Woman should not teach or assume authority over men (applies to secular????)

  • 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.
A

Arwen4CJ

Guest
That actually may be the very reason why men should be in authority...

1 Timothy 2:12-15

[SUP]12 [/SUP]But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
[SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

And considering, women tend to lean more into liberal-minded thinking, even Christian women.... I think it has support.
That passage doesn't say that women are more likely to be deceived than men, which is the specific point I was replying to, or even worse, the idea that women are "easily deceived and seduced by erroneous doctrine more than men are."

That statement almost makes it sound that men are smarter than women, or that men have been given more discernment than women....basically, that men are better and more equipped at understanding doctrine than are women....

Be careful when making generalizations about a group of people. There are several things that need to be asked. What kind of liberal thinking are you talking about? There is a continuum, and there is also the difference between theological and political liberalism and social liberalism, etc.

There are many men who are also more liberal-minded. In fact, younger generations of both men and women tend to be more liberal. Should that, then, mean that no man in younger generations should be in authority?
 
J

joem789

Guest
While I do not agree with many of John MacArthur interpretations of scripture. I do believe that he gave a good one for the role of women in this world.

Many interpretations lead to legalism that simply degrade women because of Eve's fall. But if we consider women's IMPORTANT role in bearing children and raising them, then we can begin to learn and understand why they aren't permitted to "spend their time" carrying the burden of authority and instructing men. I won't try to make the whole point here. Just watch and listen to this sermon. And I sincerely hope that it will broaden your awareness. Especially for any women on this board.

John MacArthur - I do not Allow a Woman to Teach... (1Timothy 2:12-15) - YouTube

Pardon me if these links aren't allowed.
 
Sep 6, 2013
4,430
117
63
[SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
This scripture has always made me wonder... if Adam wasn't deceived, does that mean that he willfully disobeyed? What does this mean for men and women?
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
While I do not agree with many of John MacArthur interpretations of scripture. I do believe that he gave a good one for the role of women in this world.

Many interpretations lead to legalism that simply degrade women because of Eve's fall. But if we consider women's IMPORTANT role in bearing children and raising them, then we can begin to learn and understand why they aren't permitted to "spend their time" carrying the burden of authority and instructing men. I won't try to make the whole point here. Just watch and listen to this sermon. And I sincerely hope that it will broaden your awareness. Especially for any women on this board.

John MacArthur - I do not Allow a Woman to Teach... (1Timothy 2:12-15) - YouTube

Pardon me if these links aren't allowed.
I'm unable to view the video at this time, but I would like to address the statement that I have bolded. Motherhood is not an option for many women as many are single, infertile, or dealing with other factors preventing the bearing or raising of children. Does that make one of these any less of a woman? Not to mention those who choose not become parents.

Even mothers are only occupied with the raising of children for a portion of their lives. Are they not fully women until they have borne children? Are they just "on hold" until their uterus is activated? What about when their children leave home?

This is almost assuming that men are irrelevant in their children's lives other than as provider. Ideally, both parents take an active and positive role in raising children. Once a child is weened, what prevents the father from being the primary care-giver?

Many of the women in the Bible are mentioned because of the children they bore and the men they married. Those women are important for their roles as mothers and as either positive or negative forces for our faith. But others are included with little to no mention of their children because they as women were important in the story of the gospel.

To say that women are important ONLY because we give birth (which is a really awesome feature, by the way) is to consider us little more than chattle or human incubators. Then we are merely objects whose worth is in our womb. Our value is then dependent on our ability to produce another male heir. Our duty, to sit in quiet thankfulness that we are properly cared for by those who "know better" and do things "for our own good."

That line of reasoning is depraved and leads to very dark places.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
This scripture has always made me wonder... if Adam wasn't deceived, does that mean that he willfully disobeyed? What does this mean for men and women?
Awesome point! If all women are easily deceived because Eve was deceived, then all men are willing to sin on purpose (rebellion) because Adam sinned knowing it was wrong.
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
G

GreenNnice

Guest
you're such a cynical grouse, johann. you're so clever, in a way, like, uhhh, who was that guy, composer, music fellow, 'STross' or , 'Streuce,' or, yeah, 'Strauss.' yeah, that guy :D

0------------------0

Hmmm, yes, like gracey said, it's true. Woman was deceived. Man WILLFULLY disobeyed.

Apparently , to God, the deception is WORSE than the disobedience, in this 'order' regarding preaching and teaching in church.

Which gender, therefore, is worse to pastor a church,? I mean, which is the gender you want less pastoring your church, teaching your Sunday school classes?


There is an order to this whole preaching and teaching thing of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, and, alas!, wait none too far after this complementary set of verses because verses 13 and 14 complement 1 Tim. 2: 11-12 :)

1 Tim. 2
11A woman[SUP]a[/SUP] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[SUP]b[/SUP] she must be quiet.

Now, the verses that speak of 'order.'

13
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

And, then, this verse makes it clear that women could be upset that they can't preach or teach men in church, so, Paul shows them a reward:
15
But women[SUP]c[/SUP] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.


Order. Order is everywhere. Afterall, without order, there is chaos. Period. :(

Order in creation. Man, first, woman, second, made. verse 13 makes sense, doesn't it? It speaks of 'order.'

Apparently, since God says so, through brother Paul's inspired, holy words mounted into the Good Book, it's the man, first, in the order, and, the woman, second, ala 1 Tim. 2:14, because she was deceived, NOT the man. And, further, verse 15 of 1 Tim, says she also will be saved by childbearing--God bless her merry little soul--for understading/accepting that she is SECOND in the order of who is to SPEAK in an authority role to others in the church.



Ok, that said, it's obvious that God is telling us that the man is first in the order of preaching and teaching to women in positions of authority in the church. Paul is spot-on consistent in telling women what they can do and that's past just childbearing, like it says in 1 Tim. 2, as in chapter that older women are to teach the younger women.

So, again, Paul is pretty clear of his way of saying things in these 1 Tim. 2 verses, and, apparently, as far as the order goes, women, who as much as Paul 'suffers' not to have them preach or teach men anything, ARE 2nd in the order.

No, green ! Child-bearing only !!

Really? What about all those women who can't bear children. as mistysevens said? God could use them for something else, right? What about, then, as a pastor of a church or a teacher in the church, preferably to women, but, that's not always going to be the case, right :) Men will be, sometimes, in a Sunday school learning class, too, that a woman is teaching, because, well, because for a number of reasons, maybe, not enough males to teach, or, even, gasp!, there might not be a male pastor in the church suitable, or, uhh, qualifiied, might be a good choice word, to pastor the congregation. But......


......there is a woman, suitable, qualified, and, therefore, 'called' by God to pastor. :)

Ahh, now , I THINK, y'all are understanding just what I mean by the word, 'order,' that Paul so grace-fully uses in verses following 1 Tim. 2:11-12, so graciously uses, in concluding 1 Tim. 2 .

The bible is not one of confusion. If Paul doesn't speak of order here, then, 1 Tim. 2: 11-12 is a little more cut and dry, so to speak. Still, even with these verses of 13-14 in 1 Tim. 2 speaking of 'order,' I'm still believing that a woman who is not child-bearing and who is not cut out to be a wife of one husband, IS quite likely to be called by God to an act of different service, not to mention, 'calling.' One where she goes to seminary and, then, becomes a church leader/teacher, or, assistant pastor, or, even, the pastor of a church, with women AND MEN in it being preached and taught the bible, that's the Truth. :)
Amazing how so many can live with a clear conscience when God's generally, or, can we say, 'naturally,' done things with men as pastors of churches but, then, can we say, 'supernaturally,' has used a women in a church to pastor but they won't go to that church, or, will speak badly of it. And, they will, even, condemn it, and, certainly condemn her :( They'll say something like, "That woman as a pastor is against the bible, there is no way God would EVER do something like that, I CAN read His mind." Sad, really. :( And, really, can you read God's thoughts. Isaiah 55 and 1 Cor. 2 tell you, you cannot do that.

And, even if, let's just say that a woman is not to pastor but goes against God's will and does pastor a church, doesn't God have a funny way of working that out for His good? :) Sure, He does. God will work out that church to understand how to be a blessing to Him in the midst of being doing things against His perfect will. So, why, either scenario, would you want to come on here and tell women that are pastors, or, thinking of being pastors, that they are doing things against God's will.
HEY, you let God figure that out, don't you play God. Instead, be supportive and let the Lord make His moves on that person who is not doing things for God's glory.
 
C

cjordan38

Guest
That's clearly not the way God would want it.

Its being about better.

And sure God can use a woman... and speaking of animals... in the beginning when things we're perfect... Adam named all the animals showing his authority over them. And before I get my head bitten off by a woman who may think I'm making animals on the same level as women... I'll make this point clear...

Genesis 1:26
[SUP]26 [/SUP]Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[SUP][a][/SUP] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

So, while they both have ruler-ship, man has authority over women since Adam named woman, Eve. Similarly, as he named the animals. Also, we find later in scripture that Adam (one man) is the blamed for sin even though Eve was first to sin... no mention of Eve....but they do mention one man. I can't help but see that this shows Adam as in charge and responsible.

Romans 5:15

[SUP]15 [/SUP]But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!

That's I think its ideal for men to lead in general and with a Christ-like mind of course.

Didnt the Word say in the last days God will pour out his spirit on his sons and daughters and they will preach the Word and prophesies? So thay there says woman can lead...Not to , mention people keep bringing up this Eve thing....Adam wasnt far from Eve and he knew what he was eating...Not to , ention he lied to God...So what makes man better than woman...He that hasnt sinned cast the first stone
 
G

GreenNnice

Guest
Didnt the Word say in the last days God will pour out his spirit on his sons and daughters and they will preach the Word and prophesies? So thay there says woman can lead...Not to , mention people keep bringing up this Eve thing....Adam wasnt far from Eve and he knew what he was eating...Not to , ention he lied to God...So what makes man better than woman...He that hasnt sinned cast the first stone
Prophesying is not 'preaching,' or, 'teaching,' at least, that's what those against women being called by God to pastor or teach in a church would tell you, cjord.

Prophesying does not teach a woman anything. Prophesying, or, a woman telling a man of things to come in life does not make her have authority over a man.

That's a good question, but, truthfully, that's not an argument to me, it's arguing something that's, really, with too much gray area.
 
P

phil112

Guest
............
That's a good question, but, truthfully, that's not an argument to me, it's arguing something that's, really, with too much gray area.
Not a gray area at all. A woman is not to have authority over a man. If a woman can prophecy then prophesying is not preaching. There, now wasn't that easy?:)
 
T

tucksma

Guest
Awesome point! If all women are easily deceived because Eve was deceived, then all men are willing to sin on purpose (rebellion) because Adam sinned knowing it was wrong.
But which would be a better leader. One who knows what he is doing and goes for it, or one who is deceived into doing something? I want to make sure you understand we are not saying men are better than women, rather that God has an order in place. Men are to lead because although Adam didn't do what's right (which neither Adam or Eve did) he did it of his own conscious. Eve was tricked. A leader needs to be able to lead and not be swayed on their leadership. This is also true for leading a church. Also for teaching.

The point that Adam willfully sinned doesn't deny the fact that we are taught that men are supposed to lead. It's all over in the bible. Most, if not all, of the examples of women leading are because the men didn't do their job. The order of men leading is still in place, but when there are no men who can handle the leading role then clearly a women must do it. That doesn't mean if there is a capable man, and a more capable women to let the women lead because that is unbiblical. Rather if there are no men able to lead, only then may a women lead. (I am talking strictly in a church setting here. Leading being class giving and pasturing not simply spreading the gospel to unbelievers)
 
T

tucksma

Guest
Not a gray area at all. A woman is not to have authority over a man. If a woman can prophecy then prophesying is not preaching. There, now wasn't that easy?:)
That's also what he was saying, that there is a difference. Some look at that as preaching, but I agree with you that there is a clear difference.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
But which would be a better leader. One who knows what he is doing and goes for it, or one who is deceived into doing something? I want to make sure you understand we are not saying men are better than women, rather that God has an order in place. Men are to lead because although Adam didn't do what's right (which neither Adam or Eve did) he did it of his own conscious. Eve was tricked. A leader needs to be able to lead and not be swayed on their leadership. This is also true for leading a church. Also for teaching.

The point that Adam willfully sinned doesn't deny the fact that we are taught that men are supposed to lead. It's all over in the bible. Most, if not all, of the examples of women leading are because the men didn't do their job. The order of men leading is still in place, but when there are no men who can handle the leading role then clearly a women must do it. That doesn't mean if there is a capable man, and a more capable women to let the women lead because that is unbiblical. Rather if there are no men able to lead, only then may a women lead. (I am talking strictly in a church setting here. Leading being class giving and pasturing not simply spreading the gospel to unbelievers)
The point is that Eve was deceived, not that all women are likely to be deceived. That is misogynistic theology.

I was stating that for consistency's sake, you would also have to conclude that all men are likely to do the wrong thing on purpose, which is definitely not the case.

There is support for a man demonstrating headship in the Bible, but not for men in general to lead women in general. A lot of people think that at first because they still read the Bible as a modern westerner. Once you take the culture and time into context, men and women Biblically enjoy equal opportunities in society (the actual point of the thread). As far as the prohibition of women preachers is concerned, the supporting evidence is circumstantial, at best. Meaning, the examples are men, but it never says that they must be male in the description lists, at least not when read accurately.
 
Last edited:
G

GreenNnice

Guest
Not a gray area at all. A woman is not to have authority over a man. If a woman can prophecy then prophesying is not preaching. There, now wasn't that easy?:)
True, but prophesying can carry some weight to it for those being prophesied, but, agreed, women prophesying is not the same as preaching adn teaching.

But, anyway, yeah, my long post explains as the Lord's led me to see the obvious 'order,' as I call it, to 1 Tim. 2 11-12, and, not so coincidentally, as Paul says things right after those prohibiting or, not 'permitting' verses that there is an order of who is to pastor and teach, first, and, who, second? yes, in 1 Tim. 2: 13-14.
That women an opportunity to teach and preach to men, that understood order. But, yes, the majority preachers and teachers in the church are to be men, but, the order, too, can include women, second, a.k.a., 'the minority,' as I would classify, philly.:)

Also, God can call a woman to be a pastor, and, yes, she can be called to pastor over men. Again, this is not going to be a high percent of the time, just because that's how chaos becomes in the church, from too much confusion. But, in the right situation, God could, indeed, have a woman 'called' to pastor a church congregation with men in it listening to her, too :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T

tucksma

Guest
The point is that Eve was deceived, not that all women are likely to be deceived. That is misogynistic theology.

I was stating that for consistency's sake, you would also have to conclude that all men are likely to do do the wrong thing on purpose, which is definitely not the case.

There is support for a man demonstrating headship in the Bible, but not for men in general to lead women in general. A lot of people think that at first because they still read the Bible as a modern westerner. Once you take the culture and time into context, men and women Biblically enjoy equal opportunities in society (the actual point of the thread). As far as women preachers are concerned, the supporting evidence is coincidental, at best. Meaning, the examples are men, but it never says that they must be male in the description lists, at least not when read accurately.
I would say men are inclined to do wrong on purpose. But I would say that about all humanity, not just men, but women too. Just look at today's time, people do wrong all the time.

Also Paul straight forwardly says men are leaders and bases it off of Adam and Eve. Nowhere in the bible does it say men and women have equal society opportunities, at least not that I'm aware of. The evidence is there, you just seem to ignore it and say that it was only implied to the people he was sending the letter to. If this was true, then why even put the whole Book of Timothy in the bible if it isn't meant for us? Does that make any sense? Why would 1 Tim 2 be in the bible, if it wasn't meant for us. Also if women are supposed to be allowed to lead in the church just like men, why would Paul say differently? If the bible teaches men and women both can teach, why would Paul then teach something different? That doesn't make sense either. The word of God doesn't change based on your situation. I know you don't like hearing that, but it's what God says. There would be no point to 1 Tim 2 if it isn't meant for us to read and apply to our lives.
 
I

IloveyouGod

Guest
A "Lady" is one when you look at her you see grace and beautiful smile with humility, wisdom and kindness.

I suggest you don't take things out of context. Maybe read this same passage in NIV Study bible to understand the background of why this has been said to women at that time.


1 Timothy 2:11-15

[SUP]11 [/SUP]A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. [SUP]12 [/SUP]I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was formed first, then Eve. [SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.



Hey, so while this applies to the Church... could it also apply in a secular settings, like work or college? I think we can... Consider our more fundamental beliefs, like not lying or stealing. Do we apply those beliefs, in a general way, in a secular setting? We do.

Also, I think the secular have some awareness...
Romans 2:14-15


[SUP]14 [/SUP](Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. [SUP]15 [/SUP]They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)


Anyways, any supporting or opposing scripture would be great.
 
T

tucksma

Guest
True, but prophesying can carry some weight to it for those being prophesied, but, agreed, women prophesying is not the same as preaching adn teaching.

But, anyway, yeah, my long post explains as the Lord's led me to see the obvious 'order,' as I call it, to 1 Tim. 2 11-12, and, not so coincidentally, as Paul says things right after those prohibiting or, not 'permitting' verses that there is an order of who is to pastor and teach, first, and, who, second? yes, in 1 Tim. 2: 13-14.
That women an opportunity to teach and preach to men, that understood order. But, yes, the majority preachers and teachers in the church are to be men, but, the order, too, can include women, second, a.k.a., 'the minority,' as I would classify, philly.:)

Also, God can call a woman to be a pastor, and, yes, she can be called to pastor over men. Again, this is not going to be a high percent of the time, just because that's how chaos becomes in the church, from too much confusion. But, in the right situation, God could, indeed, have a woman 'called' to pastor a church congregation with men in it listening to her, too :)
Personally I would say that only would happen if there isn't a man "up to par" in God's eyes. The reason I think this is because the times that a women takes over a man's position in the bible is because the man fails at his job. (Like Deborah leading the military for a time)
 
G

GreenNnice

Guest
Personally I would say that only would happen if there isn't a man "up to par" in God's eyes. The reason I think this is because the times that a women takes over a man's position in the bible is because the man fails at his job. (Like Deborah leading the military for a time)
There you go, then. Simple. Not likely. But feasible that God could call a woman to pastor a church of men. I agree, it's not going to be very often that he does this, but, NOT all women are 'childbearing' and not all women are confined to just be housewives and that's it. They can be called to be other things. I can't explain why there aren't more women as pastors in the bible, with Phoebe, as a 'deacon' or 'servant' as close as it comes, really, besides, Deborah, you mention, who was a judge. But, this judging, is like prophesying, I don't see that position carrying that much authority over a man and, certainly, it's not a church setting she was in.

So, yes, when no one of male quality is qualified or willing to lead as pastor of a church, except a woman, there ya go, a woman takes over. Simple as that. God will do that. :)
 
P

phil112

Guest
True, but prophesying can carry some weight to it for those being prophesied,...........
I don't understand what you mean there. A prophecy is a statement of fact. It is true, not maybe true, or a little true, or a lot true. Just simply true. How do you add weight to truth?

Also, God can call a woman to be a pastor
Would you be kind enough to provide me with an example?