1 Timothy 2:15
- Thread starter Tyrese
- Start date
- Status
Patrick,
I'm quite attracted to RSC's point, though the interpretation focused on contentment with the role God has assigned women in creation is certainly well-founded. In the associated PB thread, the point is made by Rev.Winzer that contextually Paul has concern for order in the church, a very valid point. The reference to the importance of "faith, love, holiness, and self-control" should be taken as the demonstration of lives of true devotion to Christ, as opposed to a universalist notion, or the idea that having a child is a ticket to heaven.
I would only add in preference for RSC's proposal (not original with him as he says himself), that Paul could just as easily punctuate his immediate counseling concern (to Timothy) with a theologically rich point. The reference to Eve--regarding the creation order and the deception that followed--argues the practical point conclusively. So what more needs to be said? What concession is Paul making regarding the female gender?
Rather than leaving the topic on a negative (and potentially denigrating) description, Paul's contextual-awareness could well be drawn to that precious protoevangelium occurring in the same general context of Gen.2 & 3, that speaks of a promised victory through "the seed of the woman." In other words, Paul doesn't simply address "childbearing" as from that context (3:16) without having first passed through the description of the ultimate expression of childbearing (3:15).
To take that context only a little farther, to Gen.4:1, we see Eve's own childbirth, in which she errs identifying that son (Cain) with the promise. Clearly, that childbirth did not bring about the hoped-for salvation. But, there would be one, the childbirth; that is, despite the failures of the first woman, and all the rest of womenkind, hers was not a ruined or despised gender (no more so than the male), and unworthy of salvation. Paul affirms the inherent worth of woman, by testifying that she too will be saved in parallel with the man (and not after him or because of him), by the same Agent. And, in fact, He only arrives by means of her willing engagement in her role.
I'm able to see in Paul's Genesis allusions a very robust theological statement, indeed one that invokes 3:15 as a yet another way of getting to Christ, even while discussing matters of church-order.
I'm quite attracted to RSC's point, though the interpretation focused on contentment with the role God has assigned women in creation is certainly well-founded. In the associated PB thread, the point is made by Rev.Winzer that contextually Paul has concern for order in the church, a very valid point. The reference to the importance of "faith, love, holiness, and self-control" should be taken as the demonstration of lives of true devotion to Christ, as opposed to a universalist notion, or the idea that having a child is a ticket to heaven.
I would only add in preference for RSC's proposal (not original with him as he says himself), that Paul could just as easily punctuate his immediate counseling concern (to Timothy) with a theologically rich point. The reference to Eve--regarding the creation order and the deception that followed--argues the practical point conclusively. So what more needs to be said? What concession is Paul making regarding the female gender?
Rather than leaving the topic on a negative (and potentially denigrating) description, Paul's contextual-awareness could well be drawn to that precious protoevangelium occurring in the same general context of Gen.2 & 3, that speaks of a promised victory through "the seed of the woman." In other words, Paul doesn't simply address "childbearing" as from that context (3:16) without having first passed through the description of the ultimate expression of childbearing (3:15).
To take that context only a little farther, to Gen.4:1, we see Eve's own childbirth, in which she errs identifying that son (Cain) with the promise. Clearly, that childbirth did not bring about the hoped-for salvation. But, there would be one, the childbirth; that is, despite the failures of the first woman, and all the rest of womenkind, hers was not a ruined or despised gender (no more so than the male), and unworthy of salvation. Paul affirms the inherent worth of woman, by testifying that she too will be saved in parallel with the man (and not after him or because of him), by the same Agent. And, in fact, He only arrives by means of her willing engagement in her role.
I'm able to see in Paul's Genesis allusions a very robust theological statement, indeed one that invokes 3:15 as a yet another way of getting to Christ, even while discussing matters of church-order.
KaphLamedh
Puritan Board Freshman
Thanks Bruce and Mr. Religion.
Marrow Man
Drunk with Powder
The connection to Eve and the authority issues and the Christological focus in the passage are unmistakeable, as has been mentioned above. There is also an underlying background which both lends credence to this view, plus shows a very practical application for women in general. Philip Towner's commentary on the Pastorals (NICNT series) has a lengthy discussion on a certain "feminist" movement that existed in the Roman Empire at the time ("the new Roman woman"). It was not prevalent throughout the entire Roman world, but did exist to some degree in the major cities (of which Ephesus was one). The elevated role of women (usurping of household roles and authority) was one aspect of this movement, as was an eschewing of the role of motherhood (worldly manners of dress -- see 1 Timothy 2:9 -- being yet another). It would seem likely that the false teachers in Ephesus had seized upon this secular movement and were using it to their advantage with certain women in the Ephesian church. There are obvious references to problems of authority in chapter 2 of 1 Timothy, but there are also references to what this had done to marriage within the Ephesian church as well. 1 Timothy 4:3 mentions the forbidding of marriage as being an element of the false teaching, and in 1 Timothy 5 there is a reference to a problem with younger widows in the church not remarrying; Paul says he wants them to marry and bear children (1 Timothy 5:14). 1 Timothy is very much a "corrective" letter in that Paul is addressing bad doctrine and bad practices in the Ephesian church and instructing Timothy in how to correct these things.
The coming of the Messiah -- the promised seed of the woman/Eve -- is the salvation to which we much all look, male and female. We will not be saved through secular pseudo-religious means. The women in Ephesus were encouraged to continue in faith and love and holiness with self-restraint. They were not to usurp the leadership roles nor follow after the false teachers or worldliness. But they were also being encouraged to be who God made them to be. They did not have to adorn themselves in the way the world adorns itself in order to be "beautiful," but rather they were to adorn themselves with good works, modesty, etc. And the rejection of marriage was not a path to godliness; rather, marrying and having children was a honorable path for the women. It is as if Paul is telling them not to think they are missing out because they are not in leadership roles in the local church; they have a very valuable service in God's Kingdom in the family itself (even those who could not bear children had valuable ministry in the church -- again see 1 Timothy 5 and the lengthy discussion on widows). The "new Roman woman" was not the way to go; God had ordained certain roles for the man and woman, and this was the calling they were to pursue.
The coming of the Messiah -- the promised seed of the woman/Eve -- is the salvation to which we much all look, male and female. We will not be saved through secular pseudo-religious means. The women in Ephesus were encouraged to continue in faith and love and holiness with self-restraint. They were not to usurp the leadership roles nor follow after the false teachers or worldliness. But they were also being encouraged to be who God made them to be. They did not have to adorn themselves in the way the world adorns itself in order to be "beautiful," but rather they were to adorn themselves with good works, modesty, etc. And the rejection of marriage was not a path to godliness; rather, marrying and having children was a honorable path for the women. It is as if Paul is telling them not to think they are missing out because they are not in leadership roles in the local church; they have a very valuable service in God's Kingdom in the family itself (even those who could not bear children had valuable ministry in the church -- again see 1 Timothy 5 and the lengthy discussion on widows). The "new Roman woman" was not the way to go; God had ordained certain roles for the man and woman, and this was the calling they were to pursue.
arapahoepark
Puritan Board Professor
I would agree. It makes more sense given that it is the church roles being discussed. If you go to pipers site he has a free download of recovering man and womanhood and deals with the exegesis I think by Doug moo.
- Status
