1 Timothy 2:12 should a woman teach a man

[Marcia]

I believe that Paul is forbidding women to take the authoritative role of teacher/pastor, which is to have authority over the church. I do not believe he means that women cannot share their knowledge of scripture with others. If he means that women are forbidden to share their knowledge, then he contradicts the Bible in many places where it is clear that women taught the scriptures to men and in doing so, led men to Christ.

Amy, I think you and I might have some disagreement on this. :smilewinkgrin:

I am wondering where in the bible it is clear that women taught the scriptures to men?

Usually, people cite Aquila and Priscilla, but Priscilla was teaching with her husband, which is not the same as teaching on her own.

I do not believe women should do exegetical teaching of the Bible to men, nor should they be pastors.

Women can be missionaries, teach women and youth, and speak in church but not in a way that is teaching scripture or excercising authority. I speak in churches on the occult and New Age but am sharing information; I do not teach scripture to men and would refuse to give a "message" or anything like it to men.

 

[Pastor Larry]

If I am speaking of Christ to a crowd, I am teaching them... just as Anna was doing.

No, not at all. You could be testifying. Furthermore, the Bible doesn't say she did it to a crowd.

Do you really think Anna's speaking was just that? That she wasn't teaching? Wow!

Yes, I know. I am a silly one for thinking that words mean things. But yes I think her speaking was simply that ... speaking. Why? Because that's what God said it was.

These people were seeking redemption and Anna spoke of Christ to them. If that isn't teaching, what is?

Speaking (just read it ... that's what it says it is). Women speak to me and other men all the time in church. That is not teaching, and any one standing there would readily recognize that.

Ok, God breathed out what Paul said. Does that include:

1 Corinthians 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

So, if God actually breathed out what Paul said, then God has caused Paul to lie in this passage... making God a liar, for He caused Paul to say He did not say it.

This is confusing. If you look at the context, Paul had previously quoted Christ, and when he says "I speak, not the Lord," he is referring to the fact that he is no longer quoting Christ.

I was under the impression that you had been a believer for a while. But the kind of stuff you are saying here makes me wonder. Perhaps I have assumed to much about you. This is pretty basic stuff.

When Paul says "I speak," or "I do not," he speaks of his own preferences and doing.

Um, no. When he says that, he is speaking from apostolic authority under the inspiration of the Spirit. I gave you a number of examples and could give you many more.

Again, this is basic bibliology that should be covered in any basic discipleship class. It reminds me of just how poor a job churches do of discipling people. It grieves me as well, particularly when we end up with people denying the commands of God over it.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Yes, it is a shame Paul claimed to be the one who suffered not a woman to speak when it was God all along, right?

Funny, I can't find one verse in which God says, "Now Paul, you know that command was from me and not from you. You had no business putting the word 'I' in there."

 

[Crabtownboy]

Priscilla taught Apollos:

Acts 18:28 says that after Apollos left Ephesus with the encouragement and recommendation of the "brethren," which means the Christian assembly, "he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah." Here we see an account of a woman teacher, along with her husband, educating an already learned man of great ability and preparing him for his greatest accomplishments in the Gospel. This example would seem to set a good precedent for women and seminary professors and Bible school teachers.

But does Paul's writing to Timothy negate the passage about Priscilla teaching Apollos? No, of course not. It is always dangerous to build a doctrine on one passage no matter how appealing it is to my own wishes.

This occurrence creates a difficulty for those who believe that Paul taught in I Timothy that Christian women are not qualified to teach on the basis of the creation order and the Fall. That difficulty is intensified by Paul's commendation of the many women who labored with him in the Gospel since one can hardly labor in the Gospel without preaching or teaching the Gospel. This thinking also runs contrary to the words of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost, who interpreted the women proclaiming the mighty works of God publicly, as the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy that "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy." A study of the ministry of Biblical prophets shows that prophecy was not limited to telling future events, but also included expounding God's Word and exhorting His people to turn to God and repent. So, for women to prophesy necessarily means that they preach and teach God's Word under His authority

Paul must have been writing about a specific issue or problem. We know from scripture that Timothy was taught by his mother. His father was gentile.

In Paul's letter to Timothy (II Timothy 1:5) he tells us that the apostle Timothy followed the faith of his grandmother Lois and his mother Eunice. Chapter 3:15 tells us that from childhood Timothy had learned the sacred Scriptures. Timothy's mother was Jewish, but his father was a Gentile. We may infer that Lois and Eunice taught Timothy the Scriptures, introduced him to Jesus, and brought him up in the faith. Evidently they did a good job, for Timothy became Paul's closest assistant, accompanying him on his missionary travels and eventually becoming bishop of Ephesus.

Some other women who followed in Priscilla's footsteps include Marcella (325-410 A.D.), whose Church of the Household in Rome became a center of study, prayer and charity. Marcella assisted Jerome in combating heresies and settling theological disputes. She inspired another woman, Fabiola, to establish the first hospitals in Rome, and Marcella established the first retreat for Christian women on the outskirts of that city. Under Marcella's leadership, Paula and her daughter Eustochium assisted Jerome in his Latin translation of the Bible from Greek and Hebrew. These women traveled to Bethlehem and dedicated the rest of their lives to translate, revise, and correct the manuscripts, several of which Jerome dedicated to them. There, Paula founded three convents and a monastery, establishing the model for Scripture study and copying in monasteries which continued until the Reformation.

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cach...+paul+women+teachers&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us

 

[donnA]

Anna was teaching those who sought redemption of the Christ. She was teaching... in the Temple. There is no denying that. It is in black and white in the Word of God.

Had it been a command of God, Paul would not have had the need to include the pronoun "I" in 1 Timothy 2:12. He would have just said 'Do not."

I don't know about you, but we do not attend a jewish temple.

 

[donnA]

I'm just not sure what the problem is with just simply believeing what God out in His bible for us, especially when it is plain and clear.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I don't know about you, but we do not attend a jewish temple.

Reckon we can say then that the passage for women not to speak was written to Timothy and his congregation then.

Paul did not say it was to all Churches, nor did he say it was a command of the Lord. When he said, "I" he was speaking of his own preferences. He did not say 'God does not suffer.'

Larry can say it is poor exegesis, but that is just his opinion. Paul said 'I' referring to himself. Had he not meant 'I' he would not have said it.

 

[Amy.G]

Amy, I think you and I might have some disagreement on this. :smilewinkgrin:

Say it ain't so Marcia! :laugh:
You and I agree on so much.

I am wondering where in the bible it is clear that women taught the scriptures to men?

Usually, people cite Aquila and Priscilla, but Priscilla was teaching with her husband, which is not the same as teaching on her own.

Well that is a good one. Priscilla was teaching with her husband, but still teaching. She was teaching under her husband's authority. A woman today teaches under the pastor's authority.

I do not believe women should do exegetical teaching of the Bible to men, nor should they be pastors.

I agree that women should not be pastors, but women have the same Holy Spirit as men and they're exegesis is just as good.

Women can be missionaries, teach women and youth, and speak in church but not in a way that is teaching scripture or excercising authority. I speak in churches on the occult and New Age but am sharing information; I do not teach scripture to men and would refuse to give a "message" or anything like it to men.

Do you not give the gospel message to men? You have to quote/teach scripture to do that, right?

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.

 

[Amy.G]

I don't know about you, but we do not attend a jewish temple.

What's your point?

 

[annsni]

Priscilla taught Apollos:

WITH her husband and not in the assembly. If you read the passage, you'll see that they "took him" (ESV), "took him unto them" (KJV), "took him aside" (NASB), to teach him. This would be like taking someone out for coffee to speak to them. Very different than the public assembly AND Priscilla did not teach Apollos on her own but along side her husband. What they did was to disciple.

But does Paul's writing to Timothy negate the passage about Priscilla teaching Apollos? No, of course not. It is always dangerous to build a doctrine on one passage no matter how appealing it is to my own wishes.

It is not building a doctrine on one passage to say that women are to not teach or have authority over men. Scripture is clear on that - and no were do we see a woman in authority over men in the New Testament church.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

It is not building a doctrine on one passage to say that women are to not teach or have authority over men. Scripture is clear on that - and no were do we see a woman in authority over men in the New Testament church.

A woman teaching does not necessitate her being in authority. Paul says he does not allow a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority. Teaching can be done without usurping authority.

Fact is, Anna was teaching in the temple when she spoke to all who sought redemption in Jerusalem.

 

[Crabtownboy]

WITH her husband and not in the assembly. If you read the passage, you'll see that they "took him" (ESV), "took him unto them" (KJV), "took him aside" (NASB), to teach him. This would be like taking someone out for coffee to speak to them. Very different than the public assembly AND Priscilla did not teach Apollos on her own but along side her husband. What they did was to disciple.

I fear you are mistaken. There is strong evidence that Priscilla did indeed teach Apollos. She, against all the norms of that day, is listed first in this scripture and this gives very strong evidence that she was regarded more highly as a leader and teacher than her husband.

It is not building a doctrine on one passage to say that women are to not teach or have authority over men. Scripture is clear on that - and no were do we see a woman in authority over men in the New Testament church.

But you are building a doctrine on just one passage while there are others you must ignore if you are to hold to that belief.

A few questions:

What issue or problem was Paul specifically writing about in Timothy? You remember that in Cor. he says a woman should always have her hair covered. If you take Paul and build a doctrine on teaching from one passage in Tim. than to be honest you must demand that women always have their hair covered.

However this is not the case. Paul was writing about a particular problem in one location and so his stance on covering the head by a woman does not apply to all places.

Remember that these are letters from Paul to specific places. They were not general letters sent out to everyone. Each letter of Paul must be placed within the context of who, where, when and why he was writing them.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Remember that these are letters from Paul to specific places. They were not general letters sent out to everyone. Each letter of Paul must be placed within the context of who, where, when and why he was writing them.

Really ? So nothing in Galatians could be applied to every church ? Did Paul give different messages to each church ? Did God set up each church to preach a different message ?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Really ? So nothing in Galatians could be applied to every church ? Did Paul give different messages to each church ? Did God set up each church to preach a different message ?

I did not say that. I said that each letter must be seen in the light of the specifics that Paul was writing about to that particular church. There were specific reasons why Paul wrote particular ideas to one church and not another ... just as you would do if you were writing letters to churches. You have to look at all of Paul's writings and see how ideas that on the surface negate other ideas he has written to other churches can be reconciled and brought together. As I said in one letter to one specific church Paul writes about always keeping a woman's head covered. Why? Because there was a specific problem in that city that people in other cities did not face. Thus that command, if you want to call it that, is for one congregation but not all congregations ... but Paul does not say that. Why? Because, again, he is writing to one congregation.

Same with Timothy. Why did he write about women not being allowed to teach to Timothy, but not to all other churches. Certainly Paul never expected his letter to Timothy to be read by thousands around the world.

So, again, all of Paul's writing must be taken as a whole and brought together in a rational manner. Else to quote one passage you like while ignoring others leads to gross errors.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I'm not taking a side at this point since it's effects are so close to home. It's not that I don't have a side just choose not to take one as yet for this discussion. However, I do wonder at something. Should women who attend church not cut their hair or wear makeup and Jewelry? It seems Paul teaches this too.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Same with Timothy. Why did he write about women not being allowed to teach to Timothy, but not to all other churches. Certainly Paul never expected his letter to Timothy to be read by thousands around the world.

He said it to Corinth, 1Cor 14:34 tells women to sit in silence.

So, again, all of Paul's writing must be taken as a whole and brought together in a rational manner. Else to quote one passage you like while ignoring others leads to gross errors.

Gross errors, like women preachers. That's what you get when you don't take the bible as a while.

 

[annsni]

If it were only a specific issue that Paul was addressing, then he would not have gone back to the creation order to explain why. I do not see that it's just a conditional statement.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

He said it to Corinth, 1Cor 14:34 tells women to sit in silence.

Paul was addressing unruly women who interrupted the service by asking questions of their husbands in the congregation.

This is not addressing women in a teaching position. The women were asking questions, not trying to teach.

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Clearly, they were trying to ask their husbands questions and disrupting the teaching of the Word of God.

 

[Jerome]

I do wonder at something. Should women who attend church not cut their hair or wear makeup and Jewelry? It seems Paul teaches this too.

It's just "in the assembly" that they are to dress modestly(v. 9), just like it's just "in the assembly" that they may not teach men(v. 12).
When one is the back room of another building or a coffee shop, it's another matter altogether.

 

[annsni]

I'm not taking a side at this point since it's effects are so close to home. It's not that I don't have a side just choose not to take one as yet for this discussion. However, I do wonder at something. Should women who attend church not cut their hair or wear makeup and Jewelry? It seems Paul teaches this too.

Can you show me where Paul says not to cut the hair (not that women's long hair is given for her glory but that we're not to CUT the hair)?

Can you show me where Paul says that we're not to wear makeup?

Can you show me where Paul says that women are not to wear jewelry?