# 1 Timothy 5:9



## Romans922 (Apr 17, 2009)

"A widow is to be *put on the list* only if she is not less than sixty years old..."

What is this list? And what is it's purpose?


----------



## Hamalas (Apr 17, 2009)

I always understood it to be a list maintained by the church to identify and aid true widows.


----------



## LawrenceU (Apr 17, 2009)

We discussed this for thee days in a college class. It is most likely either a list for aid, or for widows who do work for the church, or both.


----------



## DonP (Apr 17, 2009)

Convent


----------



## Scott1 (Apr 17, 2009)

I think, in context of the surrounding passages in Romans and elsewhere, this is talking about a class of women who were destitute financially and likely would remain so. They had no husband, family, or other means to provide for their needs.

This has always been a class of dependent persons throughout history and our phrase "widows and orphans" expresses that.

If the widow's life was exemplary and evidenced service and mercy, she could be supported by the church, at the church's expense and dedicate herself to an office in the church of performing works of mercy to all, but particularly appropriately to other women.

This appears to be an office, probably set apart by prayer and vow, under the authority of the Elders and Deacons, to perform "good works" or mercy and service as needed in the church, somewhat in return for the church taking responsibility to her support her and hold her accountable to those vows.


----------



## Hamalas (Apr 17, 2009)

PeaceMaker said:


> Convent


----------



## chbrooking (Apr 17, 2009)

What about it gives the appearance of an office?

Remember that orphans and widows were vulnerable, in the sense that they did not have male oversight. Don't go bashing me for this, it's just the way it was. When a woman married, she left her father's oversight and came under her husband's. If there was a divorce or she was widowed early enough, she could return to her father's roof. But an older widow would not have that societal protection. How would she earn her bread? I believe this was a ministry of mercy to the elderly widows of the church, nothing more.


----------



## Ex Nihilo (Apr 17, 2009)

I've always wondered why sixty was the cut-off age. The passage mentions that younger widows could remarry and bear children, but childbearing capacity, for many (most?) women ends long before sixty. Also, I've heard some use this passage to say that, for example, a 57-year-old in a bad situation could not be financially helped -- surely this is wrong. Is the enrollment a distinction between temporary and permanent help?


----------



## DonP (Apr 17, 2009)

Ex Nihilo said:


> I've always wondered why sixty was the cut-off age. The passage mentions that younger widows could remarry and bear children, but childbearing capacity, for many (most?) women ends long before sixty. Also, I've heard some use this passage to say that, for example, a 57-year-old in a bad situation could not be financially helped -- surely this is wrong. Is the enrollment a distinction between temporary and permanent help?



I think it is an approximation not an absolute. But 50 is pretty common for the change now and may have been later then. But not essential she is still child bearing, but more that she is no longer wonton, tempted to want more than a holy kiss. 

And for those who think the list is an office of deacon, no it was assistant Deacon, women can't be deacons.

Don't you think it would help our churches today if we had the position, non-office of Asst Deacon. 
Then they have a title for the duty; they may be called upon to accompany a male deacon or elder to do visits with women esp. and also where the may have useful skills, cooking, nursing, etc. whatever is needed, while the deacon chops her some wood or fixes her computer.


----------



## satz (Apr 18, 2009)

Ex Nihilo said:


> I've always wondered why sixty was the cut-off age. The passage mentions that younger widows could remarry and bear children, but childbearing capacity, for many (most?) women ends long before sixty. Also, I've heard some use this passage to say that, for example, a 57-year-old in a bad situation could not be financially helped -- surely this is wrong. Is the enrollment a distinction between temporary and permanent help?



I think you are right that the enrolment is a distinction between two types of charity taught in the bible. Normally, charity is only extended to those who are helping themselves as much as they possibly can. Paul said if someone just doesn't want to work, the church should let him go hungry (2 Thess 3:10). Even in OT Israel, charity to widows and orphans was to make it easier for them to work for a living - by gleaning fields like Ruth. But godly charity to these people did not normally entail full time support. They still had to go out to the fields and do their bit. 

_Deuteronomy 24:19 When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands._

I think the "list" in 1 Tim 5 is a special list of widows who are entitled to full time support by the church. It is for godly women who have lived lives full of good works (1 Tim 5:10) to have a "retirement"- to use a modern word- from having to worry about finances.

So the list in 1 Tim 5 is a kind of special support for a particular class of widows. But I don't think it disqualifies extraordinary help for a 50 yr old who is placed in bad situation by providence.


----------



## DonP (Apr 18, 2009)

satz said:


> I think the "list" in 1 Tim 5 is a special list of widows who are entitled to full time support by the church. It is for godly women who have lived lives full of good works (1 Tim 5:10) to have a "retirement"- to use a modern word- from having to worry about finances.
> 
> So the list in 1 Tim 5 is a kind of special support for a particular class of widows. But I don't think it disqualifies extraordinary help for a 50 yr old who is placed in bad situation by providence.



Agree except for the retirement part. I think they may have actually served the church. Continuing to do good works for others, serving and helping others, maybe as an assistant to deacons.


----------



## Rich Koster (Apr 18, 2009)

PeaceMaker said:


> satz said:
> 
> 
> > I think the "list" in 1 Tim 5 is a special list of widows who are entitled to full time support by the church. It is for godly women who have lived lives full of good works (1 Tim 5:10) to have a "retirement"- to use a modern word- from having to worry about finances.
> ...



What brand of worms are those, regulative or normative ?


----------



## satz (Apr 18, 2009)

PeaceMaker said:


> Agree except for the retirement part. I think they may have actually served the church. Continuing to do good works for others, serving and helping others, maybe as an assistant to deacons.



I agree completely. Sorry I may have caused confusion by using the word "retirement". I didn't mean she just sat around doing nothing. I was refering to not having to worry about her financial provision anymore.


----------

