Does 1 Timothy 2:11-14 justify the sceptic?

[Sonnet]

I was talking about Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve :liberals:

Whoops I meant not talking about Adam and Paul.

Have you considered Tambora's post and my mention of 7 women prophetesses specially mentioned in the Bible. There were others but not specially called out. How does that square with your point? Is it possible you are viewing it with modern eyes?

Yes - Tambora makes an interesting point.

 

[Sonnet]

I believe the Bible tells us about the greater sin because breaking a command from God is worse than not hearing a command and sinning. However, both Adam and Eve knew not to eat of the tree, as commanded by God.

Romans 5:14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.


Even though Eve sinned first by eating of the fruit, sin still entered the world through Adam, the man.


Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned--


I believe these scriptures show that Adam's sin was greater; and that man is over the woman.

Ok - so why would Paul single out Eve's vulnerability to deception (and thus women in general) and relate it to why they should not teach etc if Adam's sin was, in your view, greater?

The hierarchical order (mentioned in 1 Cor 11:3) would seem to be sufficient to explain why women shouldn't teach and have authority.

Just trying to get to the bottom of thus.

 

[Sonnet]

The lack of hierarchical order in, for example, the Anglican communion would seem to be at complete odds with the hierarchical order mentioned in scripture.

Anyone here like to defend that (the Anglican's) position?

 

[Sonnet]

I do not go to any church that builds a large doctrine on a single verse in scripture that appears to be encouraging people to follow the customs of the society of their day.

This was your response to my:

"Assuming you go to Church, do the women follow Paul's sanctions? If not, do you cite him?"

But you say:
"Yes, I believe I addressed this by pointing out that there are other scriptures that support the hierarchy that has man as the head of the woman."

You subscribe to the hierarchical order (citing 1 Cor 11:3 but appear to diminish 1 Tim 2:11-14.

 

[exminister]

If Adam did worse then Paul's sanction against women would seem inappropriate wouldn't it?

I was talking about Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve :liberals:

Whoops I meant not talking about Adam and Paul.

Have you considered Tambora's post and my mention of 7 women prophetesses specially mentioned in the Bible. There were others but not specially called out. How does that square with your point? Is it possible you are viewing it with modern eyes?

Sonnet,
Did you see the above?

I referenced GO expansion of the cultural thing and noted you have two people answering you. Are you trying to stir the pot and not looking for an answer?
If so I say Good Day, Sir.

 

[exminister]

If Paul only meant the sanction against women (regarding teaching and having authority over men) to be for the time/culture then he would not have made reference to the Fall and differentiated between the sexes.

Sure, by your reasoning we might legitimately reverse Paul's differentiation...claiming it was just for the time/culture?

I am fine with that as I have stated in multiple posts.

 

[God's Truth]

Ok - so why would Paul single out Eve's vulnerability to deception (and thus women in general) and relate it to why they should not teach etc if Adam's sin was, in your view, greater?

The hierarchical order (mentioned in 1 Cor 11:3) would seem to be sufficient to explain why women shouldn't teach and have authority.

Just trying to get to the bottom of thus.

Paul speaks about women in general.

 

[Sonnet]

Sonnet,
Did you see the above?

I did...

Quote Originally Posted by exminister View Post
I was talking about Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve

Whoops I meant not talking about Adam and Paul.

Not quite following you.

Have you considered Tambora's post and my mention of 7 women prophetesses specially mentioned in the Bible. There were others but not specially called out. How does that square with your point? Is it possible you are viewing it with modern eyes?

I did see this, yes.

I referenced GO expansion of the cultural thing and noted you have two people answering you. Are you trying to stir the pot and not looking for an answer?
If so I say Good Day, Sir.

I am not trying to stir things, no. Why do you ask? The split in the Church over this issue would suggest that a definitive answer is going to be difficult.

Scriptures such as those referenced on this thread remain a stumbling block for atheists, agnostics and myself, especially in the modern age of equality.

 

[Sonnet]

A friend of mine is a follower of Christ but he does not consider the bible authoritative. He has singled out this thread's OP scripture as particularly worthy of condemnation.

 

[Sonnet]

I repeat:

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have."

1 Peter 3:15

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

Acts 17:11

 

[God's Truth]

1 Timothy 2:11-14
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Paul's reasoning - that Eve was deceived rather than Adam - is baffling to me and, it would seem, rather embarrassing for (*some) Christ followers.

If these scriptures were the first an unbeliever were to read then, surely, they wouldn't engender or encourage faith would they?

* added Tuesday 22nd March.

Paul is speaking about the nature of women in general.

It is good information on the nature of women.

As for being quiet while learning that is about order in a public setting when a woman doesn't understand something being discussed and wants to learn.

There must be order. Women and men must be able to humble themselves, for no one can even enter the kingdom without being able to humble one's self.

Is it a lack of humbleness that is causing you so much trouble with this scripture?

 

[God's Truth]

A friend of mine is a follower of Christ but he does not consider the bible authoritative. He has singled out this thread's OP scripture as particularly worthy of condemnation.

The Bible must be authoritative, if it is not, then the words of any person can substitute the words of God.

We must obey God not men.

 

[Sonnet]

Paul is speaking about the nature of women in general.

It is good information on the nature of women.

As for being quiet while learning that is about order in a public setting when a woman doesn't understand something being discussed and wants to learn.

There must be order. Women and men must be able to humble themselves, for no one can even enter the kingdom without being able to humble one's self.

Is it a lack of humbleness that is causing you so much trouble with this scripture?

No - not humbleness in this context - I'm male - it's more about trying to understand Paul's reasoning (which has been explained by folk here) and why the Church is not in agreement (eg. the Anglican Church). Paul appears to establish an hierarchical order in a number of scriptures...and does so explicitly.

It is a stumbling block for me personally - and not only this but other scriptures too.

 

[Sonnet]

The Bible must be authoritative, if it is not, then the words of any person can substitute the words of God.

We must obey God not men.

But it is not so easy to establish the Bible as authoritative. One could legitimately do as my friend has done.

 

[God's Truth]

No - not humbleness in this context - I'm male - it's more about trying to understand Paul's reasoning (which has been explained by folk here) and why the Church is not in agreement (eg. the Anglican Church).

All denominations teach some falseness. You have to look to the written Word of God.

As for being male, you still have to humble yourself to God's words.

It is good that you care about women being unfairly judged. Can you not find reasoning in what Paul says without disregarding it all together?

Paul appears to establish an hierarchical order in a number of scriptures...and does so explicitly.

It is a stumbling block for me personally - and not only this but other scriptures too.

Are you having trouble with what Paul says because you go to a church where women lead?

I want to discuss those other scriptures with you.

Remember, Paul was speaking about the nature of women in general.

 

[God's Truth]

But it is not so easy to establish the Bible as authoritative. One could legitimately do as my friend has done.

You are right, one can easily write off some things that Paul says. Some would like to dismiss everything Paul says.

Before you write off Paul, or anything that he says, get to a more humble place, and maybe the truth will become clearer to you.

 

[God's Truth]

Making oneself more humble is a risky thing, in some people's minds. However, look at what you are being humble to. Don't be humble to what any man or women says; be humble to the written Word.

If you do not think that the Almighty God can preserve His Word exactly as it is preserved, then how mighty is God to you?

 

[Sonnet]

All denominations teach some falseness. You have to look to the written Word of God.

As for being male, you still have to humble yourself to God's words.

Indeed. I was only referring to the context of this thread.

It is good that you care about women being unfairly judged. Can you not find reasoning in what Paul says without disregarding it all together?

Yes - though it is difficult in the current egalitarian milieu and church split.

Are you having trouble with what Paul says because you go to a church where women lead?

I don't go to church and I am not a believer.

I want to discuss those other scriptures with you.

Remember, Paul was speaking about the nature of women in general.

Okay.

 

[Sonnet]

You are right, one can easily write off some things that Paul says. Some would like to dismiss everything Paul says.

Before you write off Paul, or anything that he says, get to a more humble place, and maybe the truth will become clearer to you.

I'm not dissing Paul, yet.

 

[Sonnet]

Making oneself more humble is a risky thing, in some people's minds. However, look at what you are being humble to. Don't be humble to what any man or women says; be humble to the written Word.

If you do not think that the Almighty God can preserve His Word exactly as it is preserved, then how mighty is God to you?

And yet is it necessary for a book - the bible - to be 100% accurate? One would think that one could be a believer without scripture as Abraham etc.