Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Timothy 2:12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Timothy 2:12 I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet [in the congregation]. |
Bible Question:
Hello Doc: I think it is interesting that "devon" asked the inital question, and no resonse has been made by that person. Oh well. But just to add some more thought to the issue of Scripture and Transculture, I have a serious question. If we follow your interpretation of how culture should cross the culture of time and years, than why not use the customs of the time of Jesus, ore even if you like go the the culture of Paul while in Rome? Much of the time period of Paul and Jesus had dietatary laws and personal, male and female cleansing regarding husband wife and their private love life. Then there was the womens laws regarding the birth of a male or female child etc. My point is there was an itermixing of religious laws and the ones of governing authorities. We live in a time when women have gained a rightful position in many areas, and some areas have gone beyond what is considered by some, to be barbaric, by killing their own child while in the womb. The numbers of baby killings is in the multi-millions just in the United States! The group I feel that has been so reluctant to even consider the possibility of the effect of past culture, on the role women have in the church, are those who fail to see the influence the culture of those who penned Scripture, while under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. Yes, I agree there is a "slippery slope" in attempting to understand what is cultural and what is to be "for believers in all time,". I do not want to appear to be unorthodox or liberal, but I personally have no desire to greet my brothers and sisters in Christ with a holy kiss. I have used some very simple illustrations, but it does get more complecated as we fully study the Scripture from the view point of, what did it mean to those it was written? What was the history of the time it was written, and how do I apply this to me today? These questions are something we must do to totally understand Scripture. Now there are many passages this would not apply, as the issue is totally clear with no added understanding will change a thing. I am sure what I have said is redundant, but none the less worth while to recall every once and a while. Blessings to you. justme |
Bible Answer: Dear Justme, You speak of women as having attained a "rightful position in many areas." Right by whose standards? Men have abdicated their proper leadership roles as holy, righteous, loving, providing examples. Either you embrace the clear command of Scripture or you discard it. Picking and choosing, based on our own sense of right, is taking God's place. You wrote, "The group I feel that has been so reluctant to even consider the possibility of the effect of past culture, on the role women have in the church, are those who fail to see the influence the culture of those who penned Scripture, while under the leadership of the Holy Spirit." The Antiochian School of Thought has always advocated that Scripture must always be interpreted in the full historical and grammatical context. That tradition stretches down to us from Augustine and the Reformers. It is embraced by most confessional churches today. The groups where you see the ordination of women are those that embrace the Alexandrian School of Thought, which does not consider the historical and grammatical context as paramount for interpretation. Instead, they use something other than Scripture on which to base authority. Liberal theology has long rejected (over 100 years) the historico-grammatical approach to Biblical interpretation. Consequently, your statement is non sequitur. The groups most likely to utilize women in positions of authority in the church are also least likely to use sound exegetical methods. The "simple illustrations" you use do not bear consideration. None of them are accompanied by the kind of detailed explanation like to that of the prohibition to women in leadership. If we were in the Middle-East, we might still "greet one another with a holy kiss." These do have very specific historical contexts. However, we can clearly see that we are to approach one another with affection. Making an effort to coerce Paul into saying something else, is far, far worse than failing to take the cultural context into account! This does not help your argument at all. Cultural considerations can add color to our understanding of the Scripture. However, they should never dictate our understanding of the Scripture. Please see my posts on sound exegetical methods. They explain the Antiochian School's approach. In Him, Doc |