Browsed by
Category: 1 Timothy 2

What “law” does Satan agree with?

What “law” does Satan agree with?

Comments 3 comments

What “law” does Satan agree with?

I should call this post Part Four of “Does God have one unique law?” but instead I chose to make it a “unique” post of its own. Let me ask you, do you believe that there are any laws of God that Satan agrees with? Apparently he is in full agreement with the “law” that forbids godly Christian women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men.

Let’s see how this works itself out:

Satan loves it when men and women teach false doctrine, but he hates it when anyone teaches correct biblical doctrine because the teaching of correct biblical doctrine thwarts his purpose to infiltrate the church with false doctrine. The teaching of correct biblical doctrine immunizes Christians from error. It also opens their eyes to the deception that lies within satanic doctrines. Does Satan like that? Absolutely not! Satan does not want his lies exposed and he fights long and hard to stop the teaching of true doctrine. …

Read More Read More

The case of the battling proof texts Part Two

The case of the battling proof texts Part Two

Comments 2 comments

In part one, we discussed the fact that the Bible does not contradict itself so when a complementarian has a “proof text” that is used to prove that women are not allowed to teach the Bible to men, they must also deal with the apparent contradictions of this view. Here are some of the contradictions that need to be answered:

1. 1 Timothy 2:12 is the only verse in the Bible that seems to suggest that women are not allowed to teach men. Since Paul commended the Bereans for checking his doctrine by the measuring stick of the Old Testament, what Old Testament scripture would they have turned to that confirmed the prohibition disallowing women from teaching the bible to men?

2. If 1 Timothy 2:12 is a universal prohibition, why would Paul word God’s universal law with the words “I do not allow”? Where else did God ever give a universal prohibition with the words of a man saying “I (the man) do not allow”?

3. If women are said to be more susceptible to deception than men, why are women allowed to teach other women (who by their nature would also be susceptible to deception) and young children (who by their age would also be susceptible to deception)? Why would they only be stopped from teaching men (who would be the very ones who would be able to correct them if men are the ones who are not susceptible to deception)?

4. Since Paul’s concern in leaving Timothy behind in Ephesus was to stop the false teachers, what reason did Paul give to stop godly Christian women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men? Why would Paul have not mentioned in chapter one that he left Timothy behind to stop the false teachers and the women from teaching men?

5. If God does not want the teaching gifts of women to be used for the benefit of men, then doesn’t this make women’s teaching inferior to men’s teaching? How can a woman’s gifts be equal to a man’s gifts if he cannot benefit from her spiritual gifts?

6. If a group of men are not allowed to be taught by a woman, why is a single man allowed to be taught by a woman? Can you explain why Paul’s prohibition stopping “a woman” from teaching “a man” is not applicable for a single woman teaching a single man?

7. In Acts 18:26 Priscilla is said to have taught Apollos and corrected his doctrine. What scripture explains why Priscilla was allowed to teach Apollos? Was the universal prohibition to stop women from teaching men given before Priscilla taught Apollos or after she taught him?

The case of the battling proof texts, Part One

The case of the battling proof texts, Part One

Comments 2 comments

Battling proof texts = a real problem

One of the things that bugs me when Christians have discussions about the women’s issue is the point when they are at loggerheads regarding “proof texts”. One person says they have their “proof text” scripture and so they are not willing to listen to what the other person has to say. The other person also has their “proof texts” and also isn’t willing to budge. However proof texting is simply not good enough. While you may have one verse that seems to agree with you, you also need to deal with the texts that don’t agree with you. This is the point where many people give up. They hold onto their proof text and stubbornly refuse to look outside of their already made-up mindset.

So how do we handle the situation when we come up against someone who is holding onto a wrong interpretation because of their “proof text”? What we need to do is to look carefully at their proof text and examine it within its entire context. That entire context may be broader than the chapter it is in and may include the entire book of the Bible that it is included in. Why is this important? It is important because if we do battle with our “proof texts” we are in essence saying that the Bible contradicts itself.  Do you believe that? I don’t. So now here comes the challenge – instead of retreating to your corner with your proof text, how about proving that the Bible doesn’t contradict itself? …

Read More Read More

Why was Adam’s sin more serious than the sin of Eve? Part Two

Why was Adam’s sin more serious than the sin of Eve? Part Two

Comments 16 comments

Adam’s treason was serious

While we have seen from part one that Adam’s sin was said to have been a deliberate transgression of the covenant and as a result it was a treacherous act against God (Hosea 6:7) where does that leave the seriousness of Eve’s sin?

God has made a dividing line between those sins which come from a deliberate defiance against God and those sins which are done unintentionally. Numbers 15:22, 27, 30, 31 says:

‘But when you unwittingly fail and do not observe all these commandments, which the LORD has spoken to Moses… Also if one person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering… But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt will be on him.’

If one sins unintentionally, it is still a sin, but there is provision given for grace to cover this sin. 1 Timothy 2:14 says that Eve was deceived and fell into sin unintentionally through that deception.

And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

…

Read More Read More

Why was Adam not deceived?

Why was Adam not deceived?

Comments 32 comments

1 Timothy 2:13, 14 show that the first creation of Adam is connected to the fact that Adam was not deceived. Why was Adam not deceived? If the Hebrew text shows that God created the animals in two creative acts – one before Adam was created and one after Adam was created (but before Eve was created) – then we can understand that Adam had knowledge about the huge difference between God and creation that kept him safe from deception. See my summary of the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passage explained in 20 short points posted here to understand the complete context of what we will be talking about in this post.

The discussion has taken on a question of whether animals could have been created after Adam if the old earth view is considered or if only a young earth model could fit the context. I will be posting several comments that came in under the 1 Timothy 2 passage and placing them under this post so that they can be answered here. I will then take each question and comment on them as time permits in my schedule.

Does God have one unique law? Part Three

Does God have one unique law? Part Three

Comments 9 comments

God’s one unique law? Part three

In this part three of “Does God have one unique law?” we will be discussing the last set of circumstances that set apart the “law” that complementarians say God made that forbids godly Christian women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men. It is our desire to point out that all of these unique circumstances that set apart this “law” as something completely unique from all of God’s other laws should cause us to see “red flags” regarding making 1 Timothy 2:12 a universal law.

If we look at the entire context of 1 Timothy chapters 1 and 2 we are able to clearly see a context of deception and false teachers that Timothy was left behind in Ephesus to deal with, therefore we should be very cautious in using one verse taken out of its context to condemn all godly Christian women who obey God by using their gift of teaching to include men.

In the last two articles where we have been discussing this unique “law”, we have discovered that God has certain characteristics concerning his laws that are common to all of God’s laws. …

Read More Read More

Does God have one unique law? Part Two

Does God have one unique law? Part Two

Comments 12 comments

God God have one unique law? Part 2 Is there a second witness?

Complementarians have stated that God has a law that forbids godly Christian women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men. This law, they say, is revealed in 1 Timothy 2:12. Since we saw in part one that this law is foreign to the Old Testament, let’s have a look at the New Testament to see if there is a second witness to this law.

Paul stated that repetition is for our safety. Philippians 3:1 says:

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things again is no trouble to me, and it is a safeguard for you.

Paul knew the importance of repetition. Every time doctrine is repeated and every time a prohibition is restated, we have a verification of the facts. Cults often take one scripture out of context and twist the meaning. When a fact is repeated, it is less likely that the fact can be disregarded or disputed. Repetition is indeed necessary for our safety.

So since we know that the “law” that forbids godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men is not stated in the Old Testament and would not have been a tutor for the women in the early church, is there a repetition of this “law” in the New Testament anywhere? No there is not. Now isn’t that odd? Every single “law” in the bible is verified by a second witness, except for this one. For more discussion on the necessity of having a second witness click here. …

Read More Read More

What does 1 Timothy 2:11-15 mean?

What does 1 Timothy 2:11-15 mean?

Comments 86 comments

Summary of 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in its context

I was challenged to present my view of 1 Timothy 2:11-15 on another blog and I thought it would be good to summarize my view on my own blog. Here is the teaching from “Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?” our DVD series on the hard passages of scripture on the women’s issue, presenting the 1 Timothy 2 passage in a nutshell. Below the summary are links to my 4 DVD set for free on YouTube.

  1. In context, Paul is dealing with false deceived teachers who are teaching false doctrine (1 Tim. 1:3, 7)
  2. Paul did not leave Timothy behind in Ephesus to stop the false teachers AND to stop all women who are teaching correct biblical doctrine – he only left Timothy behind to stop the false teachers from teaching false doctrine (1 Tim. 1:3)
  3. Paul says that he too had been deceived and he received mercy because of his fighting against the church was because he was ignorant of the truth and he had been deceived (1 Tim 1:13, 16)
  4. Paul differentiates between those who were teaching false doctrines because they were ignorant and deceived (1 Tim. 1:3, 7) and those who were deliberate deceivers (1 Tim. 1:19, 20)
  5. Paul names the deceivers (1 Tim. 1:20) but he does not name the ones who are deceived (1 Tim. 1:3, 6)
  6. Paul gives instructions to Timothy regarding how the men and women who claim godliness should conduct themselves in the church while they are in the midst of the false teachers (1 Tim. 2:1-10)
  7. All Christians should be praying for the lost even those who are lost in their midst – those who are embroiled in false doctrine (1 Tim. 2:1-4)
  8. The Christian men in the congregation are not to handle the false teachers with argumentation that might come out even in their prayers (1 Tim. 2:8)
  9. The women in the congregation who lay claim to godliness (1 Tim. 2:10) need to handle this false teacher situation with prayer as well (1 Tim. 2:9 “likewise” links back to prayer) and continue to produce good works (1 Tim. 2:10) and not expect that it is their appearance with elaborate dressing that will show forth the godly example, but their godly works (1 Tim. 2:8-10)
  10. Paul then abruptly changes from the godly men and women (plural) to the singular form of woman and man and deals with a problem of false teaching and a false teacher.
  11. Before Paul gives the prohibition, he gives the solution to one of the problems in the church. Paul instructs that “a woman” is to be given the opportunity to learn. This identifies the problem that she is not one of the deceivers, but one of the deceived. Paul never educates the deceivers – he names them, exposes them and shuns them. His solution to deception is education in sound doctrine and he never ever identifies the deceived.
  12. Paul tells Timothy that he is not allowing “a woman” to teach or authenteo “a man”. It is out of context to even consider that Paul is here stopping godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine. In context the prohibition can only be the stopping of false doctrine and stopping a false teacher. (1 Tim. 2:12)
  13. We know this is false teaching that is being stopped because Timothy’s mandate to stop the teachers was only for false teachers. Also in the example given later of why the teaching is to be stopped, Paul ties the prohibition into the example of the first deceived woman (1 Tim. 2:14)
  14. Whenever gune and aner are mentioned together in scripture in any type of relationship, they are always translated as husband and wife. Verse 12 should be translated as a single wife teaching/influencing her husband.
  15. Paul has several times not identified people by calling them “a man” yet the context clearly identifies the “a man” as a specific person (2 Cor. 12:2, 5; 1 Cor. 5:1) 1 Timothy 2: 11, 12 follows that example as two people are called “a woman” and “a man” without naming them. They are not named because the wife is one of the deceived and Paul never identifies the deceived ones by name.
  16. Paul identifies the reason why the first man was not deceived and why the woman was. He refers us back to Genesis to discover the reason by stating that the man was created first and was not deceived and the woman was created second was deceived (1 Tim. 2:13, 14 and Gen. 2:8, 19) See Genesis 2:8, 19 in the Apostle’s Bible which is the modern English version of the Greek Septuagint where it is quite clear the education Adam had before Eve was created.
  17. The grammar from 1 Timothy 2:15 requires the identification of a single female to refer back to “a woman” from verse 12. The “she” from verse 15 cannot be Eve because the tense is future and Eve is dead.
  18. The only “she” in this entire passage that verse 15 can refer back to is “a woman” from verse 12. “She” and “they” are given instructions regarding her salvation and it is future tense.
  19. 1 Tim. 2:15 gives the answer as to whether the deceived woman can receive salvation even though she has been deceived by false doctrine. She (refer back to verse 12 the deceived Ephesian woman) will be saved through the Messiah born of the woman (the childbearing which is a noun and not a verb), if they (refer back to verse 12 the deceived Ephesian woman and her husband) continue on in their faith in God, love for the Savior, holiness, and self-control to stay away from false doctrine. This is how one deceived woman will be saved (and is a pattern for the salvation of all deceived teachers).
  20. Summary: Paul was not making a universal prohibition that stopped godly women from teaching sound doctrine to men. He was stopping one of the false teachers in the assembly from taking her Christian husband down the proverbial garden path towards the forbidden fruit.

View “Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?” for free

For a full media production of this passage along with the other hard passages of scripture on the women’s issue, we have placed our entire 4 DVD set called Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free? for free on YouTube.

Part 1s & 2 can be found here.

Part 3 can be found here.

Part 4 can be found here.

Parts 5-7 can be found here

A fuller version of my article on 1 Timothy 1:11-15 by clicking here. To purchase the 4 DVD set of Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free? go to our website here.

Does this exegesis make sense?

Does God have one unique law? Part One

Does God have one unique law? Part One

Comments 4 comments

Does God have one unique law?

If complementarians are right in their interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:12, then God must have one completely unique law. This “law” forbidding women from teaching the bible to men is not like any other law in the bible.

All of God’s laws have several things in common. Every law is able to be traced back to its origin in the Old Testament.

Laws traced back to OT on Women in Ministry blog by Cheryl Schatz

All prohibitions that are God’s law written in the New Testament are traceable back to the Old Testament law.

But it is an odd thing about the law about women not teaching men-

It cannot be traced back to the Old Testament. There is no connection there at all! Now isn’t that odd? The 1 Timothy 2 “prohibition” about stopping women from teaching the bible to men is a unique law, the only”law” that cannot be traced back to the Old Testament! …

Read More Read More

Godly women need to repent?

Godly women need to repent?

Comments 2 comments

My heart goes out to Pastors who are so engrained in tradition that they can easily justify sending godly women to hell. This past weekend I spoke with a Pastor from a denomination that does not believe that women are allowed to teach the bible to men. I asked him several questions regarding his view and his answers were very eye-opening to me.

1. I asked him if there was a law that forbid godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men and he said yes. (Yet every law of God comes from God alone and is never put into the words of a man saying “I do not allow”. God’s laws are clear, understandable, enforceable and they always have a second or third witness because God’s law are always repeated in scripture.)
2. I asked him if disobeying that “law” is sinning against God and he answered yes.

3. I asked him if I teach the bible to men and then do not repent of this sin before I die will I go to hell. He said yes.

Think about this – I will go to hell for teaching correct biblical doctrine! This has nothing to do immorality or a hatred of God. This has everything to do with operating in my God-given gifts. Yet this tradition says that I will go to hell for refusing to kick men out of my bible studies. Otherwise I must act in a prejudicial way towards my dear brothers in Christ so that God doesn’t send me to hell. How Satan must laugh at the church when our traditions have become a cause of separating brothers and sisters in Christ. Women have so much to give to the body of Christ and it is our desire to be allowed to share this knowledge with our brothers.

Audio talk now available online

Audio talk now available online

Comments 5 comments

On October 20, 2006 I gave a talk on the women’s issue at a convention of ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses. The talk was roughly based on questions that I had received from a Pastor who had watched my DVD “Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?” He had asked me some questions that were not covered by the hard passages on women from WIM. In my talk I answer the challenges against women teaching the bible to men that the Watchtower makes as well as the challenges from some Christian pastors. You can download the audio file at Jehovah’s Women on Trial mp3 file or play a streaming version at Jehovah’s Women on Trial mp3 streaming version.

Is there a law that forbids women from teaching men?

Is there a law that forbids women from teaching men?

Comments 12 comments

Q: Isn’t there a law in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 that forbids women from teaching the Bible to men? Why are you disregarding this law?

A: There are many who take 1 Timothy 2:11-15 as a law that forbids women from teaching the bible to men and therefore forbids them from ministering in the church using their God-given gifts. However we need to test this “prohibition” to see if it is a situation in the Ephesian church (a local situation) that Paul is stopping or if it is a law that Paul is establishing for the body of Christ. Up until 1 Timothy 2 was written, there was not even one scripture that says that women are not allowed to teach the Bible to men. Is Paul constructing a new law for the church? Well, let’s test that. …

Read More Read More

Doesn’t 1 Timothy 1:3 list only males as false teachers?

Doesn’t 1 Timothy 1:3 list only males as false teachers?

Comments 3 comments

Q: In WIM you say that 1 Timothy 1:3 “charge some that they teach no other doctrine” means people male or female. However isn’t the technical grammar of “some” as singular masculine?

A: This is an excellent question and I am glad that you asked this. Although 1 Timothy 1:3 has a generic meaning of male or female, the fine points of the grammar show that the Greek is singular masculine. However this grammar does not exclude females. …

Read More Read More

Isn’t it a sin for a woman to teach men?

Isn’t it a sin for a woman to teach men?

Comments 0 Comment

Q: Doesn’t Paul’s command in 1 Timothy 2:12 for women not to teach men show that to disobey this command is a sin?

A: That’s a great question. In 1 Timothy 2:12 we need to determine what the command is and who the command is to. To determine these two things, we refer you back to the section on 1 Timothy 2:12 in the DVD “Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?” Now to the question about sin. If one interprets this passage as meaning that all women are not allowed to teach the bible to men, then one would have a very serious dilemma about the charge of sin in this passage. …

Read More Read More

Isn’t “a woman” from 1 Timothy 2 clear that she is “generic woman”?

Isn’t “a woman” from 1 Timothy 2 clear that she is “generic woman”?

Comments 0 Comment

Q: You say that “a woman” in 1 Timothy 2:11 & 12 is the same terminology as Paul calling “a man” living in sin in 1 Corinthians 5. Wouldn’t you have to admit that the normal grammatical reading in 1 Corinthians 5 which says that Paul is talking about a particular man, not “all men”, is clearer there than in the passage in 1 Timothy 2 talking about “a woman” not meaning “all women”?

A: Absolutely, yes, I agree. That is why the 1 Corinthian 5 passage is not considered a difficult passage. 1 Timothy 2 has many difficult elements and it has been considered a difficult passage throughout church history. …

Read More Read More

Would your arguments have strength without 1 Timothy 2:15?

Would your arguments have strength without 1 Timothy 2:15?

Comments 0 Comment

Q: It also seems that 1 Timothy 2:15 is crucial for your interpretation. The word ‘she’ is a definite point in your favor. However, without this verse (being that it’s very difficult historically) do you think you’d have the strength in your argument as you do now?

A: Yes, 1 Timothy 2:15 is a very strong point in our argument. It is very important because Paul draws all his conclusions that he has systematically defended in the previous verses, and ties them all together in this one verse. Many Pastors will be blunt and say that they have no idea why Paul put this verse in the passage. …

Read More Read More

%d bloggers like this: