Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The 2 Timothy debate

[media=https://youtu.be/i10LSuKIxPo]

As a woman of God I am constantly having this debate with men who suggest that 2 Timothy was a message suggesting women do not speak on what goes on in church. 2 Timothy is a letter from the Apostle Paul to his protégé, Timothy, written around 64–67 AD while Paul was in prison. It’s Paul's final letter, filled with encouragement and warnings to remain faithful to the gospel. Paul urges Timothy to endure hardships, guard sound doctrine, and continue preaching despite the challenges, emphasizing the importance of Scripture and faithful leadership.

Paul’s instructions for women to be "quiet" in 2 Timothy and 1 Timothy were specifically aimed at addressing issues in churches like Ephesus, where false teachings, paganism, and witchcraft were spreading. Some women were promoting these disruptive ideas, and Paul’s guidance sought to prevent further disorder and protect the church from these harmful influences.

His concern wasn’t about silencing women in general, but maintaining sound doctrine and order in the church.God deliberately put Ester in the position. Esther 4:14, where Esther's decision to speak up and act ultimately saved her people from destruction. It shows that, sometimes, speaking out is essential to fulfilling God's will and protecting others, even when it challenges cultural norms.Remember that when the Pharisees were trying to accuse Jesus, they were trying to arrest him for healing on the Sabbath day to which Jesus reminded him I AM HEALING

Thoughts 💭
Top | New | Old
Charity · 56-60
From my understanding it was based on women gossiping / talking in the meetings and interrupting asking husbands questions, and probably not concerning the meeting. From my understanding the women set on one side and the men sat on the other and as women we do have a tendency to talk sometimes loudly. A practice that continued for decades even in the 19th and early 20th century.
https://www.bibleviews.com/separateseating.html

https://johnbelovedhabib.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/the-early-church-tradition-of-separate-seating-ancient-practice-not-a-cultural-anomaly/

And when you have a discussion about this bring up the women who held churches in their own homes Aquila, Priscilla and five or six more you can look up.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@Charity it's very interesting thinking about how things were so different back then and up until now.

thank you very much for responding
RisingMorningStar7 · 36-40, M
@DeluxedEdition I posted what 2 Timothy talks about unlike you that didnt put the whole thing.
Interesting debate... if we were all to take these teachings here and in Paul's letters without context we'd see Christian women in headcoverings and they wouldn't be allowed to pray or do presentations, etc in church and we know that isn't the case.

As you say it was due to a local issue however I do believe these teachings do prohibit female pastors.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@BritishFailedAesthetic Very well said!
@DeluxedEdition Thankyou, a very good and thought provoking post, very well exposited on the verses!
jehova · 31-35, M
I think women should be outspoken, at the least consulted in matters of family safety and preference.
In particular because women are entirely tied to their child (for life) whereas men have a tendency to wander . Thus in terms of survival of the species women need to be honored respected and protected from the males of our species. Especially when with their children.
tenente · 36-40, M
good point re: Scripture.. Paul's letters weren’t exactly about starting a "No Girls Allowed" club in church lol they talked about what was important back in the day.. historical backdrop can make a big difference. Freedom is super important to me, so I think Esther's story is proves everyone has a vital role in shaping history ( male or female)
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@tenente you summed it up very well :)
RisingMorningStar7 · 36-40, M
No it was women psyche that Paul understood, a woman should be quiet in church and not teach because it through her that everything went down the hill. Second most woman are not Esther and Esther wasn't preaching she just wanted to save her fellow jews.
RisingMorningStar7 · 36-40, M
@DeluxedEdition he gave women to men so he wouldnt be alone and be a helper. Now that is in the begining Christ actually says is best not Marry as well as for Paul.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@RisingMorningStar7 paul wrote it in context to the fact that they were spreading witchcraft in the church of Ephesus. Do you also think it's a sin to trim your beard hair because that is also mentioned in the old testmament too. This is why context and knowing who wrote the books and for what purpose is important
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@RisingMorningStar7 *quotes revised standard version taking it out of context thinking he ate*
RisingMorningStar7 · 36-40, M
15, which instructs women to learn in quietness and submission, and not to usurp authority over men thats from googles overview. And i take its very protestant take too.
Adstar · 56-60, M
One either believes the Word of God or they don't.. Rejecting his Word and believing in a lie does not have a good eternal outcome..

(Revelation 22:13-16) "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. {14} Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. {15} For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. {16} I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
jehova · 31-35, M
@Adstar whilst the u.s. political situation indeed has nothing to do with the "word of GOD". The politics of the vatican has much to do with the many edits to those words over the years. Humans morphed the original message of that book.
Again its a book written by humans. A collection of letters BTW compiled and interpretted unendingly. Indeed there are so many sects, difference in interpretations, translation, and internal squabbles over meaning, intent, implication, and often misunderstanding. The content\alteration of hearsay continues, by men in the various councils over 2 millenia that i cannot personally take any of it seriously.
Is that a direct quote? What does it matter it was 2,000 years ago originally in arameic (now a dead language). Written by a speaker of hebrew; later translated into latin, and eventually from latin into some other language to be read and intepretted prior to being transcribed after much debate.
It is unrecognizable from the original text!
Believe what you choose. Praise reality i don't have to.
After the first council of nicea in 325AD. The entire thing ceased being the "word of GOD" and became the "interpretation of man"
I accept that truth as a former catholic.
Grow up!
Adstar · 56-60, M
@jehova
@Adstar whilst the u.s. political situation indeed has nothing to do with the "word of GOD". The politics of the vaticain has much to do with the many edits to those words over the years. Humans morphed the original message of that book.

I am not a catholic.. I am a Christian.. In any case you have heard or read a report that the catholic church changed the Bible.. and YOU decided to believe that report because YOU wanted to believe that report.. Why because in your mind you wanted to reject the Word of God and confirmation bias made you latch onto the report that the Bible had been changed.. Woe to anyone who embraces an evil report.. Again in the end you will be judged on what you embraced as truth and what you rejected..

Again its a book written by humans.

Humans inspired by The Holy Spirit..

i cannot personally take any of it seriously.

You don't WANT to take it seriously because you disagree with the Message of God.. Something or some things in that scripture offends you, therefore you latch onto any report that attempts to undermine it's validity.. As i have said before Disagreement comes before Disbelief..

Is that a direct quote? What does it matter it was 2,000 years ago originally in arameic (now a dead language).

The Old testament was originally written in Hebrew.. The New testament in Greek..

After the first council of nicea in 325AD. The entire thing ceased being the "word of GOD" and became the "interpretation of man"

So you believe God is so weak and pathetic that he would allow His message to be sabotaged to the extent to make it of no salvational effect... That shows that you do not see God as being an Actual GOD.. You humanize God knocking Him down to limited human levels.. I know why your doing this because you want to reject His will.. So be it..


I accept that truth as a former catholic.
Grow up!

Well at lest we have one thing in common.. We are both former catholics.. But i grew up by actually reading the Word of God from the start of Genesis to the end of Revelation in my early 20's and The message as a whole moved me to accept The Word of God which is a title for Jesus.. 😁

All Praise The Ancient Of Days 👍
jehova · 31-35, M
@Adstar cant argue with that. Not worth the time either. Exterior to the book a mans place is to support the mother of his children. As such women should be respected as the ultinate authority in matters of children.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@DeluxedEdition Islamic women follow Paul's instructions on how women should behave far more faithfully than Christian women do.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@Diotrephes They also do some of the Old Testament teachings such as not trimming their beards.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@DeluxedEdition
They also do some of the Old Testament teachings such as not trimming their beards.

Islam is just another version of Judaism. There is a theory that Jews helped write the Koran. The Bible wasn't written until the 680's early 690's, about 40 some years after the Koran was written.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@Diotrephes That is fascinating and thank you for taking the time to share :)
"I do not allow" sounds like a strangely subjective way of beginning a directive in the new testament. It makes me wonder if its a mistake to conflate "do not allow" with "forbid" as we do often do in English
DanielsASJ · 36-40, M
You have a YouTube channel?
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@DanielsASJ I'm very new to yt. I'm finding my footing
walabby · M
The consensus of biblical scholars is that 2 Timothy wasn't written by Paul at all, and was written by someone pretending to be Paul years after Paul's death.
DeluxedEdition · 26-30, F
@walabby the plot thickens
walabby · M
@DeluxedEdition Check out books by Bart Ehrman.

 
Post Comment