Are most of you stay at home wives and mothers?

My primary concern with using Titus 2 as a contemporary paradigm for our social structure is that a few verses after instructing women Paul gives clear instructions to slaves.

Joshua

 

Joshua, I am curious about something. If you don't believe that women are instructed in God's word to be keepers at home in this day in age, I am sure that you are don't believe that they are to be instructed by aged women to:

• of good things
  to be sober
  love their husbands
  love their children,
  to be discreet
  to be chaste
  to be good
  to be obedient to their own husbands

I hope you'll take some time and consider how unlikely it is that women are not to love their husbands and children, are not to be discreet, are not to be chaste, are not to be good, are not to be obedient to their own husbands. What an unholy, ungodly picture that it is!

Consider that if a woman is not to be obedient to her husband in this day and age (from Titus 2), then neither are men love their wives. See Ephesians 5 wherein women are taught to be subject to their husbands and husbands are taught to love their wives and to cherish them.

Julia
your fellow Georgian

 

Julia,

If I were to say, "the Earth is round and the Sun orbits it" you because you disputed the orbit of the Sun wouldn't mean you were disputing the roundness of the Earth.

Likewise, I can recognize that some of Paul's advice must be contextual (otherwise he wouldn't be giving advice about slaves) without throwing it all out.

Joshua

 

BTW, that same word servant from Titus 2:9 is the same word servant used in 1 Peter 2:16 that says: (1 Pet 2:16 KJV) As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

The can mean slave, but also is bondman or servant. Could this word not mean one who is hired to work for another?

We see the word again here with the same meaning:

(Phil 1:1 KJV) Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

Strong's says that this word can be figurative or literal, voluntary or involuntary, and denotes subjection or subverviency.

A servant, in the Webster's dictionary, is one that serves others; one that performs duties about the person or home of a master or personal employer.

I do not believe that Titus 2:9 refers specifically to slaves as you suggest.

Just food for thought.

Julia

 

From the Bauer-Arndt-Gingrinch entry for /doulos/ - 'servant' for 'slave' is largely confined to biblical translation and early American times...

Particularly used in conjunction with /despotais/, /doulos/ is slave.

Joshua

 

Call me dense, but so what? He's talking to different people in different roles in life. Or am I wrong? He was talking to older men, then older women, then young women, then young men, then servants. Which had different roles to in the household at the time. What would that have to do with not using it like it says Joshua? I don't get it, unless I'm connecting it wrong, which I very well could be.
Gina

 

Gina, my point is that some are taking Paul's instructions for how to be good homemakers as a command from God that women should all be homemakers today. If that's the case, then Paul's instructions to slaves mean that the citizens of our enemy nations should become slaves.

Joshua

 

That is laughable to say the least Joshua. The verse says

. That is not telling someone to become someone else's slave! How in the world do you get your explanation of that verse?! It doesn't even make sense.

Even if the word servant in the verse did mean slave, it is simply telling those slaves to quietly obey their masters and do a pleasing job without disputing. However, verse 5 specifically defines a woman's role. The only thing verse 9 is doing is giving instruction for the conversation (conduct) of a slave (servant).

Julia

 

Julia, in a time when the only career open to women was homemaking, Paul gives very specific advice on how to be a good homemaker. That is not the same as saying that women should be homemakers for all time.

If it were, then Paul's advice on how to be a good slave should be considered an endorsement of slavery as part of the social order as well.

Joshua

 

KeeperOfMyHome seemed to have some good points. The bible is not dated to a certain time, yes things in the world do change with the generations but solid principles from the word of God still remain the same - this is what I believe. Just because he talks about servants after the woman should not mean that we exclude parts of these writings. I for one work outside of the home right now and I believe the verses giving instruction to servants apply to me and my behavior toward my employer, I never thought of it as referring to a slave, just those that are working under someone else, so yea I guess slaves would fit in that category, but so would a lot of other people.

 

Molly, I actually apply the same hermeneutic to every pericope of Scripture that I read. I'm sorry that you find it inconsistent, but as long as it results from prayerful study and the preponderance of Christian scholarship is on my side; then I'm not too concerned.

Personally, though, I think you are the one who is being inconsistant. If Paul's advice to the homemaker's of his era is intended to mean that all women should be homemakers for all times; then you should likewise take Paul's advice to slaves to mean that all people who meet the criteria that determined slaves in Paul's day should be slaves even today.

I'm not saying disregard Paul's instructions. I'm saying place them in the appropriate context.

Joshua

 

The question on the topic of this forum asked if most of us were stay at home wives, and mothers . Since it is beginning to drift into yet another debate, and on to its fourth page, it will be closed down this PM!

Joy ~ Moderator

 

Joy, probably a good idea, but don't feel compelled to do so on my account. Now that the debate part of this thread has gone full circle (twice) I'm dropping out. I had simply popped in to point out that there is considerable diversity among baptists regarding gender roles.

Joshua

 

...among Baptists, perhaps, but the Bible is very clear on gender roles starting with the creation of woman.

It is the policy of the moderators to close topics that vear off course or become too lengthy. If it appears that this subject often gets closed down, well, you are right. It is one that generally stirs up the masses, thus generating lengthy threads. No one person is being singled out. Feel free to open another topic and continue the discussion if so led.

Joy ~ Moderator