One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (KJV)
My question is regarding the adjectives in this statement concerning the qualifications of the bishop.
"One that ruleth well his own house" is masculine singular
"having his" is masculine singular
"children" is neuter plural
"in subjection" is feminine singular
"with all gravity" is feminine singular
I have always been under the impression that the adjectives should be in the same gender and number as the nouns they modify. In this verse that is not true. Is there any significance to the change in gender? Does one or both of the adjectives modify the subject (one that ruleth) as opposed to the object (children)? Does anyone know of other examples of a gender change between the adjectives and nouns they modify?
I recently heard someone take the position that the first adjective refers to the children and the second to the parent. In other words he should rule his house well with all gravity and bring his children into subjection.
I have searched but all the online resources I found indicate very few exceptions to the gender/number rule and this example does not fall into those exceptions.
Thanks for your thoughts.
1 Timothy 3:4 Help on adjectives
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by KeithS, Aug 6, 2008.
Page 1 of 2
-
Okay as a person who doesnt do the gender thing, and well since I am a single mom with kids. This is where the bible bugs me because today in the 21st century houses are not ran by just the man as in my case they are run by the woman as well and this is where it irks me because a woman can do what a man can do. Okay hit me with the pitchforks I dont care. :tonofbricks:
-
-
-
-
But let's consider several issues:
1. The Bible teaches that women play an indispensable role in the household, but that men are the ones whom God has charged with responsibility. Single mothers do have to rule their own household however. This verse teaches no different.
2. This passage is about qualifications for pastor, not about ruling households. It is masculine because only men are considered eligible to be pastors. It says nothing whatsoever about a woman ruling her household well.
3. Women can't do everything men can do. And men can't do everything women can do. It is neither biblical nor is it experiential. -
Do you mean by this that while the chapter touches on ruling households, it is given as a qualification for an elder/pastor. So the subject of the verse in its context is the qualifications for elders, one of which is that an elder/pastor must rule his own house (wife and children) well.
RB -
Yes, that is correct, RB.
-
-
superwoman....you are indeed super for how you handle your family, being a single mother. I think your confusion with this entire gender thing is that you immediately become offended as if people believe in gender roles because of some sort of sexist bent, or a degrading view of women. On the contrary, most people (there are always a couple of nuts out there) believe strongly in the separate gender roles because of honest interpretation of the bible....not because they don't think you have the ability, or work ethic, to lead and care for your home. Try not to get so uppity over this. Try and probe around and seek after the reasoning for the bible being interpreted this way.....you may become a little more understanding, even if you still disagree. -
There's a number of single woman households scattered throughout the Scriptures.
In a pinch, we can all perform the responsibilities of the opposite sex but we were designed with specific roles to play.
...and doing dishes isn't included under the gender specifications.
This is from a new resource of mine: The Lexham High Definition New Testament
This is how the author breaks up the verse:
Therefore an overseer must
• be above reproach,
• the husband of one wife,
• sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
• not a drunkard,
• not violent but gentle,
• not quarrelsome,
• not a lover of money.
• He must manage his own household well,
• with all dignity keeping his children submissive,
[Runge, S. (2008; 2008). The Lexham High Definition New Testament: ESV Edition.
Logos Research Systems, Inc.]
Your question had me running to my bookshelves for a Greek grammar.
Eeeek, I can't find any! Plenty of Hebrew grammars but I can't find one for Greek.
Well that will have to be fixed (any suggestions?)
Rob -
-
-
Paul has set up a parallelism with strongly negative attributes on one side and their positive counterpart on the other side. NOT given to wine, but moderate or temperate. NOT a brawler or striker, but "unquarrelsome". NOT given to filthy lucre or dishonest gain, but "uncoveteous" or the idea of not a hoarder of money. I found it interesting.
And all of my grammars are packed away. I need to fix that. -
Seriously. Take my advice. Do a little seeking with why people feel so strongly about gender roles. I think you'll find that it comes from honest interpretation (whether you agree with the interpretation, or not). It does not come from any idea that says women can't do what men can.
You are a little too obsessed with proving yourself. -
There are many things that men do that women should not do.
The unisex and feminist movements were ungodly, and rebellious movements of our day that led to immodesty and a general pattern of rebellion.
Burkas were instituted by the Muslims after 600 A.D. They are not Christian apparel, and have nothing to do with Christianity. Do you know what a burka is?
Study 1Cor.11. Women were required to wear a head covering during the service of the church. Obviously, outside of the church service she was free from wearing a head covering. Throughout history from about forty years ago and beyond I can remember that all the women in both Catholic and Protestant churches wore head coverings (hats) to church. What has changed? Not the Bible. It is the feminist movement, an ungodly rebellious attitude toward the Bible. In eastern nations today, believers still wear the head covering in their church services. Only in our so-called western civilized nations are we not civilized enough to obey the command to wear a head covering.
At any rate, the command only applies to a church service. The burka is a head to toe covering that is to be worn all the time. It is a Muslim dress, and never existed at the time of Christ.
However, when children were free from the home there were some that went into their own business. Lydian (Acts 16), for example was a seller of purple. She was a business woman. But there is no indication that at that time she had a family to take care of with any small children.
Proverbs 16:25 There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
I feel sorry for you that you are not willing to follow the Bible in all that it says. Your attitude towards the Bible and towards God in general, by what you have written in your post are very telling. -
2. You mean a woman who decied not to follow the scriptures? How do you know such women are christians, or even claim to be? People who do not like scripture and intend on not following it, and think it isn't for them for whatever easons are usually not christians, and if they are they aren't living in the wil of God, they're making it up as they go.
It all sounds like anti God radical feminism. -
------- -
-
When I became a believer, I was a single mom. That made me the spiritual head of the household because there was no husband/father in the house (and the father was an unbeliever and had left the city).
I suggest you look at this site:
http://www.cbmw.org/
It is hard being a single mother as a Christian because so much of the church addresses family as though there is a husband, so I understand how it can be. I often felt very left out of things. However, it is essential to search the Bible and abide by God's word and way of doing things. I think maybe you are defensive because you've been hurt, and I understand that very well, too. Try not to let that get in the way of seeing what God says, however.
Page 1 of 2