If Women Can't Have Authority Over Men in the Church, Why Are They Expected to Teach in School?
- Thread starter seoulsearch
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Sorry to be so late to this thread. I am so busy writing papers in theology, etc. Here is something I wrote about the Greek meaning of "authority" in 1 Tim. 2:12
" I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." 1 Tim. 2:12 ESV
Basically, the word "authority" is translated totally wrong! Of course, how simple!
But really, the noun εξουσια (exousia) is the word the New Testament uses to translate the word authority. Eg. Matt 28:18 where Jesus has been given "all authority." Or Romans 13:1 where we are to obey the authorities, because all authority is given by God.
The word in 1 Tim. 2:12 is NOT exousia, but rather αὐθεντεῖν or authentein. This word is a hapax legomena, which appears only ONCE in the Bible. This means you cannot find the word anywhere else to compare how Paul or anyone else translated it.
In fact, you have to look at contemporaneous sources to find a definition, and there are over 50 different uses, ranging from murder and copulation to domineering. But most often it is translated “to domineer.”
So, if you translate it using that, you get, "And not to domineer a man." Sounds reasonable to me! As believers we are not to domineer over other believers! Mutual submission, like Eph. 5:20 says. And then you don't have to add that extra word "exercise" which is needed as a verb, because authority is a noun, but authentein is a verb, an infinitive. Just a small piece of grammar the translators seemed to miss!
Of course, we can get into the cultural reasons why women were not allowed to teach in Ephesus, home of the temple of Artemis, one of the 7 original wonders of the world. A cult dedicated to women, who were in charge, and also highly uneducated, like all the women of their culture. And we might add, a little wild, those women??
As for keeping silent, well, another poor translation, based on the 16th century treatment that women were less than people. Probably quiet would be a better word, and consistent with the Jewish rabbinical practice that students were to learn quietly before the Master. So actually, Paul is giving permission in this and other places for a woman to learn. In fact, I believe he encourages it.
As for 1 Cor. 14:33-34, a very simple explanation.
"For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. "
In fact, the only confusion comes from the fact that the punctuation is in the wrong place. "For God is not a god of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints."
You see, the original Greek was in majuscules, or capitals, all squished together, and no punctuation. Very easy to put a period in the wrong place if it suits your purpose. ESV is very male hierarchical (they call themselves "complementarians" but you get the idea!) and they have lovingly retained the KJV mistake. LOL! Now the reason scholars know the punctuation is in the wrong place, is because of the last part of the passage. "As the law says". Except for in no place does it say in the law, that women should not speak, not even in the synagogue. So, Paul is likely quoting someone, and being sarcastic. I was in an Orthodox synagogue two years ago when I took Hebrew, and the women talked to each other, and to the men over the barriers separating the men from the women. They obviously had never heard of a law prohibiting women from speaking either! So those are what are fondly known as "the two disputed passages." Of course, there are other texts, but I have been through all of them with a fine tooth comb, and none of them has any validity restricting women from ministry. Or that a man has "authority over a women" at all! There are those pesky Roman household and Greek household codes, which Paul and Peter both try to use to have people be better witnesses to the surrounding cultures, but even if you want to go with marriage roles (which I do not!) there is simply no biblical basis for any man having authority over every woman. And nothing anywhere saying a woman cannot be a pastor.
" I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." 1 Tim. 2:12 ESV
Basically, the word "authority" is translated totally wrong! Of course, how simple!
But really, the noun εξουσια (exousia) is the word the New Testament uses to translate the word authority. Eg. Matt 28:18 where Jesus has been given "all authority." Or Romans 13:1 where we are to obey the authorities, because all authority is given by God.
The word in 1 Tim. 2:12 is NOT exousia, but rather αὐθεντεῖν or authentein. This word is a hapax legomena, which appears only ONCE in the Bible. This means you cannot find the word anywhere else to compare how Paul or anyone else translated it.
In fact, you have to look at contemporaneous sources to find a definition, and there are over 50 different uses, ranging from murder and copulation to domineering. But most often it is translated “to domineer.”
So, if you translate it using that, you get, "And not to domineer a man." Sounds reasonable to me! As believers we are not to domineer over other believers! Mutual submission, like Eph. 5:20 says. And then you don't have to add that extra word "exercise" which is needed as a verb, because authority is a noun, but authentein is a verb, an infinitive. Just a small piece of grammar the translators seemed to miss!
Of course, we can get into the cultural reasons why women were not allowed to teach in Ephesus, home of the temple of Artemis, one of the 7 original wonders of the world. A cult dedicated to women, who were in charge, and also highly uneducated, like all the women of their culture. And we might add, a little wild, those women??
As for keeping silent, well, another poor translation, based on the 16th century treatment that women were less than people. Probably quiet would be a better word, and consistent with the Jewish rabbinical practice that students were to learn quietly before the Master. So actually, Paul is giving permission in this and other places for a woman to learn. In fact, I believe he encourages it.
As for 1 Cor. 14:33-34, a very simple explanation.
"For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. "
In fact, the only confusion comes from the fact that the punctuation is in the wrong place. "For God is not a god of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints."
You see, the original Greek was in majuscules, or capitals, all squished together, and no punctuation. Very easy to put a period in the wrong place if it suits your purpose. ESV is very male hierarchical (they call themselves "complementarians" but you get the idea!) and they have lovingly retained the KJV mistake. LOL! Now the reason scholars know the punctuation is in the wrong place, is because of the last part of the passage. "As the law says". Except for in no place does it say in the law, that women should not speak, not even in the synagogue. So, Paul is likely quoting someone, and being sarcastic. I was in an Orthodox synagogue two years ago when I took Hebrew, and the women talked to each other, and to the men over the barriers separating the men from the women. They obviously had never heard of a law prohibiting women from speaking either! So those are what are fondly known as "the two disputed passages." Of course, there are other texts, but I have been through all of them with a fine tooth comb, and none of them has any validity restricting women from ministry. Or that a man has "authority over a women" at all! There are those pesky Roman household and Greek household codes, which Paul and Peter both try to use to have people be better witnesses to the surrounding cultures, but even if you want to go with marriage roles (which I do not!) there is simply no biblical basis for any man having authority over every woman. And nothing anywhere saying a woman cannot be a pastor.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
So... how about women who lead the music part of the service? She may not necessarily be the worship leader, but she leads a song here and there?
“Oh she’s not preaching tho.” But what if she’s quoting scripture? What if she is giving an encouraging word as she’s leading a song?
I’m just a wondering.
“Oh she’s not preaching tho.” But what if she’s quoting scripture? What if she is giving an encouraging word as she’s leading a song?
I’m just a wondering.
-
2
-
2
- Show all
One of the reasons I ask these questions is because I see constant arguments about men leading in the church, and I'm actually not questioning that.
What I do question, however is the application: so the Bible calls for male leadership - I understand and accept that.
But if all the church can offer as leaders are men who are addicted to watching women dressed like 16-year-old cheerleaders (or whatever their fancy may be) performing sexual acts in adult movies, do I not have a right to ask God, the church, and the men who are saying they have leadership over me to please offer, train up, or find some better quality leadership?
I am not saying this in condemnation. I know it's a problem for pretty much everyone in some degree and am more than willing to try to listen, help, and pray for people who have addictions. So my first point would be that yes, I understand the Scriptures, thank you for telling me about them for the 12,000th time. However, may I ask, could you please show me some leaders who actually meet these standards, and if there aren't any, tell me what do we do next?
I was in a chat group in which the question was asked, "Is a man who is addicted to pornography qualified to lead a youth group, or a group of young men who are trying to get over porn themselves?"
If God says that I need to follow male leadership in church, I have no problem with that. Just please, give me male leaders that adhere to the passages that are always recited to me and can offer an example of what I'm told I need to follow.
One of the reasons this is important to me is because my entire life, friends, peers, and co-workers have confided in me about the sexual abuse they've suffered in their life, and I am looking for leaders in the church that I am confident are safe to talk to and could realistically help them, and it's tough to find.
Shouldn't male Christian leaders be held to the standard of sexual purity, both in body and mind? And if they are not, and no one else is to be found, what do we do next?
(I am NOT at all advocating that women should be teaching groups of all males; I personally don't believe any gender should be teaching a group that is comprised solely of the opposite gender, if nothing else, for the safety of their reputation.)
But I AM trying to present some real-life scenarios I'm finding when I look for church leadership, and am wondering what others have found and have done in the same situations.
What I do question, however is the application: so the Bible calls for male leadership - I understand and accept that.
But if all the church can offer as leaders are men who are addicted to watching women dressed like 16-year-old cheerleaders (or whatever their fancy may be) performing sexual acts in adult movies, do I not have a right to ask God, the church, and the men who are saying they have leadership over me to please offer, train up, or find some better quality leadership?
I am not saying this in condemnation. I know it's a problem for pretty much everyone in some degree and am more than willing to try to listen, help, and pray for people who have addictions. So my first point would be that yes, I understand the Scriptures, thank you for telling me about them for the 12,000th time. However, may I ask, could you please show me some leaders who actually meet these standards, and if there aren't any, tell me what do we do next?
I was in a chat group in which the question was asked, "Is a man who is addicted to pornography qualified to lead a youth group, or a group of young men who are trying to get over porn themselves?"
If God says that I need to follow male leadership in church, I have no problem with that. Just please, give me male leaders that adhere to the passages that are always recited to me and can offer an example of what I'm told I need to follow.
One of the reasons this is important to me is because my entire life, friends, peers, and co-workers have confided in me about the sexual abuse they've suffered in their life, and I am looking for leaders in the church that I am confident are safe to talk to and could realistically help them, and it's tough to find.
Shouldn't male Christian leaders be held to the standard of sexual purity, both in body and mind? And if they are not, and no one else is to be found, what do we do next?
(I am NOT at all advocating that women should be teaching groups of all males; I personally don't believe any gender should be teaching a group that is comprised solely of the opposite gender, if nothing else, for the safety of their reputation.)
But I AM trying to present some real-life scenarios I'm finding when I look for church leadership, and am wondering what others have found and have done in the same situations.
-
2
- Show all
R
I think there are a good number of churches that should close their doors (or merge with other churches), turn their property over to a mission minded church planting organization and go serve and give where they can make an impact. On the mission field lady missionaries have had to preach the gospel. I too have seen that it is mostly women that serve in small churches. What does this mean? It means a great number of we men are going to be held accountable for abdicating our responsibility. When there is no other alternative, and nothing else can be done until an alternative can be found, is one thing, but just doing something because one can and wants to have the position and power is another. There are so many denominational ministries, para church groups and so on that have contact with retired men who have pastored or lay preachers there is no excuse to continue an unbiblical practice. JMHO
R
The role of music leader isnt found in Scripture, lol. Apparently Paul was one those 'types' while he wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Sharing a Scripture, or even giving an exhortation is not filling the role of a pastor. 1 Cor. 11 speaks of a woman prophesying in church. Ok i probably have a target on me now LOL.
L
The battle for sexual integrity is literally every man's battle now days. There are male leaders who have overcome in this area. It is possible to win that fight. In our day with our ready access it's a difficult one but still not insurmountable.
However I get where you are coming from. It's hard to find a church that is lead by anyone of integrity it seems. I just left a church a few years back because of leadership integrity issues. It wasn't sexual integrity but even still a pastor who is a nice guy who is smart but not qualified to lead. At least the pastor at the church I attend now if the pastor makes a mistake he just admits it from the pulpit on Sunday morning. We are all human and blow it some times, confessing it right out in front of everyone is a level of integrity that I respect.
However I get where you are coming from. It's hard to find a church that is lead by anyone of integrity it seems. I just left a church a few years back because of leadership integrity issues. It wasn't sexual integrity but even still a pastor who is a nice guy who is smart but not qualified to lead. At least the pastor at the church I attend now if the pastor makes a mistake he just admits it from the pulpit on Sunday morning. We are all human and blow it some times, confessing it right out in front of everyone is a level of integrity that I respect.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
If even a fraction of the effort put into arguing over who should lead was directed to raising up leaders instead, I think the church would be a much different place.
All the attention seems to be placed on what is said (Scripturally), and OF COURSE that's of first importance, I'm not arguing that.
But unfortunately, that's where it stops.
If everyone spends all their time arguing over what the map says and which direction we're supposed to go in first, yet no one ever takes an actual step, what good is all that time put into arguing over the map?
All the attention seems to be placed on what is said (Scripturally), and OF COURSE that's of first importance, I'm not arguing that.
But unfortunately, that's where it stops.
If everyone spends all their time arguing over what the map says and which direction we're supposed to go in first, yet no one ever takes an actual step, what good is all that time put into arguing over the map?
L
Perhaps this anecdote will help muddy the waters a bit.
So a friend of mine was attending a church that had a woman pastor. From what I gathered she was pretty demanding concerning the work around the church. My friend had an epiphany one day when one of the other men commented that when the pastor called him up to do work and his wife answered the phone she would say your other wife called. She wasn't accusing him of a sexual or emotional affair, but perhaps a dutiful affair if you will.
I doubt that the dynamic would have been the same had the pastor been a man.
Are you groking the cut of my jib?
So a friend of mine was attending a church that had a woman pastor. From what I gathered she was pretty demanding concerning the work around the church. My friend had an epiphany one day when one of the other men commented that when the pastor called him up to do work and his wife answered the phone she would say your other wife called. She wasn't accusing him of a sexual or emotional affair, but perhaps a dutiful affair if you will.
I doubt that the dynamic would have been the same had the pastor been a man.
Are you groking the cut of my jib?
