All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
I do not permit a woman to teach
1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
1 Corinthians 7:8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. 10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband.
This topic has been discussed before, and I've often seen people bring up 1 Corinthians 7 as being Paul pointing out he was saying this, not God, but that in 1 Timothy 2, he doesn't qualify it as his words so it must be God's words.
As this verse came to mind, the very first word seemed to jump out in my mind...
I!
If Paul were speaking for God, wouldn't he have said, the Holy Spirit has shown me that..., or God has revealed to me that....? Those who have long been against women teaching or leading use 1 Timothy 2 as the standard. And while led by God, many in scripture also were speaking as men. It is an account of Jesus, His disciples, prophecy, creation, etc. By those who were there. When we feel led by the Spirit to write (aka - what I'm doing right now), we write about what we witness and believe. So why would we think Paul didn't also write things as he felt and believed? In places, he said God told him something or the Spirit led him, so why do we assume those things when he does not say that?
I believe this verse is exactly as stated:
I (Paul - me, myself, I...alone) do not permit a woman to teach.
After all, Paul was living in a time where women were considered lesser creatures.
Also interesting to note: Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. In this he is correct...Eve was the one who was deceived. Being the one who was personally told not to eat of the tree though, Adam WILLFULLY disobeyed and did what Eve did or told him. All we know is she gave it to him.
Another thought regarding 1 Corinthians 7. Paul said he would prefer all remain unmarried. But what did God say?
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Views: 1075
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Amanda on
-
I found this article:
Question: "Are the writings of the Apostle Paul inspired (see 1 Corinthians 7:12)?"
Answer: The bulk of conservative evangelical Christianity believes in what is called the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture, meaning that every single word of the Bible is “breathed out” by God (2 Timothy 3:16). If biblical critics can claim that 1 Corinthians 7:12 is not inspired, but rather Paul’s opinion, what other passages could they claim to be the opinion of the human author and not the commands of the divine Author? This strikes at the very heart of biblical authority.
Paul wrote this first letter to a group of Christians dwelling in the city of Corinth, a very corrupt city. Part of that corruption was due to the temple of Aphrodite, which was home to over 1,000 temple prostitutes who plied their trade on behalf of their deity. It was in this setting that Paul founded the church at Corinth. In fact, many of the congregation came out of the immoral Corinthian lifestyle. The church of Corinth was made up of ex-fornicators, ex-idolaters, ex-adulterers, ex-homosexuals, ex-thieves, and ex-drunkards.
With that as a backdrop, when Paul gets into chapter 7 of his letter, he is answering a question the church had regarding sexual relations between men and women. Given the social climate in Corinth, the Corinthians thought it would be a good thing for everyone to remain celibate. Paul agrees that celibacy is a good thing and even states that he wishes more people could be celibate as he was. Paul is not down on marriage. All he is doing is stating the obvious benefits that singleness affords for ministry opportunities. However, Paul mentions that singleness is a gift from God, and not all have the gift (v. 7). For those who are currently married, Paul tells them to remain so, and in v. 10 Paul says “not I, but the Lord.” This means that what Paul is telling the Corinthians is a direct command from Jesus. This command comes from Jesus’ teaching in the gospels, in particular, Matthew 5:32.
Finally, in v. 12, Paul addresses “mixed marriages”—those between a Christian and a non-Christian. Given the prevailing environment, Christians might be tempted to divorce their unbelieving spouses, thinking that somehow by doing so they are purifying themselves. Paul tells the believing spouse to remain with the unbeliever, with the comment that the command comes from him, not Jesus. But Paul is not offering his own opinion here. What he is saying is that Jesus never addressed this issue directly during His earthly ministry. If we search the Gospels, we will not see any direct teaching of Jesus that addresses the situation of a believing spouse married to an unbelieving spouse. But Jesus did give only one legitimate reason for divorce (Matthew 5:32; 19:19), and being married to an unbeliever was not it.
So the best answer is to see Paul as providing new revelation regarding an area that Jesus did not specifically address. That is why Paul says, “I, not the Lord.” In other words, I, not Jesus, am giving you this command, although it is based on the principles Jesus taught. As extensive as Jesus’ ministry was, He did not articulate everything regarding the Christian life. That is why He commissioned the apostles to carry on His ministry after His ascension, and that is why we have a God-breathed Bible, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:17). Paul was responsible for much new revelation, although ultimately those revelations came from the Holy Spirit. In many of his epistles, Paul reveals to us “mystery.” The word “mystery” is a technical term that signifies some previously unrevealed truth that is now revealed, such as the church being made up of both Jews and Gentiles (Romans 11:25) or the rapture (1 Corinthians 15:51-52). Paul is simply giving us additional revelation regarding marriage that Jesus didn’t elaborate on.
Recommended Resources: The Quest Study Bible and Logos Bible Software.
http://www.gotquestions.org/apostle-Paul-writings.html
-
-
Was Paul really only giving his opinion in 1 Cor 7:12-16, or was Paul sharing what Holy Spirit had revealed to Him instead of the Lord revealing it, 1 Cor 2:10?
Since it made it into the canon of the 66 books, I trust it is God-breathed and Holy Spirit inspired and therefore not just Paul's opinion but the way God views it, too.
-
Permalink Reply by Leonard T on
-
Since it made it into the canon of the 66 books, I trust it is God-breathed and Holy Spirit inspired and therefore not just Paul's opinion but the way God views it, too.
Amen
-
Permalink Reply by RoyW on
-
Great question - one of which I personally know that I do not have the answer to. I must admit it has always bothered me that we seem to take this point so lightly and dismiss it. There do seem to be some good reasons why we would go ahead and permit women pastors. My mother-in-law was a Pentecostal Holiness pastor for over fifty years. She was like a Deborah. She took churches where they could find no man to take. She was as dedicated to Christ as any person I have ever known. She and her husband raised five children who are today serving God. She had a husband that supported her ministry doing whatever he could to make enough money for the family to exist. The family was fairly poor in today's world but very powerful. I would have a very hard time saying that God had not called her.
When God set me free from the bondage of legalism, she did struggle with it but was very wise and honored Laura's and my new beliefs. She grew up in a very legalistic time and never cut her hair. Before she died she had cut her hair and was wearing pant-like clothes. Her faith was clearly in Jesus. Her children call her one of God's special saints.
Just thought I would throw this in the pot, Seek.
I do believe that God very much wants us to marry, have children and raise them to be Godly. There are some He has called to remain unmarried. I see no problem with this teaching.
-
-
I think I could tell you of other women pastors that I personally do not think should be in the head position but that might be judging. There will be those who will say that they know some men that should not either. haha
-
Permalink Reply by Seek on
-
There are men pastors that I personally think shouldn't be either. LOL
I personally don't have a problem with women teachers as I know for a fact what God has called me to do.
But my question is on the "I". As Paul stated it was HIS desire that they "all" become eunuchs, not just those God called to this, then we do know that they sometimes offered their opinions and not everything was God speaking. There are those today who are Spirit filled Christians, yet even they sometimes offer their own opinions and even can get things wrong at times. Does that mean these weren't men of God led by the Holy Spirit or that the Bible isn't useful for training and rebuking? No. But I think it does show we can often take things out of context because we don't see those words. It also doesn't mean the Bible is capable of being wrong or that it's contradictory. Paul, speaking for himself, said I. Therefore he wasn't wrong in stating his desire in things. It's a small, usually insignificant word. In this use however I find it to be very significant.
The thing is, I actually was not even studying this, nor was I reading scripture. I was working around the house on some projects. For unknown reasons, this verse jut sprang into my mind and it was like the I was in this bold pulsating emphasis to draw my attention to it.
-
-
Seek, just to make sure that I understand you correctly: you are saying that since Paul is using the word "I" it is not God saying it but Paul himself saying it. If this what you are saying?
Paul does use himself as an example from time to time such as the not marrying thing. However, he specifically says that, "I do not permit..."
I think I hear you saying that this in Paul's personal conviction. I think there is a sizable difference between your first and second illustration.
-
-
That's what I'm saying but I don't see the difference between them. In one he says what he would want (all to be eunuchs) and in the other he says what he does...not permit a woman to teach.
-
-
I am trying to get an understanding of what you are saying. Obviously, his tone is much different in the first instance from the second instance. I think what you are saying is that it is okay to ignore what Paul is saying since he is saying "I." He says, "I do not permit..." Does this mean it is okay to go ahead and ignore what he says because he says "I" rather than the Holy Spirit says?
-
-
Since Paul said he didn't permit it yet lauded some women who were obviously in ministry...which one is actually being ignored?
-
-
He wasn't saying that he didn't permit women to minister to men. He was forbidding them to teach or have authority over a man. Paul would encourage woman's ministry.
-
-
You don't see the difference between an opinion and a biblical conviction? Even if we have convictions that can be classified under giving up freedoms in Christ as described in Romans 14 and 1 Cor 8, to go against the convictions is to sin. For instance, if we feel that something we do in front of a weaker Christian is causing the person to stumble and then if we go on to do it anyway, it is a sin for us, and if we convince the weaker one to do something that in his or her mind is wrong, and the person does it, it's a sin. If we reduce what Paul is saying to just his opinions and not God's word, then we open a door of doubt about anything Paul says even the things he qualifies as being The Lord saying them. Even if this is Paul's convictions where he says "I" and not just opinions, convictions come from God. Opinions can come from the flesh, the world, fallen people, and the spiritual enemy. I don't see that these verses you've pointed out are even just convictions that Paul has. I see them as revelations to Paul from the Spirit and are for all, not just for Paul. Paul spent time being taught directly from The Lord. Afterwards, Paul relied heavily upon Holy Spirit to preach and teach. So Paul was shown things by The Lord and by Holy Spirit.
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
