 1 Timothy 2:9, this is how the verse could be translated using the minimalism approach.

Also similarly the women to be adorning themselves in appealing garments with respect for others and discretion, not just with braids or gold or pearls or costly garments.

See 1 Peter 3:3-4 for a parallel expression of the instruction.