Here We Go…
December 10, 2006
I was eating with one David Butcher this evening, and somehow, the topic of women in ministry came up. So, per this conversation, 3 (hopefully objective & constructive) things, now reworded to avoid any confusion:
- I mentioned to Dave (thanks to Shawn) that Galatians 3:28 is typically taken out of context to justify the equality of men and women, and I wanted to re-read it in context to make sure my statement was correct. All of chapter 3 covers grace and the topic of justification through faith alone, and verse 28 in context states that grace was extended to all, and that have put on Christ and become recipitents of grace, by grace. It states that all are equal candidates for grace. Equal/equality are very loaded words in the first place.
- 1 Timothy 2:8-15 -8I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10but with what is proper for women who profess godliness–with good works. 11Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15Yet she will be saved through childbearing–if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. Paul appeals here to more than just the context of any specific church, citing a specific difference between men and women that goes back to the creation of the world. I agree that verse 12 is one of the most taken-out-of-context verses in the Bible, and the following verse needs to be taken into consideration as well. There is a reason why people have such huge discussions on this passage; it can’t be written off so easily as the far-left or far-right tend to do so.
- Romans 16:1 (ESV): “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church at Cenchreae…” The Greek word diakonos, rendered ’servant’ in this verse of the ESV, is translated ‘deacon’ elsewhere in the NT……….what?! Why is it not translated ‘deacon’? There had better be a good explanation for this, and hopefully it’s more than conservatives with agendas translating the Bible.
Entry Filed under: Greek, Women and Ministry. .
6 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1.
Shane | December 10, 2006 at 6:49 pm
Point One – Are you trying to argue that men and women are not equal? Or are you simply stating that this verse doens’t prove that they were?
Point Two – Lots here about context to look deeper into. I’m also completely uncomfortable with the translation that Adam was not deceived. When you actually go back and read Genesis it clearly states “Adam, who was with her” so I’m kinda sick of people arguing that Eve was the one tricked and not Adam. They were together when it took place!
Point Three – Nice point. Where did you hear about this from?
Love you man, keep digging!
2.
ashley | December 11, 2006 at 3:51 am
i’m intregued… however not convinced of your argument. i have a great book for you to read on this subject “Men and Women in the Church” by Sarah Sumner. If you wanna borrow it just let me know!
3.
Tyler | December 11, 2006 at 4:36 am
Shane –
1 – I am saying this doesn’t prove they are; it’s not valid to support an argument for their equality in context. (i am willing to be disproven!)
2 – However, it was what Paul wrote in his letter to Timothy. The question is, what did he mean by it? And why did he call Jesus the ’second Adam’ if Eve was the one who became the transgressor?
3 – You asked me to look it up and I did, silly. Is this a trick question?
4.
Tyler | December 11, 2006 at 4:42 am
Ashley –
I was hopefully not making an argument at all. I only wanted to dialog this topic because I’d like to understand it a bit better. It seems people are either completely one way or completely the other. The first verse mentioned is my interpretation of Galatians 3:28, which I take (in context) to mean merely that there is no limit to who is able to receive the free gift of justification by faith through grace. The second verse is commonly abused by conservatives, then shot down by the ‘other’ side, stating that it was only written in context. There is a bigger issue, however, because Paul appeals to a much earlier event than his context in v13. My third point was that I was upset that Phoebe wasn’t given her due credit as a deacon in many modern translations, which is completely wrong and unfair. I would love to read that book, if I can squeeze it in. :)
5.
Shane | December 11, 2006 at 1:11 pm
Sure opened a can of worms with this one didn’t you? :)
1. I hear ya. Your tone made it sound like you were asserting that they were not equal, that’s what I asked.
2. Yeah, you’re the guy who reads Greek. You’ll have to tell me what he meant. I’m just curious because they seem to be different so I’m wondering if we’re reading one wrong.
2a. Your question about the “second Adam” is a great one, you should research that more as I think it means something significant. Check out the second half of Romans 5.
3. Yeah, I was making a funny:)
Love you man, keep digging…
6.
Tyler | December 11, 2006 at 3:11 pm
I don’t read Greek, I cheat with a Greek/English NT. But I’m trying to learn!