Carry_Your_Name
Member
1 Timothy 2:8-15 (NKJV) reads:
I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
There're many challenging and controversial passages in the bible, this one is at the top of the list as it was written in such strong language against women and thus it had earned a bad reputation for the whole church for being misogunistic. On face value, it bars women from church leadership with no wiggle room, on top of that it also restricts women with a repressive dress code and affirms the traditional gender roles, that men are born as leaders, women are mere "helpers" for house chores and childrearing. The worst part is the reference from Gen. 2 and 3 as a theological reasoning for this instruction, that women are not only physically inferior, as Eve was created second from Adam, but also intelletually inferior, as Eve was gullible and deceived while Adam was not, despite the fact that Adam was held accountable by God for the fall, and today women vastly outnumber men in college, in some places it's as high as two women per man.
This section is not an isolated case, there're many similar instructions in Paul's letters that corroborate this message with a negative image of women that are hurtful to take in:
But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. (1 Cor. 11:3)
Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church. (1 Cor. 14:34-35)
And besides they (younger widows, applicable to modern single women) learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not. Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully. (1 Tim. 5:13-14)
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. (Eph. 5:22-24. Timothy was in charge of the Ephesian church at the time).
In the Pauline epistles, he commended Pheobe with whom he entrusted the Romans epistle; he greeted Priscilla and Aquilla who risked their lives for Paul; he addressed one church as "Chloe's household"; and back in Acts he was sponsored by Lydia of Phillipi, a seller of purple. If Paul were an authoritative chauvinist as you think he was judging by these statements, he would've betrayed all of these sisters in Christ.
This makes me wonder if we have a flawed understanding of the principle "Sola Scriptura". It's never supposed to indicate that "the bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it". We need external sources about the the cultural and historic context to get a grip on Paul's true intention with these passages. We need to zoom out to see the bigger picture, to catch the grand narrative of the bible, and critical feature in this grand narrative is POLEMIC - a strong rebuke or refutation against an established idea, practice, opinion or belief. Polemic is very common throughout the whole bible, the creation account, the garden and the flood narrative were all polemics agaisnt Sumerian mythology, the Sermon on the Mount was a polemic against the Pharisees' tradition and teaching at the time, and so were the Pauline epistles. He gave these instructions as a response to specific situations at the time, in my knowledge, such situations include: some women dressed in fancy Roman fashion and caused distraction, hence the dress code; some women spoke out of order and disrupted church service, hence the silence part; some were spreading rumors, hence the critique on gossiping - you shall not bear false witness agaisnt your neighbor! Some thought they'd better go to a nunnery to serve the Lord, this is the exact same impression the disciples got at the teaching about marraige and divorce: "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry." Paul told them no, don't abandon your prospect of a secular life just it's "secular". Also, the cultural norm in England at the time also played a part in the KJV translation.
In a recent conversation with a member on this forum, I was told to read the bible as God's personal word and divine revelation to me without weaponizing the text for any ulterior motive. That's a sound advice to me, but if this was to a lady, how would she feel when she reads these passages? If she was sexually abused, how would she feel? In a worse case, what about a woman was sexually abused by a church clergyman who uses these passages to justify his abuse?
I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
There're many challenging and controversial passages in the bible, this one is at the top of the list as it was written in such strong language against women and thus it had earned a bad reputation for the whole church for being misogunistic. On face value, it bars women from church leadership with no wiggle room, on top of that it also restricts women with a repressive dress code and affirms the traditional gender roles, that men are born as leaders, women are mere "helpers" for house chores and childrearing. The worst part is the reference from Gen. 2 and 3 as a theological reasoning for this instruction, that women are not only physically inferior, as Eve was created second from Adam, but also intelletually inferior, as Eve was gullible and deceived while Adam was not, despite the fact that Adam was held accountable by God for the fall, and today women vastly outnumber men in college, in some places it's as high as two women per man.
This section is not an isolated case, there're many similar instructions in Paul's letters that corroborate this message with a negative image of women that are hurtful to take in:
But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. (1 Cor. 11:3)
Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church. (1 Cor. 14:34-35)
And besides they (younger widows, applicable to modern single women) learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not. Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully. (1 Tim. 5:13-14)
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. (Eph. 5:22-24. Timothy was in charge of the Ephesian church at the time).
In the Pauline epistles, he commended Pheobe with whom he entrusted the Romans epistle; he greeted Priscilla and Aquilla who risked their lives for Paul; he addressed one church as "Chloe's household"; and back in Acts he was sponsored by Lydia of Phillipi, a seller of purple. If Paul were an authoritative chauvinist as you think he was judging by these statements, he would've betrayed all of these sisters in Christ.
This makes me wonder if we have a flawed understanding of the principle "Sola Scriptura". It's never supposed to indicate that "the bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it". We need external sources about the the cultural and historic context to get a grip on Paul's true intention with these passages. We need to zoom out to see the bigger picture, to catch the grand narrative of the bible, and critical feature in this grand narrative is POLEMIC - a strong rebuke or refutation against an established idea, practice, opinion or belief. Polemic is very common throughout the whole bible, the creation account, the garden and the flood narrative were all polemics agaisnt Sumerian mythology, the Sermon on the Mount was a polemic against the Pharisees' tradition and teaching at the time, and so were the Pauline epistles. He gave these instructions as a response to specific situations at the time, in my knowledge, such situations include: some women dressed in fancy Roman fashion and caused distraction, hence the dress code; some women spoke out of order and disrupted church service, hence the silence part; some were spreading rumors, hence the critique on gossiping - you shall not bear false witness agaisnt your neighbor! Some thought they'd better go to a nunnery to serve the Lord, this is the exact same impression the disciples got at the teaching about marraige and divorce: "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry." Paul told them no, don't abandon your prospect of a secular life just it's "secular". Also, the cultural norm in England at the time also played a part in the KJV translation.
In a recent conversation with a member on this forum, I was told to read the bible as God's personal word and divine revelation to me without weaponizing the text for any ulterior motive. That's a sound advice to me, but if this was to a lady, how would she feel when she reads these passages? If she was sexually abused, how would she feel? In a worse case, what about a woman was sexually abused by a church clergyman who uses these passages to justify his abuse?
