The Apostle Paul and women...

[Robert]

Warning: This post might be highly controversial to women! So be cool....

Okay...I've heard some women complaining about Paul’s so called attitude towards women. I say we explore this...

Okay, I'll start:

• 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.

  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 [Torah] says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Since I wasn’t there in that place and time, I can only speculate. There is a clue, through, in verse 33.

Apparently there was some high decibel chatter going on...and apparently it was mostly the women.

In general women have the gift of gab...they are more talkative than men. So I can see this counsel aimed at the women folk.

If you don't buy that generalization, they you'll probably deny that guys tend to be more confrontational and aggressive.

Anyway, however we look at this Paul is inspired and we are not.

Rob

[Ron Lambert]

You have to remember the situation in Jewish synagogues in Paul's time. Women were segregated from the men, and sat off by themselves behind a lattice, where they were supposed to be quiet and listen while the men read from the scrolls of Scripture and commented on them. It often was the case that women (understandably bored out of their minds) would start talking among themselves, and if this sussuration of noise became very loud, then it would be distracting to the men discussing the Scriptures. This is what Paul was addressing.

It should also be noted that the prevailing practice of separating the men from the women in synagogues this way was not directed by the Lord. This is not according to the directions given to Moses. Bible scholars believe that the practice of segregating women into a separate section of the synagogue began sometime during the Babylonian captivity. So apparently it reflects some influence they came under in Babylon.

It is interesting that Paul does not call for a return to the Mosiac pattern here, he is content merely to "go with the flow," and try to make abiding by the present customs as manageable as possible.

Paul also justified not letting women teach by citing what appears to be a rabbinical argument (since it is not in Scripture) that women should not be allowed to teach because Eve was deceived, but Adam wasn't. (See 1 Tim. 2:14.) Uh, excuse me, but that actually sounds like a good reason why MEN should not be allowed to teach. Whom would you regard as the worse security risk--someone who commited a crime because they were deceived, or someone who committed a crime willfully and knowingly?

Besides, are all women today just like Eve? Are women today more likely to be deceived than men?

[Robert]

We know from the NT that not all believers assembled in Synagogues. Many believers assembled in homes. So I'm not so sure Paul's counsel was pertaining to traditions within the Jewish Synagogues or simply to some women at the church in Corinth.

[Robert]

Meet

Quote:

---

Ron Lambert said:

Paul also justified not letting women teach by citing what appears to be a rabbinical argument (since it is not in Scripture) that women should not be allowed to teach because Eve was deceived, but Adam wasn't. (See 1 Tim. 2:14.)

---

Let's look at this one:

First Paul corrects the men:

8 Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.

Men tend to fight....They can become aggressive (nature problem). So Paul says instead of lifting your hands to fight, left your hands to pray.

Now he turns to the women:

9 Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments; 10 but rather by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to godliness.

Women (again, from the nature perspective) like to be noticed...they like attention. (Yes some guys too, but mostly women). Some will go to great lengths to get it. Hence Paul counsels the women. Now he continues:

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.

I think this might be within reference to loud talking during church....We've already touched on this one.

12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Very controversial Paul...very controversial. I have no answers here. I'm not sure if women should be pastors over the flock or not? Anyway...let's continue and try to find out why Paul states this:

13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Okay...we know the story. Eve gets inquisitive and goes against God's instruction to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Why? Doesn't make any sense for Eve was sinless...she did not have a sinful nature. So it is mystery, just like Lucifer, why she did what she did. Here Adam obeyed.

Anyway, Eve gets to the tree and sees a serpent eating fruit. No big deal, but this serpent could talk! Why does Paul state that she was deceived? After all she by her own free will walked up the tree!

Well, the serpent most likely said something like this: Eve...look at me...before I ate this fruit I was a simple serpent, but now having eaten the fruit I can talk...Wow, just think what you could be like....You'd be like God himself....

The deception was that Eve believed that this was a serpent who could talk because of eating the fruit [see verse Gen 3:13]. That's the deception, otherwise Eve disobeyed a direct command. I would say Eve was gullible and hence she was deceived. Is that Paul's point?

On the other hand Adam simply eat the fruit....Did he know where it came from? Probably! The Bible doesn't say (I don't think). Anyway, the serpent didn’t deceive Adam, he deceived Eve whom disobeyed and went to the tree.

Yes, Adam sinned...he did just what his wife wanted, but in so doing disobeyed God. His sin is that he picked his wife over God.

The point, however, is that Eve (the woman) was deceived...she was gullible. Are women more gullible than men? Not sure, but from my limited perspective yes.

Is this the reason Paul insisted that men be Pastors? I don't know...maybe! But now comes Paul's next statement that I can't explain:

15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Maybe Paul's idea was that women, in raising little rug-rats, would get to deal first hand with little human natures and therefore become keen to deception!?! Who knows...Guessing away right now.

[Amelia]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

So those of us women who dont or cant bear children, are lost?

[cricket]

[:"brown"]Genesis 2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.[/]

This does not say it is a sin to approach the tree.

[:"brown"] Genesis 3:1-5 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. [/]

This does not say that Eve was near the tree.

[:"brown"]Genesis 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.[/]

This does not say that Adam was near the tree. It says he was with her, though.

[Ron Lambert]

Adam was the one who really sinned. Not only does Scripture say "As in ADAM all die...." (1 Cor. 15:22), also we read in Genesis 3:6, 7: "She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. THEN the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked;" (NIV)

Notice that their eyes--of both Adam and Eve--were not "opened" and they did not realize they were "naked," until ADAM ate. If Adam had not eaten, the human race would not have fallen. Eve probably could have been acquitted on the basis that she was deceived.

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Adam was the one who really sinned

---

There are some assumptions made that indicate some bias in the interpreting of scripture....

For example, the assumption here is that man is the head of the household because he was designated to be the head of the household. But where is that pronouncement? Is it not AFTER the fall....

If one looks at the genesis account as man and woman as equals, then the account shows how EACH gender failed mankind. If that is the case, then man and woman truely are equal in thier stance before God.

[Gregory Matthews]

I happen to agree with Ron's comment that essentially states that Adam had the responsibility. But, I disagree with the assusmption that such represents the idea that males were heads of the household.

Scripture indicates that Eve was decieved. But, it never tells us that Adam was decieved. I picture Eve taking Adam the fruit, and telling him what she had done. I then see Adam as eating of the fruit, in open, knowing, rebellion against the directive of God. That open, knowing, rebellion places Adam, in my thinking, in a different catagory than that of Eve who was decieved. Therefore I give Adam the responsibility for the Fall.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

So those of us women who dont or cant bear children, are lost?

---

Sister Amelia, it seems we need a graemlin that is crying... would have fit well after that.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

This does not say it is a sin to approach the tree.

---

Why did Eve go the tree? Sin begins in motive....

Quote:

---

This does not say that Eve was near the tree.

---

I guess the serpent had an intercom system!

Quote:

---

and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat....This does not say that Adam was near the tree. It says he was with her, though.

---

Depends which translation you use. Here's the RSV:

"So when the woman [Eve] saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate.

Okay...let's say both of them were there. That means Adam overheard the serpent talking to Eve. Only problem is the serpent was only addressing Eve. Why not Adam, if he was there?

Well, let's say he was there and only Eve was addressed...wouldn't that mean that Adam was also deceived? But the Bible says only Eve was deceived.

So if both were there and only Eve was deceived, then that seem to build a case against the female gender...maybe they are more gullible?

Your argument actually builds a case against Eve.

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Ron Lambert said:

Adam was the one who really sinned. Not only does Scripture say, "As in ADAM all die...."

---

No...Eve sinned first! She was used as a tool by Lucifer (disguised as a serpent) to get to Adam. By going to the tree she was questioning God's command. She entertained doubt.

It's like I am a recovered alcoholic and decide to go a bar....Where did I sin,?

1] Going to the bar

2] Or drinking when I get there.

The answer is # 1. I know not to go because of my weakness, but I go anyway. The sin is pride...I think I can go and just "say no".

Eve's sin was unbelief in what God said....She doubted God and "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Once there and once deceived she coveted God's position, which is idolatry. Eve's sin was like Lucifer’s. Both covet position.

Once she became imbued with "indwelling sin" (and captive to Lucifer) she went to Adam. When they (Eve and Lucifer) got Adam they got the human race. That's because when God made Adam He was not making just a man...He was creating "all men" (mankind) in one man. Even Eve was taken from Adam's side.

[Robert]

Let's see what EGW says (although she is not the final word):

• The angels had cautioned Eve to beware of separating herself from her husband while occupied in their daily labor in the garden; with him she would be in less danger from temptation than if she were alone. But absorbed in her pleasing task, she unconsciously wandered from his side. On perceiving that she was alone, she felt an apprehension of danger, but dismissed her fears, deciding that she had sufficient wisdom and strength to discern evil [pride] and to withstand it. Unmindful of the angels' caution, she soon found herself gazing with mingled curiosity and admiration upon the forbidden tree. The fruit was very beautiful, and she questioned [unbelief] with herself why God had withheld it from them. Now was the tempter's opportunity. As if he were able to discern the workings of her mind, he addressed her: "Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" Eve was surprised and startled as she thus seemed to hear the echo of her thoughts. But the serpent continued, in a musical voice, with subtle praise of her surpassing loveliness; and his words were not displeasing. Instead of fleeing from the spot she lingered wonderingly to hear a serpent speak. Had she been addressed by a being like the angels, her fears would have been excited; but she had no thought that the fascinating serpent could become the medium of the fallen foe…..Without a fear she plucked and ate. And now, having herself transgressed, [i.e., God's command] she became the agent of Satan in working the ruin of her husband. In a state of strange, unnatural excitement, with her hands filled with the forbidden fruit, she sought his presence, and related all that had occurred.

  An expression of sadness came over the face of Adam. He appeared astonished and alarmed. To the words of Eve he replied that this must be the foe against whom they had been warned; and by the divine sentence she must die. In answer she urged him to eat, repeating the words of the serpent, that they should not surely die. She reasoned that this must be true, for she felt no evidence of God's displeasure, but on the contrary realized a delicious, exhilarating influence, thrilling every faculty with new life, such, she imagined, as inspired the heavenly messengers.

  ... Eve was before him, as beautiful and apparently as innocent as before this act of disobedience. She expressed greater love for him than before. No sign of death appeared in her, and he decided to brave the consequences. He seized the fruit and quickly ate.

[Robert]

Here's more:

• ….And the Lord said, "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." In the creation God had made her the equal of Adam. Had they remained obedient to God—in harmony with His great law of love--they would ever have been in harmony with each other; but sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one or the other. Eve had been the first in transgression; and she had fallen into temptation by separating from her companion, contrary to the divine direction. It was by her solicitation that Adam sinned, and she was now placed in subjection to her husband. Had the principles joined in the law of God been cherished by the fallen race, this sentence, though growing out of the results of sin, would have proved a blessing to them; but man's abuse of the supremacy thus given him has too often rendered the lot of woman very bitter and made her life a burden.

[Robert]

I don't believe Paul is saying that....That would be salvation by child bearing!

Anyway, let's go back to Paul's statement:

Paul: 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Maybe some women in the early church were trying over-rule the leadership, I don't know...but the reason Paul gives is as follows:

13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Hey, don't get mad at me...this is Paul and he is inspired. He goes on:

Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect.

Yes, I know the verse those who insist that women should be "the overseers" use....It is Gal 3:28

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Yes, "in Christ" no one has the upper hand. Male/female all go through One man, even Jesus Christ, but to use this as reason to promote women as the head, I can't find it.

Well, I don't want to get too mixed up with this ordination thingy....I lean towards the side of men only being the overseer for the reasons Paul gave, even though I am not sure of his motive. I wasn't there.... Nevertheless, we just can't toss Paul out the door, for again, he was inspired. There's got to be a reason for his madness! I'm just trying to understand him....

[Gregory Matthews]

Robert:

I would prefer, when you (and everyone else) quote from EGW that you give the citation. This way one can check it to see if you have properly cited it. It appears to me that you have taken your reference from PP pages 53, 54 and 56. People who do not check it would probably be unaware of the vast amount of material that you left out of your citation (all of page 55 and much of pages 53, 54, and 56.).

Next, I ask you to go to Genesis 3:17-19. Here God is addressing Adam, not Eve. God had addressed Eve in verse 16. Here God tells Adam that the consequences listed in verses 17 - 19 come about because of His (Adams) sin.

To me, the Bible tells us that Adam has a greater responsibility than did Eve. Eve was decieved. Adam knowingly, and in rebellion, sinned. Adam is responsible for our present state, not Eve.

[Bravus]

Interesting to see what each of us projects onto the basic tale...

[aldona]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."

This does not say that Adam was near the tree. It says he was with her, though.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

So much for the (unbiblical) old Adventist admonition to women..."Eve sinned because she left Adam's side...so don't you dare do anything on your own initiative or leave your husband's side for a moment..."

aldona

[cricket]

Quote:

---

Your argument actually builds a case against Eve.

---

My words were simply to show that some liberties in Biblical interpretation were being taken.

It was not an argument.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Gregory Matthews said:

To me, the Bible tells us that Adam has a greater responsibility than did Eve. Eve was decieved. Adam knowingly, and in rebellion, sinned. Adam is responsible for our present state, not Eve.

---

Now wait just a minute...if Eve would have never gone to the tree we wouldn't have the situation we have now. Clearly Eve sinned....She doubted God and that sin led to deception.

When Eve enticed Adam then she got "all men"....Yes, Adam too was to blame, but please don't let Eve off the hook!

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

Interesting to see what each of us projects onto the basic tale...

---

Here we go....

[Bravus]

Heh, fair enough I guess - but interesting that I get the 'blablabla' icon in possibly my least verbose post ever <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

.if Eve would have never gone to the tree we wouldn't have the situation we have now. Clearly Eve sinned....She doubted God and that sin led to deception.

---

Um...is going to the Temptation Tree a sin?

It was placed there by God...Surely we were to look at it and if so, God did not intend for the looking at the tree a sin....

[Amelia]

Well it certainly was a lure. Wasnt the tree set aside in the garden? I dont think Eve could have come upon it by chance if she were out wandering in the garden. I think she would have known where she was heading. If she didnt, then she was truely naive.

[Clio]

I thought it was in the Center of the Garden?

A clear choice between the Tree of Life and the other one.... Now where did I get that idea?

Clio