1 Timothy 2 Explained - Genesis Story - Katia Adams

[@betterleftsaid3688]

"It's not when you're speaking that you're likely to be deceived, but when you're learning - if you haven't learned well." !!! Yes. Thank you.

[@daviebluff]

Fantastic job, Katia! I am a pastor and former complementarian who has come to understand the correct interpretation and application of 1 Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 14, and Ephesians 5 by a corrected and more consistent Biblical hermeneutic. I highly recommend Cynthia Long Westfall's book, Paul & Gender, if you have not yet read it. very insightful! I know that you are going against the grain in Western evangelical theological tradition so God bless you for your courage and commitment to the truth!

[@yellowlabsrule]

Can you speak to the "saved through childbearing" aspect of that section? (1 Timothy 2:15)

[@hermanessences]

According to some, they had been part of a pagan Artemis cult where they had to do certain rituals to not die during childbirth and so on. And so Paul is saying that they need not fear such things.

[@SashiMashiStories]

I ilove your explanations. But I need to know your view on verse 15 please.

[@_JulianAdams]

Unfortunately, I haven't done a specific teaching on 1 Timothy 2:15, although in my book, Equal (www.frequentsee.org/equal), I do comment briefly on it. I will say that 1 Tim 2:15 should be read with the revelation of the rest of Scripture - ie it cannot actually mean that women will receive salvation by having babies because that clearly contradicts all the verses that talk about salvation through faith by grace! I suggest reading 1 Tim 2:15 in one of two ways - either it’s referencing the birth of Christ (women shall be saved through the birth of the child ie Christ which is possible in the Greek) or it’s using the word ‘saved’ through the lens of restoration of value (rather than salvation as we would use it) in response to one of the false teachings that we know was at work in the Ephesian community which stated that marriage + sex should be avoided because they were of the flesh and therefore evil. The truth is that this verse is a strange and difficult one. None of the ways of deciphering it are exactly satisfactory, but the rules of hermeneutics are really helpful here - we never base theology on one verse especially if it is a seemingly contradictory one! Hope that helps!

[@Chrissiela]

@@_JulianAdams have you ever considered the possibility that Paul is not talking about men and women (according to the flesh) at all, when he gets to verse 11, but is using the man and the woman (Adam and Eve) as figures for Christ and the church, in which case it would make perfect sense that Eve (a woman, who typifies the church) "shall be saved in childbearing"? It seems to me that there is a connection here to Jesus' words in John 16 where he likens his MALE disciples to "a woman...in travail," a woman whose hour is come to be "delivered of the child" (so that A MAN is born into the world). Paul (also a male, according to the flesh) speaks of his own travail in birth in 1 Cor 13, where he speak of being "a child," but having to "put away childish things" in order to become "a man." Then he speaks of travailing "in birth" AGAIN in Gal 4 with those whom he calls "my little children" as he waits for Christ (THE MAN) to be "formed" IN THEM. Paul repeatedly used Adam and Eve and the marriage relationship to teach us much deeper spiritual truths about Christ and the church. And given that Paul also said: "Henceforth know we NO MAN after the flesh" (not even Christ), it would seem very strange for Paul to divide our roles within the body of Christ according the flesh (based on gender). But if we take into account the fact that Paul also refers to the spiritually immature as "babes" and "children" (of whom "the woman" needs to be "delivered") it all begins to make much more sense. Especially when we begin to see that Paul was not the only one to make these connections. Isaiah also used "babes," "children" and even "women" to typify the spiritually immature (the ones leading Israel astray! - Isa 3). Jer 30:6 reads: "Ask ye now, and see whether A MAN DOTH TRAVAIL WITH CHILD? wherefore do I see EVERY MAN with his hands on his loins, AS A WOMAN IN TRAVAIL, and all faces are turned into paleness?" Jer 31:22 says: "...the LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, A WOMAN SHALL COMPASS A MAN." And Zechariah says: "Be silent, O all flesh, before the LORD." (Zec 2:13). Could that be because "the woman" (that is "the Church," typified in Eve) actually is commanded to be silent (as she "learns")? Because the only voice that should be heard from "her" is HIS? Which can only be accomplished AFTER "Christ" (THE MAN) has been "formed" IN US and we have been "delivered of the child" (who is "yet carnal'), ie "saved in childbearing" (Christ in you, the hope of glory)? Not only does Paul tell us that we are to know no man after the flesh he also tells us "we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal." (2 Co 4:18) Perhaps that includes the "woman" that Paul said he would not suffer to teach or usurp authority over THE MAN. (And, as it relates to Eve, who typifies "the church," that would include even those who are men according to the flesh.) [If so, these things would, obviously, also apply to 1 Cor 14.]

[@earnestlycontendingforthef5332]

God does not want women to teach and preach, and "usurp the authority" of men. He has forbidden it, for it is the Lord Christ himself who has given the command, through the apostle Paul. "As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for *it is disgraceful for a woman* to speak in the church. 36 Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, *let him acknowledge* that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. 38 If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored." 1 Corinthians 14:33-38 (ANIV) . As it is the Lord's command, that is the end of all rebellious arguments, for they run opposite to what the Lord himself has commanded. The authentic humble "Daughters of Sarah" will be eager and pleased to obey. The rebellious daughters of the "Devil and his angels" will contend to do the very opposite. For they have come under the curse of God as has St. Paul has well warned they would be. " That's why God will send them a powerful delusion so that they will believe a lie. 12 Then everyone who did not believe the truth, but was delighted with what God disapproves of, will be condemned." 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 (GW)

[@Peergint67]

Dear Katia, I think you are clutching at straws here. You say Eve misquoted God. God said, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Eve said that God said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.' Do you think Adam did not teach Eve? How would she know this if Adam hadn't told her. The only other reason she would know is if God told her. She could not be deceived if she did not know! This is not a good argument to make. Effectively God said "You shall not eat it or you will die." They basically say the same thing! Also, why are you ignoring Genesis 3:16b? Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.” Didn't God say this? For what reason then did He say it, if it were not so? Your "desire" means "control" and that's why God said "he shall rule over you." Therefore women are to be submissive, BUT men are to love their wives, to look after them and to provide for them. It doesn't mean that women are less than men, far from it. I just wonder why you completely ignore this? If you question what Paul says here, you must therefore question everything Paul said. And because all scripture is God breathed you must therefore question ALL scripture. God does not make mistakes, therefore He would not allow a mistake to be in His word because if He did, you couldn't trust Him. Scripture is God's testimony about His Son Jesus. If God made a mistake, then nothing is credible! I cannot agree with what you are saying.

[@earnestlycontendingforthef5332]

This woman is in sinful violation of Scripture teaching for the true and sincere "Daughters of Sarah". "11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Tim 2:10-14 (KJV)

[@Chrissiela]

Above, two people have asked Katia how she interprets verse 15. She says she doesn't really have a teaching on it. I think that is unfortunate, because I think it's a very important part of the passage. What do you do with verse 15? Do you not know what to do with it either? (asking since you left it out of your quote as well.)

[@servantofthelord.7963]

@@Chrissiela ..." 14 And it was not Adam who was fooled by Satan, but Eve, and sin was the result. 15 So God sent pain and suffering to women when their children are born, but he will save their souls if they trust in him, living quiet, good, and loving lives." 1 Timothy 2:14-15. [Living Bible] Pretty well, self-explanatory!

[@Chrissiela]

@@servantofthelord.7963 Self-explanatory? No prophesy of scripture is it's own explanation, my friend. That is why we are to compare scripture with scripture. And it is a Biblical fact, established by Paul himself, that Adam serves as a figure of him who was to come (the Last Adam). That makes Eve a figure for "the church." And that is exactly how Paul uses them in many of his writings. Do you deny that? Do you, somehow, believe that men are less sinful, less able to be deceived than women? And how is the assertion that "she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith" something that you find "self-explanatory"? Are you ware that Jesus himself likened his MALE disciples to A WOMAN "in travail"? A WOMAN whose hour was come "to be delivered of the child"? That sounds an awful lot like what Paul is talking about, doesn't it? And what about the fact that Paul (A MALE, according to the flesh) spoke of HIS OWN "travail in birth"? No connection there either? What about the fact that Paul seems to follow the SAME PATTERN as Isaiah did in Isaiah 3 where he likens the spiritually immature to BABES, CHILDREN, and (yes) even WOMEN? Inconsequential? And Jeremiah speaking of MEN travailing in birth? Meaningless and irrelevant? You may think so, but I do not. Especially when it was also Paul who said "henceforth know we no man after the flesh" (NOT EVEN CHRIST - WHY? Do you know?). Sorry, but I feel rather confident in what I believe the Lord himself has shown me with regard to this topic. I suggest you compare Paul's words to Jesus' words and even to the words of the Prophets of old. They are very consistent in their demonstration that when scripture speaks about "a woman" or "women" it is not always a FEMALE that is in view.

[@servantofthelord.7963]

@@Chrissiela Christ's commands and instructions are indeed for both men and women, but then there are certain commands and instructions given by the Apostles to differentiate the Divine Order that God wishes to have acknowledged and obeyed by his Elected children. St. Paul talks about head coverings in 1 Cor 11:3, his reasonings are based upon the divine hierarchy in Gen 1:26. Almighty God is first in status, rank, authority & power - then Christ over Man - then Man over woman. "The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth his head". "7 For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the **image and **glory of God: but the **woman is the **glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man: 9 for neither was the man created for the woman; but **the woman for the **man: 10 for this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. 1 Cor 11:3-10 (ASV) Our relationship one to another must reflect the authority of this divine order, irrspective of the secular modern trend to overturn Almighty God's Divinely ordianed roles for women and wives, which was observed for the best part of 2,000 years.. Indeed, St. Paul's statement in Galatians 3:27-29 that gender, racial, sexual and social distinctions are of no account where the question of salvation is concerned, does not mean that they have been abolished. As should be glaringly obvious from his Divinely approved instructions about the roles of husbands and wives, the deportment of men and women in the church assemblies, along with the instructions of slaves to respect and obey their masters. See also kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWimeYWHl9ierZY So we all still have to fit in with the born gender roles and positions Almighty God has decreed for us. For slaves were still slaves, and still told to obey their masters. Wives were still wives and commanded to obey their husbands in "EVERYTHING". Ephesians 5. And so each Slave, Master, Woman, Wife and Man must obey the specific commands and instructions given them in their gender assignments. 😇

[@Chrissiela]

@@servantofthelord.7963 you might want to read more carefully. While Paul did address the reasons foe head coverings, his conclusion was still "we have no such custom." Why? For the same reason we are no longer under the Law. And as toheadship, you might want to notice the specific words Paul chose and the manner in which he ordered them. Because he does go from women, to men, to Christ, to God. He starts with "every man, " then moves to THE man and THE woman (singular -> Christ and the Church), then he puts a head even on Christ (both Head and Body). And as to Eph 5, you might want to pay closer attention to the the last couple of verses, where Paul points out "the mystery," or what he's REALLY talking about.