Women Learning & Under Authority

[bookslover]

"She alone lost the ability to reason correctly." That's obviously not true. The sin nature affects both sexes, so both sexes have trouble reasoning correctly. I've known guys who have trouble in this area - me included!

 

[PezLad]

If we take the image of God to be rationality, we see that both sexes have a defaced image in them, since all sinners are inherently irrational when it comes to morality and spiritual truth, exchanging the truth of God for a lie. However, we have the image of God in an assertive vessel and a receptive vessel and how the mind-body dynamic affects the image of God in both genders is difficult to examine.

 

[RamistThomist]

Are women naturally stupider and more gullible? Is that the inference we draw? No one wants to say that, but when you anchor it in "the nature of things," that's sort of what it sounds like.

 

[Grant]

I stand by the quotes in the OP and more by my claim that the 2 sermons linked (In totality mind you) represent a balanced approach to this discussion.

"She alone lost the ability to reason correctly." That's obviously not true. The sin nature affects both sexes, so both sexes have trouble reasoning correctly. I've known guys who have trouble in this area - me included!

Richard, the Pastor is not saying that that ALL women lost the ability to reason because of Eve. Nor that ALL men kept it because of Adam. Both sexes are now born fallen due to The Fall. The Pastor denies that Women are more easily deceived than men. See Post # 6, or #17, or #26, or # 30.

He is simply saying Eve , in her fall, lost the ability to reason= was deceived. And further that Adam in his fall, was not deceived.

All, I will digress from this. Maybe I‘m wrong, but if not, I am certainly tiring of going in circles.

Does the pastor’s phrase “lost the ability to reason correctly” = Eve was deceived? If so, doesn’t he say here that Eve’s being deceived is a reason Paul forbids women to teach and have authority over men?

Jeri, in re-reading you here, I see I did not directly answer this. I believe the answer is “Yes” to your question here in light of the totality of the quoted portions.

 

[RamistThomist]

Is being deceived not a lack of correct reasoning ? I

The statement means that men haven't lost the ability to reason correctly, but women have. Think about that. A woman is not able to reason correctly. That is literally what that statement means.

 

[RamistThomist]

He is simply saying Eve , in her fall, lost the ability to reason= was deceived.

The problem is that she was deceived before the fall, so that doesn't work. And in any case, the Bible doesn't teach that women are incapable of reasoning correctly. Can't limit it to just Eve, since Paul's argument is not aimed at Eve, but certain women in that church.

 

[Grant]

The statement means that men haven't lost the ability to reason correctly, but women have. Think about that. A woman is not able to reason correctly. That is literally what that statement means.

Jacob your not reading the phrase right. In the sentence he is speaking about Eve and not “the female sex by nature”.

 

[RamistThomist]

Jacob your nor reading the phrase right. In the sentence he is speaking about Eve and not “the female sex by nature”.

That doesn't work, since this all goes back to Paul's using Eve as an argument that certain women in the church can't teach. If it is just about Eve, then it is pointless of Paul to appeal to Eve to silence these women.

 

[Grant]

The problem is that she was deceived before the fall, so that doesn't work. And in any case, the Bible doesn't teach that women are incapable of reasoning correctly. Can't limit it to just Eve, since Paul's argument is not aimed at Eve, but certain women in that church.

Okay, but my understanding is that when Sin tranpires in outward acts, those laws have already been violated in the heart.

 

[Grant]

That doesn't work, since this all goes back to Paul's using Eve as an argument that certain women in the church can't teach. If it is just about Eve, then it is pointless of Paul to appeal to Eve to silence these women.

I‘m trying to follow you. Why do you think Paul used “Eve was deceived” as one of the reasons for the prohibition for women to teach in the public gathered body?

 

[Jeri Tanner]

G I don’t know if you had time to read the thread I linked to, but what I gleaned from the thread is the important point made there by Reverends Buchanan, Strange, and Winzer that Paul in 1 Timothy 2 speaks to Eve’s deception as a factor only as it relates to the order of creation. The Pastor’s statement that “one of the reasons women are not permitted to exercise authority over men in the public church gathering is that Eve was deceived,” doesn’t reflect that position. I believe the view espoused (and fleshed out most fully in the thread by Rev. Winzer) provides the best understanding to uphold the creation order as the foundation for male headship in the home and church and society.

 

[RamistThomist]

I‘m trying to follow you. Why do you think Paul used “Eve was deceived” as one of the reasons for the prohibition for women to teach in the public gathered body?

Why would Paul's argumetn work if the problem with Eve didn't extend to women, at least on this gloss?

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I‘m trying to follow you. Why do you think Paul used “Eve was deceived” as one of the reasons for the prohibition for women to teach in the public gathered body?

I did not like it initially, but I think I understand better now the position that says that Paul isn’t using “Eve was deceived” as a reason, per se.

 

[Grant]

Are women naturally stupider and more gullible? Is that the inference we draw? No one wants to say that, but when you anchor it in "the nature of things," that's sort of what it sounds like.

To be fair this is not what the Pastor is saying. Further, no one, not even Perg is saying that women are somehow “stupider”. That is a misrepresentation of an opposing view that is a foundation-less assertion. Both sexes can be said to be stupid, we like sheep are all (male and female) prone to wonder away from our Holy Shepherd to all sorts of worthless things. Not worth speaking more with you on this, if this is the tactic. I am trying to rightly understand various views on this toipic. Though I do not have an issue saying ordinarily men and women tend to have unique propensities.

 

[Grant]

G I don’t know if you had time to read the thread I linked to, but what I gleaned from the thread is the important point made there by Reverends Buchanan, Strange, and Winzer that Paul in 1 Timothy 2 speaks to Eve’s deception as a factor only as it relates to the order of creation. The Pastor’s statement that “one of the reasons women are not permitted to exercise authority over men in the public church gathering is that Eve was deceived,” doesn’t reflect that position. I believe the view espoused (and fleshed out most fully in the thread by Rev. Winzer) provides the best understanding to uphold the creation order as the foundation for male headship in the home and church and society.

I also enjoyed their positions. Pastor Thomas might could have worded some things better, but he also roots the issue with a usurping the authorities laid out by God in creation. Notice his discussion on how the punishments get dished out.

 

[Grant]

Why would Paul's argumetn work if the problem with Eve didn't extend to women, at least on this gloss?

Jacob, I asked a genuine question to try and learn. I not playing the “question for a question” game.

 

[RamistThomist]

To be fair this is not what the Pastor is saying. Further, no one, not even Perg is saying that women are somehow “stupider”. That is a misrepresentation of an opposing view that is a foundation-less assertion.

I know nobody wants to say that. I'm simply pointing out the logical inference of the argument. It's not a foundation-less assertion.

1. Eve lost her ability to reason (which the Bible never says and is quite frankly bizarre, since humans reason by necessity every day).
2. There is a connection between women and Eve, otherwise Paul's argument doesn't make sense.
3. Therefore, women can't reason.

 

[Grant]

I know nobody wants to say that. I'm simply pointing out the logical inference of the argument. It's not a foundation-less assertion.

1. Eve lost her ability to reason (which the Bible never says and is quite frankly bizarre, since humans reason by necessity every day).
2. There is a connection between women and Eve, otherwise Paul's argument doesn't make sense.
3. Therefore, women can't reason.

He seems to be saying that Eve (The actual person) was deceived by Satan. Further he brings in the authority structure of creation order by showing that Eve was not more prone to deception than Adam but because of her weaker or “lower” position (not being the head) Satan tempted her first. So my take away is that Women should not have authority over men in the gathered church because (rewording), Eve was deceived and thus is a reminder that Satan‘s strategy in the fall was to usurp headship from bottom to top. Therefore Paul reminds the church why this cannot happen in the Church because it was the very strategy used in the Fall.

Again not laying out my own position, but just what I took Pastor Thomas‘s position to be.

 

[timfost]

Is this not just re-stating the biblical fact that Eve was deceived and Adam was not? Is being deceived not a lack of correct reasoning ? In full sermon context he also highlights Adam’s failures as well.

Grant,

We're speaking past each other a little. You are correct, it is a biblical fact that Eve was deceived. The portion of the sermon you cite, however, goes beyond this and said "she alone lost the ability to reason correctly." This is not a biblical fact. He makes an assertion about a change in her nature in contrast to the nature of man.

Prior to this section (4th time now), the Pastor states this:
”The Bible does not say that a woman is more prone to deception than a man. It is not that women are more gullible than men, and so for that reason cannot be teachers.”

The portion you quoted does affirm that women are not more gullible than men, while at the same time affirming that women are not as able to reason as men. I hear you, Grant. But try not to discard the information from the first post you made. He argued that another reason women can't be in positions of authority in church or home is that she cannot, as a woman, "reason correctly." The portion you've quoted a handful of times now doesn't make these former assertions go away.

Does that help clarify why so many people are reacting to what you shared?

 

[Grant]

Grant,

We're speaking past each other a little. You are correct, it is a biblical fact that Eve was deceived. The portion of the sermon you cite, however, goes beyond this and said "she alone lost the ability to reason correctly." This is not a biblical fact. He makes an assertion about a change in her nature in contrast to the nature of man.



The portion you quoted does affirm that women are not more gullible than men, while at the same time affirming that women are not as able to reason as men. I hear you, Grant. But try not to discard the information from the first post you made. He argued that another reason women can't be in positions of authority in church or home is that she cannot, as a woman, "reason correctly." The portion you've quoted a handful of times now doesn't make these former assertions go away.

Does that help clarify why so many people are reacting to what you shared?

Yes I can see and understand your concern.

 

[RamistThomist]

. So my take away is that Women should not have authority over men in the gathered church because (rewording), Eve was deceived and thus is a reminder that Satan‘s strategy in the fall was to usurp headship from bottom to top. Therefore Paul reminds the church why this cannot happen in the Church because it was the very strategy used in the Fall.

If that's true then why bring in the bizarre claim that Eve lost the ability to reason? What makes that dangerous is the link (which all admit) between Eve and women today. If Eve lost the ability to reason, then so have women today, otherwise Paul was mistaken in this analogy.

I know the pastor isn't saying that (because it is so awful), but that's exactly where his position leads.

 

[Grant]

If that's true then why bring in the bizarre claim that Eve lost the ability to reason? What makes that dangerous is the link (which all admit) between Eve and women today. If Eve lost the ability to reason, then so have women today, otherwise Paul was mistaken in this analogy.

I know the pastor isn't saying that (because it is so awful), but that's exactly where his position leads.

I think it could have been worded better. I want to assume the man is not contradicting himself. Would you have issue if the phrase “she alone lost the ability to reason” instead read ‘she alone was deceived”?

 

[RamistThomist]

Would you have issue if the phrase “she alone lost the ability to reason” instead read ‘she alone was deceived”?

Yes, for several reasons.
1) If Eve lost the ability to reason, then Eve for the rest of her life would have believed that A = ~A.
2) The text never says that.

The only way the quote can be salvaged (hypothetically, since it isn't biblical), is to rephrase it:

1* Even temporarily lost the ability to reason. That might work. It is similar to how humans' pre-frontal cortex shuts down during sex.

The statement is still wrong biblically, but at least it isn't quite as bizarre.

 

[Grant]

Yes, for several reasons.
1) If Eve lost the ability to reason, then Eve for the rest of her life would have believed that A = ~A.
2) The text never says that.

The only way the quote can be salvaged (hypothetically, since it isn't biblical), is to rephrase it:

1* Even temporarily lost the ability to reason. That might work. It is similar to how humans' pre-frontal cortex shuts down during sex.

The statement is still wrong biblically, but at least it isn't quite as bizarre.

But Jacob, does Paul not say that Eve alone was deceived in the fall and Adam was not? So I,m not sure why you would have issue with this:

My words:

“Her husband also fell, yes, but she alone was deceived. So the apostle writing to Timothy is saying that this is another reason why women may not teach and have authority over men.“

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I am thinking “lost the ability to reason” actually doesn’t seem equivalent, or come across as equivalent, to “was deceived”?

 

[Grant]

I am thinking “lost the ability to reason” actually doesn’t seem equivalent, or come across as equivalent, to “was deceived”?

I agree, but when I came across it as a reader I took it that way because he already had qualified in the sermon that, in his own view, women are NOT by nature more easily deceived than men, nor by nature dumber.

 

[RamistThomist]

But Jacob, does Paul not say that Eve alone was deceived in the fall and Adam was not? So I,m not sure why you would have issue with this:

My words:

“Her husband also fell, yes, but she alone was deceived. So the apostle writing to Timothy is saying that this is another reason why women may not teach and have authority over men.“

That has nothing to do with losing the ability to reason. In fact, that completely refutes (or at least demonstrates the absurdity) in the pastor's claim. If there is an analogous connection between Eve and women today, which everyone admits, and if Eve lost the ability to reason, then the only logical conclusion is that women today, too, have lost the ability to reason.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

But Jacob, does Paul not say that Eve alone was deceived in the fall and Adam was not? So I,m not sure why you would have issue with this:

My words:

“Her husband also fell, yes, but she alone was deceived. So the apostle writing to Timothy is saying that this is another reason why women may not teach and have authority over men.“

Sorry Grant I know this is directed to Jacob, but I am inserting myself to say the sentence, “Eve’s being deceived was not a reason women may not teach and have authority over men.”
That’s the position I believe of Rev. Winzer, Buchanan, and Strange. Is this correct Rev. Buchanan? If you are still reading.

 

[Grant]

Sorry Grant I know this is directed to Jacob, but I am inserting myself to say the sentence, “Eve’s being deceived was not a reason women may not teach and have authority over men.”
That’s the position I believe of Rev. Winzer, Buchanan, and Strange. Is this correct Rev. Buchanan? If you are still reading.

I would disagree Jeri, because that seems to not only be a plain reading of what Paul says in 1 Timothy 2:12-14, but it has support from many reformed commentators.

 

[User20004000]

Still waiting for the argument, that explains how the deception of Eve (by the serpent) is a statement about, or even is a statement in Genesis taken by Paul to mean, the (relative) gullibility of women, that they are the more gullible or less reasonable sex.

Eve did fall into deception, but there's no reason to infer from Gen.3 that her stumble is reflective of some "natural fact" that affects all her daughters in the same way. I certainly don't think Paul draws that inference from Gen.3 in his (1Tim.2) context either to illustrate or justify his contention.

There's a pesky middle premise that some preachers and exegetes just won't grant, assuming that the argument is even thought that carefully through. I'm not going to accept as "given" any such premise that is not Scriptural. And I'm certainly not going accept one that is "natural theology." I'm quite sure Paul makes no such appeal.

Excellent!