"I do not permit a woman to teach ..." (1 Timothy

[@Kay-br7by]

I'm very happy to have come across your video sir! I was comparing the KJV to the Textus Receptus and the Byzantine F35 and I realize how much those who get strident and dogmatic over this issue (Together with 1 Corinthians 14) shoot themselves in the foot... Especially with the super conservative camps. I don't consider myself egalitarian neither do I consider myself complementarian, I'd say I'm somewhere in the middle. Thank you very much for this exposition.

[@MartinMcCrory]

Dear Kevin just the surface touch of this text that you have taught has helped me SO much! Thank you. In all my years, I cannot escape the fact that I have been so significantly enhanced by women pastors and teachers and Theologians, none less than Aida Spencer on the PE. Thank you again 🤗

[@KevinSmith126]

Thanks for drip feeding encouragement Martin. I really appreciate it.

[@4playmofo]

So the HOLY (i.e. perfect/pure) Bible , which we all believe is God's Word inspired by God's Holy Spirit to men from all walks of life, is somehow unclear in a passage that leaves no room for guessing? Does "I do NOT" mean, I do? Or should we now choose to question the HOLY Spirit in Paul because he uses the personal pronoun? Why do we decide to defile God's Word and contradict ourselves EVEN in its clearest form - just to justify our own desires? Is that not sin/disobedience? I would caution you sir (brother) that false teaching (as all sins) begins with questioning God's Word 😢 and the bigger your platform the more damage you can inflict the Kingdom. Peace to you all

[@KevinSmith126]

If I am not mistaken, Peter the apostle said of Paul's writings: ὡς καὶ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων ἐν αἷς ἐστιν δυσνόητά τινα, essentially admitting that Paul's epistles contain some things that are hard to understand. Peter lived at the same time in the same culture and spoke the same languages as Paul, and although both apostles were filled with the same Spirit, Peter still found some of Paul's epistles, which he calls Scriptures, difficult to understand. Why would it seem strange that we who are 2000 years removed from their culture and challenges and do not know Koine Greek with conversational fluency should find some of Paul's writings difficult to understand? I am sure Timothy knew exactly what Paul meant. If Paul's Spirit-inspired meaning is never unclear to those far removed from him, what does οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν mean in 1 Cor. 15:29? Perhaps you could tell us what Paul had in mind when he wrote διὰ τοῦτο ὀφείλει ἡ γυνὴ ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους (1 Cor. 11:10), especially the "because of the angels" reasoning? You obviously know what Paul's σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί (2 Cor. 12:7) was because the Holy Spirit would never let us be unsure of his meaning. Can you read Greek? Have you ever tried to translate NT texts into English and realised that at every turn you are making interpretive decisions for your readers? I assume not, because the experience teaches one some humility about your own conclusions. Is it not amazing that supreme confidence in one's interpretation is so often premised on complete ignorance of the original language? I am equally amazed that you not only know exactly what the Scriptures mean, you apparently have perfect insight into my desires and motives too, even though you have never met me. Would it surprise you that I am an elder in a church that only has men as elders and preachers? Do you know that my most recent PhD student, Sarah Churchill, analysed this text and concluded that women should not be preachers? Perhaps a little more humility in judging others and in interpreting Scripture would be more becoming of your zeal for Christ.

[@suepnematicatos2363]

Kevin, thank you for being bold enough to teach on this scripture without giving into the pressure to having the "exact" interpretation. For years I fellowshipped and served within a church under the "authority" of men who did not encourage me to formally study the scriptures because "why bother, you can only teach children." Thanks to SATS not excluding me from theological studies and for enabling/training me to teach and to question! Perhaps men, and I do mean the male species, allow themselves to be placed under pressure to lead and to be in authority by incorrectly applying 1 Timothy 2:12-14, and thus become incredibly dogmatic whilst retaining a false sense of security in their leadership role. Our true security and identity rests in Jesus Christ, not in a position of authority.

[@W0nderer]

Kevin this kind of contextual teaching is excellent. I love the way you don't take a firm position but simply point out that taking a firm position given the number of questions is hugely problematic. I think as Christians we often don't want to play the field of circumstance but would far rather look look for substantive direction on an issue. I often think of the men of Issachar who understood the times and knew what to do. What did they understand and how did they play the field? I think we're missing this skill a lot

[@KevinSmith126]

Thanks Stephen. I appreciate your comments. “We don’t know” seems a reasonable conclusion when dealing with ancient texts. Timothy presumably knew exactly what Paul meant, but we cannot be certain.

[@W0nderer]

@@KevinSmith126 Paul also had been in those contexts. So when he said ABC in his letters, he'd probably already shared substantively on it already. So his letters built on what he'd already said. I think we need to look at scripture within the meta narrative of what God says about us.

[@KevinSmith126]

@@W0nderer You are 100% right. Even then, however, our conclusions may need to be tentative.

[@W0nderer]

@@KevinSmith126 agreed. I'm just saying if you look at the over arching story, themes, perspectives, then surely a view like women can't teach can't be taken literally across any context!

[@JC-li8kk]

The world not aligning with scripture is a dilemma to believers? Other than that I thought you brought up a lot of good points.

[@blessed2338]

there's no such thing as a female pastor, thats an oxymoron. 1 Timothy 2:12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 1 Corinthians 14:34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.

[@Jonathan-A]

So, can we assume that if any scripture is not to our liking, we can say it only applies to that time/context? For instance, the Lord told the woman to go, and sin no more. This does not apply to me because I am a man and not Jewish. I make an absurd comparison to highlight my point. The text of Paul (who is our Apostle) is 'misunderstood' only by those who do not like what he says. Be careful not to lead anyone astray.

[@KevinSmith126]

Hi Jonathan, I love the Scriptures. I hold them to be inerrant and fully authoritative. I gladly submit to the clear teachings of Scripture, but after 30 years of studying them intensely, I still have faith that sometimes lacks (and still seeks) understanding-but not for lack of willingness to obey the Lord who died to save this wretched sinner. The apostle Peter himself acknowledged that Paul writes some things that are difficult to understand: "... as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand ..." (2 Pet. 3:15-16, ESV). Peter was a fellow apostle and fellow Jew, living in the same time and culture and speaking the same languages as Paul. He loved Jesus enough to die for his obedience to the gospel. Yet even he found Paul's writing difficult to understand. We are 2000 years removed from their culture, history, and language. We cannot always be certain what Paul intended in every passage. I worship in a local church that does not have women elders or preachers based on the pastor's understanding of this passage. I have honest questions about whether his "straightforward" reading and application is as straightforward as it may seem. Blessings, Kevin

[@woleakin3148]

If we apply similar method to other scriptures by sprinkling doubts and offering alternative meanings and interpretations to each word, do we not arrive at a place where we reject other commands given by the scriptures, especially those that do not appeal to our generation? What is stopping anyone from breaking down each word, phrase, and clause of the scripture until arriving at the conclusion that homosexuality, other sexual immoralities, and many other sins are not applicable to us today because they are not generalizable?

[@JC-li8kk]

@@woleakin3148The proof is in the pudding. As someone who has been a part of a church where women completely DOMINATE the congregation, DOMINATE every conversation, even to the point where the HUSBAND PASTOR walks out of a service in disagreement, I can tell you there are SERIOUS issues that arise from allowing women to exercise authority & have free reign in the church. I left that church 7 years ago & have grown immensely in faith, boldness, & sound doctrine. I won’t be surprised if that church gets a Kenneth Copeland hand-me-down Jet any day now.

[@JC-li8kk]

@@KevinSmith126Is it really that difficult or is it difficult because so many teachers WANT to MAKE it difficult? Something to ponder.

[@KevinSmith126]

Who says the classic interpretation is not "to my liking"? I am a leader in a church that holds strongly to that position. I was merely pointing out that there are interpretive difficulties in this text, as there are in many texts. I believe the Bible is inerrant and authoritative.

[@georgeetboom7719]

God hasn’t come and re written our modern bibles so he must be fine with it, women carnt teach

[@dav6131]

'God is not the author of confusion' as you imly He is. You are wrong. I cannot understand how you can put forward an explanation in such a non-conclusive manner. This was so disappointing to listen to. Ask 100 non-believers how they would understand this passage- whether or not they agree with it- most would understand this in the way it reads. Add to this Paul's reference to Genesis for authority and we have clarity. Jesus and Paul often do this (Sabbath, Marriage, Origin of sin etc). Again, God is not the author of confusion.

[@charliehorse8112]

What are you saying

[@dav6131]

@charliehorse8112 women should not teach or have authority within the church- that's what the passage plainly says.

[@KevinSmith126]

I would refer you to my reply to @4playmofo above. Many statements in the Bible are not crystal clear to us, largely because we are removed from the original writer and readers by thousands of years. Even Peter admitted that he found some of Paul's writings difficult to understand. For what it is worth, we likely land on the same conclusion as concerns this passage, but only one of us knows that it is not the only coherent reading.

[@dav6131]

@KevinSmith126 Doctrinal passages are sometimes 'hard to be understood'- BUT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD. That is the clear implication in what Peter is saying in his second Letter. To paraphrase, he says that those without knowledge or those with preconceived views distort these essential teachings of Paul (Christ's)-TO THEIR DESTRUCTION. Because this is a particular mindset, they do it with other scripture. The point is, it is not acceptable to The Lord. It matters what we believe. Scripture is NEVER open to our own interpretation, no matter how difficult the passage. The fundamental teachings and practice's of The Lord are meant to be followed- not put into the 'too difficult' box. It is man with his own bias (humanist thinking) that corrupts The Lords teaching. So much of Christian doctrine has been influenced by man's thinking- ie. many churches (Catholic, SDA's, Mormans etc,) go beyond God's Word to understand the teaching of Christ.

[@dav6131]

@KevinSmith126 'prove all things, hold fast to that which I'd good'- I Thess. 5. 'If any man teach ANY other Gospel, he is accursed'- Gal. 1. 'If men do not bring this teaching (of Christs) they do not have God- and you do not receive them' - II John. etc. Sorry about the paraphrasing.

[@mbgodwebsite5272]

Paul gave the reason why he didn't permit women to teach - “the woman was in the transgression.” This reason doesn't just apply to the women he referred to in his time. It applies to all females in all times. So, his reasoning and justification for them abstaining should be our reasoning and justification. Also, if a woman is teaching, how much more difficult and sensitive it is for a man to rebuke or refute her if she is teaching in error. Paul advocated women to be in silence in the church and for wives, if they are to learn anything, they were to ask their husbands at home, as well as being a “shame” to speak in church (1Cor.14). To believe that v. 12 would allow women to teach and preach: 1) Causes Scripture to contradict itself. 2) Places some women above others, where some must stay silent, while others can speak with free will. So, Paul saying I do not permit... is a command and something we are to follow and not just a personal preference. Teaching is exercising authority, as one that has responsibility over you. Definitely not a position advocated to women, whether over her husband or over other men. How does one tell a women to be Biblically under her husband, while being over men in the church? You can't. Again, another contradiction. Especially, with her husband as a congregant. So, regardless of whether an unmarried woman in church or a wife doesn't matter. It is any female, period. The church is anywhere saints are gathered to hear the Word of God. Exercising authority can also be a woman put in a position where a man or men would be subject to her and her decision making. I don't believe “there are plausible answers that can go in more than one direction.” It doesn't just apply to the home and church regarding born again believers. The church has no affinity with the world and what non-Christians do. No “dilemma.” Men may be inclined to be deceived, but Satan saw something in the female that made him to believe she could be more easily swayed to disobey - “pleasant to the eye and desire to be wise as a god, knowing good and evil.” Evidently, according to Paul, he knew something about the difference between the male and female and their susceptibility to temptation and deception.

[@JC-li8kk]

I thought he raised a lot of good questions, but to call the WORLD’S way of doing things not aligning with the CHRISTIAN way of doing things a “dilemma” was baffling, even alarming. I think scripture is very clear about what is being said here. We just don’t want to hear it because we know it will be nearly impossible to undo the amount of involvement women have grown accustomed to in the church as a result of years of ignoring & willfully misinterpreting 1 Timothy 2 & 1 Corinthians 14. I think the MEN want it this way just as much as the women do because it lightens the load they are meant to carry. This to me is one of the biggest reasons I think Paul said this, in order that the men not become weak & shy away from their roles as leaders.