The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum 1 Timothy 2 issue

But George, if you didn't want to "beat a dead horse", which is what you have done, then why did you do it? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

The Lord Christ would have us not live by the "Letter of the Law" as you have indicated, but rather to go BEYOND the "letter" and live by the "Spirit of the Law". In every instance in Scripture, where the incarnate God expounded on the Law of God, He instructed His disciples that the "letter" only skims the surface while the "spirit" plunges to the depths of what the law actually requires; i.e., obedience from the heart and not simply an outward action. Thus, in this matter of women teaching men in the Church, simple conformity to the clear restriction is not enough, particularly where it impacts upon a woman's obedience to this law. She must do so willingly and most cheerfully knowing that it is the will of God for her life and for the sake of the order established by God for the Church.

Obviously and unfortunately, you have totally misunderstood what Paul was writing in regard to a woman being saved through "childbearing"! I would refer you back to one of my initial replies to you where I quoted a small section of William Hendriksen's comments from his Commentary. In that passage of Scripture, where Paul is basing the remarks which follow on the creation order and the place of women, not just wives, he uses the example of the typical married woman who would normally bear children. In that example he is emphasizing the place of women in relation to men; i.e., men have been given the authority to teach as the head of the woman and not vice versa. And women are designed to be helpmates of men and they have been given the privilege to bear children, and not vice versa. He is speaking of "roles" of men and women as God has created them. Thus, women (godly, Christ-professing women) are saved (ultimately) through their obedience (not by works of the law, but by displaying their good works. cf. 1Tim 2:10; Eph 2:10) and not by exercising dominion over men nor in teaching men. The thrust of Paul's words is that women should content themselves in being submissive NOT as did Eve when she usurped Adam's authority and which led to the fall of all mankind. (cf. vss 13, 14).

The fact that Paul bases all that follows upon 1) the creation order and 2) the entrance of sin, totally eliminates any possibility that his words can be relegated to a "cultural boundness". If they applied to the Church when in its infancy when it was meeting in homes. It applies all the more to the Church as it has matured throughout history.

I fully understand your "surprise". However, that such a view as you have posited here, and that which is becoming popular in the modern church is of no surprise to me, personally. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> The modern "culture" with its strong Feminist influence has effectively launched a campaign to dismantle biblical Christianity in many areas, e.g., women in the church, homosexuality, family, marriage, etc., <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> Ironically then, it isn't that Paul's teaching was based upon his cultural surroundings, but rather that the assault launched by Modernists is based squarely upon a demonic and worldly philosophy which is antithetical to biblical teaching.

In His Grace,