1 Timothy 2:12 should a woman teach a man

Define "having authority" for me. I have ask this question in several threads and to date have not received any definition. I am beginning to believe this is a work, like inerrancy, that people like to throw out, but for which there is no generally agreed upon definition.

I agree that the phrase "teach or exercise authority" is two different things, two different meanings. The word "or" makes a huge difference. If Paul has said, "teach and exercise authority" it would be a much stronger case for their meaing one and the same.

In the following sentence I mean no disrespect for anyone and especially for those on this BB that I really do not know. Now having said that I will say that I have known far too many pastors with feet of clay and I am far too much of a traditional Baptist to agree that a pastor has any authority, as I understand authority, over other Christians. The idea of having authority is a very appealing one, especially to those who like to control others, and I have seen pastors who were very proud of their "authority." To me the being proud negated any possibility of their having authority. Christ talked about being a servant, but not about having authority. The person who wants to be first must be last. I see that as being a servant with no authority, only service to God. To me only God has authority.

I appreciate you clam, rational discussion on this and I have noted it in other threads.

 

I don't think a teacher in the church has to be pastor, but it carries the same weight, which is why women are not called to it. I think all pastors are teachers but not all teachers are pastors.

I would not want to be a member of a church that allowed women SS teachers teaching God's word on a regular basis to classes with adult men in them. I've even been uncomfortable when a woman faciliated the class discussion when the teacher was absent (this happened a couple of times in my SS class but since it was temporary, I lived with it).

 

You think this is a debate? A debate is where there are two sides to a matter. There are not. This is crystal clear.

Yes, Paul was an apostle. As an apostle his "personal statements" were mandates for the church. I have already given several other examples that make this crystal clear.

HEre's what's ironic. A few weeks ago we were having a discussion about evangelism and eating with people. You insisted that the lack of clarity of Scripture was in your favor. Here, you take something crystal clear against you and explain it away. It shows that for you the Bible is apparently just a tool from which you pick and choose to support your own preconceived beliefs.

No, I am not. It is what we do when we love God and his word more than anything else. We stand up for it. The most unloving thing I could for you is to allow you to continue in wrong belief. I refuse to do that. When you do not believe what God says, you need to repent.

 

I see that as God commanding them what to teach, but I do not see their teaching as being commands. It is teaching, it is imparting knowledge and truth. I agree the word command means authority, but it is God who commands and it is God who has authority.

An analogy ... realizing that all analogies break down at one point or another.

A man teaches a child ... God is our father ... and commands him to use that knowledge. The child goes to his sibling and teaches him/her the same thing. Can that child command his sibling to work for him. No for the father had commanded the child, not his sibling.

 

In the context of teaching, it means telling people what to believe and how to live. It is telling people the truth of Scripture and how to apply it to life. In other context, it means to have rule over.

Which, as I pointed out, doesn't help you. It means that even if I am wrong about teaching=having authority, then my point doesn't change. The Bible says she can't do either.

I am not sure that is a traditional Baptist position. But perhaps you are thinking of some application of authority that the Bible doesn't speak of.

The Bible describes the pastor as an overseer of the flock, one who has charge, one who rules. It is a delegated authority from God, but it is hard to call it anything other than authority, it seems to me.

 

If teaching carries the same weight as pastor, then why are men allowed to teach? They have to be pastors to teach, right?

Why did you live with it? You should have left, if you believe it is a sin for a woman to teach a man.

 

Pastor Larry, Annsni

Larry...

Ann...

The scripture is indeed clear regarding this topic.

Although I am not a "Church of Christ" person (I am Baptist), this material is pretty good regarding the scriptures view of this topic...

http://www.christistheway.com/2007/20070901d.html



:godisgood:

 

Hello, Amy! Because men are given leadership roles in the church. God created an order of headship - this is clear in several passages such as:

This goes back to Genesis and the order of creation. Just in case men think they can abuse this or that it means they are superior, a few verses further down Paul writes:

From this passage, and others, we can derive the principles that men and women are equal in value, equal in God's eyes, men should not abuse women, BUT men do have a headship over women.

Eph 5.23 reiterates this headship:

I highly recommend this website which explains this topic in more depth. It is a subject worth studying from what the Bible says, not what we think or what we think the case should be (the link goes to the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood):
http://www.cbmw.org/

Also, I recommend this article by Ron Rhodes, a Christian author (and also friend of mine):
http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Feminism.html

He addresses the larger issue of feminism but successfully refutes all the arguments for women teaching or pastoring (I know you reject the latter).

First of all, she was not teaching, she was facilitating a discussion. I was on the fence as to whether or not this was excercising leadership but decided it was not or that at least it was a gray area. I did consider not going but decided to go as I did not want to be divisive. As it turned out, she did not do much as the class is quite talkative and we carried on pretty much by ourselves with no problem!

 

This is an excerpt from the article by Ron Rhodes at http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Feminism.html:

He addresses other passages as well.

I have explored at length, over several years, both the pros and cons of this issue, so I urge all those who think it' s okay for women to teach to carefully explore the biblical arguments against it, such as given in this very thoughtful article. We should not just give an opinion based on what we think is right but explore the biblical principles carefully. It takes time, but it's worth it as all bible study is profitable. :flower:

 

I will continue to study this issue as I have firmly decided I don't know everything.

 

Good for you, Amy! I figured you'd say something like that as you seem very ready to study, discuss and learn! :thumbs:

I enjoy being on threads with you.

 

To rule over, as in "hen-pecked", to be emasculated.
I can think of nothing more awful or embarrasing than a woman bossing a man and he's like "Yes dear, no dear, 3 bags full, dear" :type: After all, woman was created to be man's helpmeet, not to be a masculine feminist.

 

Goldie,

But thats not what we are discussing. What you just described is awful....just as awful as women who feel they must always be led by their husbands in all things, and always *supposedly* under his "authority" because she is so dependant and unable to get by without His "leadership".

We arent discussing any of those errors.

We are discussing women being teachers of the scriptures to a general audience.

The scriptures are clear that that is perfectly acceptable.

(btw, I DO believe that there are *specific times* when the leadership of the husband is scripturally warranted, but it has nothing to do with men only teaching the scriptures or women..supposedly...living their lives under the "authority" of their husbands.)


:godisgood:

 

Oh but it is when it comes to the pulpit and church matters. It just doesn't seem right when a woman Pastor cuckolds a man. Women can work in the ministry - but not in the aspect of having authority over men. And I think that extends to everyday life as well.

And by saying all of the above, I'm not implying that women should be brain dead. Women should just respect the place God has given them. If you look at some of the Pentecostal women preachers - their husbands are wimps - it's like the woman bringing home the bacon and the man being the "wife" and playing the secondary role.

 

More specifically in the verse under discussion here, define auqenthin , and explain the difference in meaning and nuance between that and exousia

 

1 Cor. 16:16
That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboureth.

Rom. 16:3
Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:

Ro. 16:12
Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord.

Phil. 4:3
help those women which laboured with me in the gospel,

 

Not sure what the point of that is Jerome. This thread is about women teachign and exercising authority over men in the church. Those verses have nothing to do with this topic.