No...that's not my question, but rather the question on ""Parchment and Pen."
"Why is it okay to think that men know so much, have so much insight, are so sensitive to all the nuances of a particular Bible passage that they can teach women in a way that women are able to learn and understand week after week but the insights and sensitivities of women are so inferior that men could/should never learn from them? Or how is this not what is being said?"
Since this is not what is being taught by most complementarians, it might be useful to note that complementarians are not monolithic (just as egalitarians are not).
It might also be useful to note that most complementarians do not teach that women are not insightful, that women are not sensitive to Scripture or that women are inferior.
Most complementarians do not teach that "men could/should never learn from them?"
From "The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood:"
"Listen to how John Piper and Wayne Grudem summarized this answer to this question. "When Paul says in I Timothy 2:12, ‘I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent,' we do not understand him to mean an absolute prohibition of all teaching by women. Paul instructs the older women to teach what is good, then they can train the younger women. And he commends the teaching that Eunice and Lois gave to her son and grandson. Proverbs praises the ideal wife because she speaks with wisdom and faithful instruction on her tongue. Paul endorses women prophesying in a church and says that men learn by such prophesying. And that members should teach and admonish one another with all wisdom as you sing songs, hymns, and spiritual songs. And then, of course, there is Priscilla at Aquilla's side correcting Apollos. It is arbitrary to think that Paul has in mind every form of teaching in I Timothy 2:12. Teaching and learning are in such broad terms that it is impossible that women not teach men and men not learn from women in some sense. There is a way that nature teaches and a fig tree teaches and suffering teaches and human behavior teaches. If Paul did not have every conceivable form of teaching and learning in mind, what did he mean? Along with the fact that the setting here is the church assembled for prayer and teaching, the best clue is by coupling teaching with having authority over men. We would say that the teaching inappropriate for a woman is the teaching of men in settings or ways that dishonor the calling of men to bear the primary responsibility for teaching in leadership. This primary responsibility is to be carried by the pastors or elders. Therefore, we think it is God's will that only men bear the responsibility for that office."
Also from CBMW:
Also, I see no need to go beyond Scripture, which does not prohibit (permits but does not mandate) prayer or testimony by a woman in the congregation nor forbid her interaction on biblical truths in a private conversation with a man (as Pricilla and Aquila with Apollos in Acts 18:26).
From another article by Wayne Grudem on CBMW:
Now regarding the question of women in the church, what actions should we put on this scale? On the left side of the scale we can put verses such as 1 Timothy 2:12, where Paul prohibits a woman from teaching or having authority over men. Since I think it is very evident from the context that Paul is talking about the assembled congregation in this passage (see 1 Tim. 2:8-10; 3:15), and he is giving principles that apply to the entire congregation (see 1 Tim. 3:1-16), I think that the left end of the scale prohibits women from teaching or having governing authority over the whole congregation.
What shall we put on the right end of the scale? Here we would put verses such as Acts 18:26, where, in a less formal setting apart from an assembled congregation, we find that Priscilla and Aquila were talking to Apollos, and "they took him and expounded to him the way of God more accurately." This situation is similar to a small group Bible study in which both men and women are participating and in that way "teaching" one another. Another verse that we can put on the right end of the scale is Titus 2:4 which tells the older women to "train the younger women to love their husbands and children..."
We see from these writings that an across the board prohibition of women teaching men is not what is being taught. Rather it is the teaching that complementarians believe that Paul is teaching that women should not teach the congregation at large, or have authority in that context.
Sue
This is incredibly comforting to me. If men don't read Latin any more then we will just eliminate the Latin Bibles of the Reformation from the history of biblical interpretation. Because God forbid that a woman teach a man anything.
I am downright embarrassed by how little anybody cares about being accurate. You do care, but you are limited in your resources. I am limited in my resources too. Do you think this is a good state of affairs?
Ellen
Because God forbid that a woman teach a man anything.
Hmmm. It's a pity you didn't read the post.
Do you think this is a good state of affairs?
There are many sad states of affairs. One of them is called "feminism".
Ellen
I am downright embarrassed by how little anybody cares about being accurate.
Just because they don't agree with you doesn't mean that they don't care about accuracy.
Just like "Theology for the Masses" that posted that all of this was post-WWII. Can I assume that I'll see you out there correcting that mistake?
Sue
I think that the left end of the scale prohibits women from teaching or having governing authority over the whole congregation.
Having governing authority is not even a remote candidate for the meaning of authentein. I did read the post.
I don't know what Theology for the Masses is or what the context of that statement was because your site was broken yesterday and I was unable to read that whole post at the time, but went back and read Dan Wallace on Erasmus et al.
So, I may have time to catch up on this. If I feel that the misconceptions presented by Theology for the Masses has affected a Bible translation and promoted a meaning for a Greek word that is not true then I will try to correct it. However, this info is new to me.
I'll go back and read that post over again now.
Sue
Got that. I think we are good on when "to have authority" came in. Once, 16th century and then again post WWII.
Now, here is the problem. Men lead the congregation. Men cannot be publicly taught by women. Men miss out on a lot of very useful information. The leadership of the church is not making use of the information which is available.
Women cannot get paid to teach men so they have fewer resources and less opportunity.
Ellen
Got that. I think we are good on when “to have authority” came in. Once, 16th century and then again post WWI
Except for the whole entire history of the church...
Now, here is the problem. Men lead the congregation. Men cannot be publicly taught by women. Men miss out on a lot of very useful information. The leadership of the church is not making use of the information which is available.
False dichotomy. Let's break it down some.
Now, here is the problem.
That would be your opinion.
Men lead the congregation. Men cannot be publicly taught by women.
I don't see the problem yet.
Men miss out on a lot of very useful information. The leadership of the church is not making use of the information which is available.
You've obviously never sat in a small group discussion with me (lol)
Women cannot get paid to teach men so they have fewer resources and less opportunity.
My dad was an elder for most of my life and I heard him teach a lot. He never got paid for it. Not one dime. Being paid for teaching has nothing to do with it.
I still don't see a problem.
Sue
My Dad neither. But at the level of scholarship and affecting changes and things like that.
I imagine you are not quiet. But think about what if women like you could go to seminary and invest in a theological education and then use it. At least some women should be able to do that. Because it should not simply be an unpaid hobby. If we believe that men can be paid to teach and lead congregations on the basis of a theological training then there must be the same opportunities for women, or women's issues will get second place. They do. At least keeping women in their place is front and centre, but scholarship by women is not favoured in some corners.
Sue
The thing is that we both had Dad's that taught in the church wthout pay. Right? But can we actually have people who learn Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German and French with no pay? Can we have people with this kind of training who are really familiar with the manuscripts for no pay?
Can we compare the man who teaches and has all the resources he wants with a woman who keeps house and reads up on these things while she nurses the baby and raises 8 kids?
Is it fair to say, well it is equal opportunity because that women can attend the women's bible study and speak there but Mr. So and So can get on TV and tell the history of Biblical interpretation from the male perspective to millions.
Ellen
But can we actually have people who learn Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German and French with no pay? Can we have people with this kind of training who are really familiar with the manuscripts for no pay?
I know so few pastors who know all those languages that it's even silly to bring up.
Can we compare the man who teaches and has all the resources he wants with a woman who keeps house and reads up on these things while she nurses the baby and raises 8 kids?
Sure - we can also compare the guy that mows the lawn of the church for no pay with Beth Moore.
The bottom line is: If it turns out that God wants men in the head leadership positions, if women are not supposed to have spiritual authority over men...
All of these are serpent questions.
Sue
The top men and the top women should be on par. There should be women involved in studying the manuscripts and teaching exegesis and translating the Bible.
If it turns out that God does not want women involved at the top levels of Biblical interpretation then he will have to remove Hulda from the Bible.
Any Biblical scholar should be able to study these languages at least. That is what they are paid for. They invest in about 8-10 years of university so they can do that. They can invest because they will be paid to teach and lead.
But if women cannot be paid to teach and lead at the same level, they cannot invest at the same level. So there is not equal opportunity to learn at the same level. They don't have the same resources. Women have access to fewer resources. Do women really want to keep it that way?
Ellen
I'm assuming you mean Hulda the prophetess (not the priestess), who had the men go in a small group (not before the congregation) and asked her counsel (much like in the post where CBMW says, "Paul endorses women prophesying in a church and says that men learn by such prophesying".
So, we have the not-a-priest(ess), prophesying in not-in-front-of-the-congregation, giving her counsel in a way that what some call the "flagship of complementarianism" says is okay.
That Hulda? She's in my Bible. And she's not leading in a congregation, she's not a priest, and Scripture doesn't say that her husband is not the authority in her household.
Sue
She was officially consulted by the priests. She was of he scholarly class. She taught the top levels.
Now, why you want to keep women out of biblical scholarship circles is something that I don't understand. Naturally this hurts me a great deal. You don't want women Bible scholars?
Ellen
Right. She was not a priest (no problem there). She did not preach in the assembly (no problem there). She was consulted by men of God privately (no problem there.)
It is not me personally that is "hurting" you - it is a belief that Christianity has taught for 20 centuries, and the Jewish community before that.
You don’t want women Bible scholars?
I adore women Bible scholars. I do not believe that they should be pastors or elders.
Ellen
Now, why you want to keep women out of biblical scholarship circles is something that I don’t understand.
Of course you don't understand it. It's not true and it's a lie for you to say it.
Sue
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to lie. I want to ask for clarification. For the most part people are able to get further education by investing in training that they can use to earn a living. That would mean being a pastor or seminary professor, for example.
Now, if a woman cannot do those things then she can't invest as much. Professors also have access to huge institutional funds and resources. For example, accessing articles on the internet. I can't do that unless I am associated with a university and that costs big bucks.
So women cannot earn or have access to resources in the same way men can. They have a real struggle participating at all. How do they do it? Often they don't get the education men have.
Ellen
Forgiven.
I don't know if you know how much most pastors make - but it's not enough to carry the financial burden of all the languages that you've described. My brother-in-law is a pastor and - I know.
Professors are not pastors or elders.
Then again...what do you want to be when you grow up? If you want to be a scholar, teach religioun at a secular university - consider it missionary work.
If you want to learn languages, teach languages.
If you want to translate languages - write notes for a study Bible. With your history and heart, write a study Bible with notes for abused and/or hurting women.
If you want to be a pastor, they don't earn enough money to continue with the resources you're talking about anyway.
If you want to be an elder...most times they don't get paid at all.
Sue
If you want to translate languages - write notes for a study Bible. With your history and heart, write a study Bible with notes for abused and/or hurting women.
Okay, I tried to post a link but it was swallowed. The name is NechaThma Leibowitz. Google her. I think there is more space for women scholars in Judaism.
Now, back to Christianity. This is hypothetical because I have too much to take care of for now. But just suppose ...
A woman wants to be a Bible scholar. She can be one in the secular university, that is true. But she cannot work on par in many seminaries. So the opportunities are restricted. Without such a job it is much harder to have access to resources. That is a fact. Professors write books as part of their job. I know, my sister has written 10 books, not best sellers but part of her secular research. She is educated as a theologian but she has never published one word on theology.
What a loss all this is to Christianity. Women are restricted. They have less opportunities. They have insights but they get marginalized. I would like to see women contribute to Bible translation. Do you think that women have no insights in that arena. Men get paid to write their books. All the important books on complementarianism were funded ahead of time.
Don't you think there should be any parity at all in scholarship?
Sue
Nechama Leibowitz - I am having a hard time somehow.
Ellen
I believe that (parity as we see it or not), God has a purpose. If I am convinced from Scripture that women should not be pastors or elders because that is God's plan, then I am good with that because God is way smarter than I am.
Sue
But what if that is not God's intent. Would you just say that about some other form of injustice like sla****y? Don't you want to stand up and say that women should be Bible scholars on par with men? I do. What if someone you loved wanted to be a Bible scholar? Would you tell her to study law or medicine instead? That is what our pastor does. Sometimes he kindly tells the woman to go to another church which will give her moral support.
Ellen
Oh yes. The other Hitler card.
No. God never said, "people, you should own slaves."
God DID say, women, be quiet in church.
You've done a pretty nice job of distracting from the text with the "authority" debate. What you don't like us to notice is that on either side of that we see, women should learn in quietness and submission, should not teach and should not speak in the assembly.
It doesn't matter what "authentein" means, it's still surrounded by women shouldn't teach in church, women should learn in submission and should keep their peace.
That is in Scripture and I'm sure that you can change out those definitions also if you'd like, or simply believe that it doesn't apply today. Another "that was then, this is now".
For me, I will follow the directive for "all the churches of the saints".
Ellen
But what if that is not God’s intent.
Sounds like "but did God really say? And that woman was deceived.
Sue
Well actually all that dominari proves is that the rule of man over woman is from the curse and there was no rule of man over woman before the curse. That is what the early church fathers always taught.
If we want to live under those conditions, well no problem. In fact, for many years, some medical practitioners actually refused anesthetic to women giving birth because woman must suffer during childbirth. I think that if we believe that woman must accept the rule of man, then woman must suffer all the pains of childbirth. I would have died of course, but that is beside the point.
These things in Gen. 3:16, are not good things.
Ellen
Paul also refers to creation (Adam was formed first). 1 Cor. 14 refers to neither.
Scripture does not forbid drugs during childbirth.
Scripture does forbid women teaching men.
I think that if we believe that woman must accept the rule of man, then woman must suffer all the pains of childbirth. I would have died of course, but that is beside the point.
You mean pain as in "`etseb"?
The one that is used elsewhere as "sorrow" or "toil"?
As in "In all toil there is profit, but mere talk(AG) tends only to poverty."
or
"It is in vain that you rise up early and go late to rest, eating the bread of anxious toil; for he gives to his beloved sleep."
Using Scripture I can refute your serpent words.
Sue
I am only mentioning where this has lead women in the past. I am not suggesting that it should be so.
There is no point in calling factual information bad names.
If it were true that God wanted woman to function as an equal to man, then this would be a good thing, it would not be a temptation to do evil. Just because something appears good to us, like using anesthetic, that does not mean God is against it.
If if appears good to a woman to function as an equal that does not mean that it is wrong.
Women were put under the power of man in Gen.3:16. We can either live with this or not. We are not to dominate man, but learn submissively. But we do not have to stay under male power.
Ellen
If if appears good to a woman to function as an equal that does not mean that it is wrong.
Does God really say a woman cannot teach?
It is written: "As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."
Sue
I know that I lived in a community that held to that. Women could not speak in church. They could only sing beneath the sound of men singing.
I did not think that complementarians follow this verse.
Many people think that this is a citation of some other law.
Others think that this was an afterthought to the epistle because it is found in the margins in some early manuscripts.
We do know that the very earliest manuscripts contain anti-female bias. FOr example, Nympha and the church in his house. Why his? Because the earliest manuscript had changed "her" to "his." Other manuscripts from other traditions still have "her."
Even conservative theologians have their concerns about 1 Cor 14. But, as I said, I have lived with silence. It is an option to consider. That is one possible interpretation.
Ellen
I believe that Scripture is sufficient.
Tony
Because it [theological education] should not simply be an unpaid hobby.
I find this disturbing. Theological eductation (whatever faith tradition you come from) should be a ministry, both to yourself, and to those you teach. After all, teaching is a spiritual act of mercy, much like feedingthe hungry is a corporal act of mercy.
I am an amateur theologian, and I enjoy sharing my knowledge with others (free of charge).