please clarify this statement from the bible

[Malaikah]

Greetings...

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women[a] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.​

1 Timothy 2

Please clarify... is this putting the blame on women? And making them seem inferior? :mmokay:

Aren't women allowed to teach men?:?

 

[Keltoi]

Gender roles were very important in ancient times, and some would say they still are. In Biblical society, the tradition was that women dress modestly, wear their hair long, and were required to wear the gender-appropriate head covering. It would have been quite a scandal for a woman to take a leadership role.

When asking the Christian perspective on this issue one has to concentrate on the New Testament though. All of Jesus's disciples were male, and they were sent to the land of the Gentiles knowing they would have to find food wherever they could and face probable martyrdom. This wouldn't have been an appropriate task or role for a female in their traditional culture. The Bible is very explicit that women should not take the role of minister or priest.

The Apostle Paul proclaimed that all people were equal in God's sight. This isn't simply Paul's belief, as Jesus Christ defied convention and allowed women into His larger circle of disciples. The important change to the conventions of Biblical culture was summed up quite nicely in the following passage:
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (NIV, Galatians 3:26-29)

 

[don532]

Romans 16
1I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant[a] of the church in Cenchrea. 2I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me. 3Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus

Servant as refers to Phoebe, can also be translated deaconess. So we have an example of a woman in church office in Romans.

 

[lolwatever]

^ but that doesn't explain the quote malaikah put which sentences women to subservience n utter silence.

^^ keltoi, but don't you agree that the quote malaikah provided suggests that women have pretty much no role at all :| ?

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

oops (Md Mashud)

 

[don532]

Usually when I ask for an explanation of a verse in the Qur'an, the explanation starts out by telling me I need to look at the context. Well guess what. We need to look at the context the passage was written in.

Paul explicitly identifies the presence of different teaching within the church at Ephesus as the primary reason for writing to Timothy. “As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith” (1 Tim. 1:3-4). His instructions are directed to both Timothy and the church (1 Tim. 1:18; 3:14-15). The nature of this different teaching remains relatively ambiguous, in part because the letter itself is the primary source for our knowledge of what the different teaching entails. Parallel descriptions within 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus suggest that a similar issue is being addressed, although the setting and time frame vary. While a precise description of the different teaching continues to elude scholars, several elements are discernible from the text.
Paul’s alarm about the propagation of this different teaching appears to be directed towards people within the church itself. Those who occupy themselves with this different teaching have “deviated from,” “renounced,” “missed the mark,” or “wandered away” from the primary goal of Paul’s instruction (1 Tim. 1:4-6; 4:1; 2 Tim. 2:15; 4:4). Several individuals are named, presumably because they are known by people in the church (1 Tim. 1:19-20; 2 Tim. 2:15, 17-18). Concern about the character and behavior of leaders within the church (1 Tim. 3:1-13; 5:17-22; Titus 1:5-9) alludes to Paul’s earlier warnings that “some even from your own group will come distorting the truth in order to entice the disciples to follow them” (Acts 20:30). The danger that some leaders may “fall into disgrace and the snare of the devil” appears to be very real (1 Tim. 3:6-7).
Paul characterizes the different teaching that is pervading the church as meaningless talk, disputes about words, and profane chatter (1 Tim. 1:6; 6:4, 20; 2 Tim. 2:14, 16). This idle talk, which breeds senseless controversy and promotes speculation, is furthermore described as “contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge” (1 Tim. 1:4; 6:4, 20; 2 Tim. 2:23; Titus 1:10; 3:9). On the one hand, Paul asserts that those promoting this different teaching do not really understand what they are saying; on the other hand, this idle talk is a direct result of deception (1 Tim. 1:7; 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:13; Titus 1:10). This inability to understand the truth is likened to being caught in the snare of the devil and held captive to do his will (1 Tim. 6:5; 2 Tim. 2:15-26).

Reading 1 Timothy 2:9-15 within its literary context demonstrates that Paul’s instructions for women are integrated with his larger purpose for writing Timothy: a proper response to the presence of different teaching in the church. Women, most likely the younger widows, were involved in some way with the promotion of different teaching, and Paul seeks to prohibit them from continuing to deceive others. Paul’s overarching concern that women reflect godliness through good works acts as a counterbalance to the deceptive temptation and destructive effects of the different teaching. Paul’s response is consistent with both his instructions for the entire church and his concern for Timothy, thereby indicating that he is not addressing women here simply because they are women.

The relevance of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 for the life of the contemporary church is grounded within the purpose of the entire book. Instead of using a selective “cut and paste” approach to application, the significance of this passage emerges out of a holistic reading of the text within its context. The correction of those who were caught in deception was to be done with gentleness because “God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil” (2 Tim. 2:25-26). Sometimes the appropriate response was even to “rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in faith” (Titus 1:13). Paul’s instruction in 1 Timothy 2:9-15 is an example of his correction of women who were involved in promoting different teaching in the church. In the face of threats to the faith of the church, the goal of Paul’s instruction was the call to godliness: true knowledge of God reflected in a consistent lifestyle. Godliness is to be evidenced by self-control, quietness, submission, and continuing in faith, love, and holiness.

 

[Keltoi]

^ but that doesn't explain the quote malaikah put which sentences women to subservience n utter silence.

^^ keltoi, but don't you agree that the quote malaikah provided suggests that women have pretty much no role at all :| ?

As I stated, the Bible is fairly specific that women aren't allowed to be ministers or priests. However, the meat of the issue is whether one takes these instructions as the cultural norm of the time, or a direct commandment from God. I, and many others, take these instructions to be the cultural norm of the time, like head covering. Jesus Christ never made any statement about the submissive role of women, but He did allow women to be a part of his larger group of disciples. Personally I see it as a cultural issue, and not necessarily a religious one.

 

[don532]

I agree with Keltoi there is some cultural influence here. However, I don't think we can ignore the context of the purpose of Paul's letter.

 

[YusufNoor]

Greetings...

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women[a] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.​

1 Timothy 2

Please clarify... is this putting the blame on women? And making them seem inferior? :mmokay:

Aren't women allowed to teach men?:?

A`udhu Billahi mina Shaytanir Rajeem,

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalamu alaykum wa'rahma-tullahi, wa'barakatahu,

if a woman wanted equality, she'd become a Muslim!

Gender roles were very important in ancient times, and some would say they still are. In Biblical society, the tradition was that women dress modestly, wear their hair long, and were required to wear the gender-appropriate head covering. It would have been quite a scandal for a woman to take a leadership role.

if we change one word:

Gender roles were very important in BIBLICAL times, and some would say they still are. In Biblical society, the tradition was that women dress modestly, wear their hair long, and were required to wear the gender-appropriate head covering.

sounds kind of Islamic, eh??

When asking the Christian perspective on this issue one has to concentrate on the New Testament though. All of Jesus's disciples were male, and they were sent to the land of the Gentiles knowing they would have to find food wherever they could and face probable martyrdom. This wouldn't have been an appropriate task or role for a female in their traditional culture. The Bible is very explicit that women should not take the role of minister or priest.

2000 years later and people still want to ignore Mary of Magdala...:enough!:

no wonder the planet earth required further guidance from Allah(SWT)!

 

[lolwatever]

As I stated, the Bible is fairly specific that women aren't allowed to be ministers or priests. However, the meat of the issue is whether one takes these instructions as the cultural norm of the time, or a direct commandment from God. I, and many others, take these instructions to be the cultural norm of the time, like head covering. Jesus Christ never made any statement about the submissive role of women, but He did allow women to be a part of his larger group of disciples. Personally I see it as a cultural issue, and not necessarily a religious one.

Hi Keltoi

do you have evidence to indicate that it is only cultural and not religious? also, if the bible is th word of god, why would he ordain/allow things that are the anti-thesis of justice? (e.g. being fully submissive, not allowing others to learn from her even if she's right.. etc)

 

[Keltoi]

A`udhu Billahi mina Shaytanir Rajeem,

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalamu alaykum wa'rahma-tullahi, wa'barakatahu,

if a woman wanted equality, she'd become a Muslim!



if we change one word:

Gender roles were very important in BIBLICAL times, and some would say they still are. In Biblical society, the tradition was that women dress modestly, wear their hair long, and were required to wear the gender-appropriate head covering.

sounds kind of Islamic, eh??



2000 years later and people still want to ignore Mary of Magdala...:enough!:

no wonder the planet earth required further guidance from Allah(SWT)!

I wasn't ignoring Mary Magdalene. As I have repeated, Jesus Christ accepted women into his general group of disciples, but the 12 apostles, the original disciples, were all male.

 

[Keltoi]

Hi Keltoi

do you have evidence to indicate that it is only cultural and not religious? also, if the bible is th word of god, why would he ordain/allow things that are the anti-thesis of justice? (e.g. being fully submissive, not allowing others to learn from her even if she's right.. etc)

Evidence? I suppose the traditional cultural norms that existed at the time. It isn't like Biblical times were special in that regard, the role of women has always been deemed a more "submissive" role throughout human history. It has only recently undergone a major change.

Why does God allow anything that we deem to be the "anti-thesis" of justice? Do you believe since God doesn't interfere in the slaughter and death that exists in the world it is an endorsement? Not that I'm comparing this to genocide or the like, but hopefully you get my meaning.

 

[Malaikah]

How far does the restriction of not allowing women to teach men go? Can a women teach her son or husband?

 

[don532]

One verse taken alone and out of context in either the Bible or the Qur'an can sound very negative toward women.

Such as in the Qur'an:[4.34] Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

Now we know there are many other verses in the Qur'an that speak very positively of women.

Jesus' actions as recorded in the Bible did not belittle women. Jesus' radical treatment of women is shown many times in the Bible.

Christ overthrew many centuries of Jewish law and custom. He consistently treated women and men as equals. He violated numerous Old Testament regulations, which specified gender inequality. He refused to follow the behavioral rules established by the three main Jewish religious groups of the day: the Essenes, Pharisees and Sadducees. As Metzger stated, Jesus' action towards women were therefore revolutionary."

Some examples are:
He ignored ritual impurity laws: Mark 5:25-34 describes Jesus' cure of a woman who suffered from menstrual bleeding for 12 years. In Judean society of the day, it was a major transgression for a man to talk to a woman other than his wife or children.

He talked to foreign women: John 4:7 to 5:30 describes Jesus' conversation with a woman of Samaria. She was doubly ritually unclean since she was both a foreigner and a woman. Men were not allowed to talk to women, except within their own families. Jesus also helped a Canaanite woman, another foreigner, in Matthew 15:22-28. Although non-Jews were described as "dogs", he was willing to talk to her, and is recorded as having cured her daughter of demon-possession.

He taught women students: Jewish tradition at the time was to not allow women to be taught. Rabbi Eliezer wrote in the 1st century CE: "Rather should the words of the Torah be burned than entrusted to a woman...Whoever teaches his daughter the Torah is like one who teaches her obscenity."
Jesus overthrew centuries of tradition. In Luke 10:38-42, he taught Mary, sister of Martha.

He used terminology which treated women as equal to men:
Luke 13:16 describes how he cured a woman from an indwelling Satanic spirit. He called her a daughter of Abraham, thus implying that she had equal status with sons of Abraham. "The expression 'son of Abraham' was commonly used to respectfully refer to a Jew, but 'daughter of Abraham', was an unknown parallel phrase...It occurs nowhere else in the Bible." It seems to be a designation created by Jesus.

Luke 7:35 to 8:50 describes how Jesus' forgave a woman's sins. He refers to women and men (i.e. "all" people) as children of wisdom.
He accepted women in his inner circle: Luke 8:1-3 describes the inner circle of Jesus' followers: 12 male disciples and an unspecified number female supporters (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna and "many others.") It would appear that about half of his closest followers were women.

He appeared first to one or more women after his resurrection: Matthew 28:9-10 describes how Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary" were the first followers of Jesus to meet him after his resurrection.

Women were present at Jesus' execution: Matthew 27:55-56 and Mark 15:40-41 describe many women who followed Jesus from Galilee and were present at his crucifixion. The men had fled from the scene. (John 19:25-27 adds John as being present with the women.)

He told parallel male/female stories: The author of the Gospel of Luke and of Acts shows many parallel episodes: one relating to a woman, the other to a man. For example:
Simeon and Hannah in Luke 2:25-38
Widow of Sarepta and Naaman in Luke 4:25-38
Healing of a man possessed by a demon and the healing of the mother of Peter's wife, starting in Luke 4:31
The woman who had lived a sinful life and Simon, starting in Luke 7:36
A man and woman sleeping together in Luke 17:34
Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11
Dionysius and Damaris in Acts 17:34
Lydia and the jailer's conversion in Acts 16:14-34

The book "Women in the Earliest Churches" lists 9 additional parallels. Author Ben Withernington III quotes H. Flender:

"Luke expresses by this arrangement that man and woman stand together and side by side before God. They are equal in honor and grace; they are endowed with the same gifts and have the same responsibilities."

He expressed concern for widows: Jesus repeated the importance of supporting widows throughout his ministry. The Gospel of Luke alone contains 6 references to widows: (Luke 2:36, 4:26, 7:11, 18:1, 20:47 and 21:1)

Divorce: In Jesus' time, a man could divorce his wife, but the wife had no right to divorce her husband. This practice is supported by seven references in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) in which a husband can unilaterally give his wife a bill of divorce. There were no references to a woman giving her husband such a bill. In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus overthrows this tradition and states that neither spouse can divorce the other; he treats the wife and husband equally.

Honestly, I can find no verse in the Bible that says specifically women should be teachers. Perhaps I am wrong, but in the Biblical account of Jesus' life, I do not find any indication he specifically limited their participation in his ministry because of their gender.

Perhaps the apostles being male gave them more credibility because of the Jewish culture of the time regarding women. That is conjecture on my part, but nevertheless a possibility to consider.

 

[lolwatever]

Evidence? I suppose the traditional cultural norms that existed at the time. It isn't like Biblical times were special in that regard, the role of women has always been deemed a more "submissive" role throughout human history. It has only recently undergone a major change.

Heya Keltoi,

I disagree, if we look at pre-Islamic Arab history, women and other segements of society where very unfairly treated and also had extremely submissive roles. When Islam came on stage, Allah explicitly condemned all that and new laws where put in place (e.g. wrt trading wives, freedom of choice wrt marriage, mother having higher status than father wrt obedience etc...).

Clearly to Allah justice is time independent and doesn't depend on the norms of society, Islam is there to change society and not to leaev it with whatever injustice it already carries.

Why does God allow anything that we deem to be the "anti-thesis" of justice? Do you believe since God doesn't interfere in the slaughter and death that exists in the world it is an endorsement? Not that I'm comparing this to genocide or the like, but hopefully you get my meaning.

Because Allah puts the onus on humankind to remove the injustice, there's natural laws that Allah put in place, as well as the laws that he sent down in teh form of the Torah, Injeel and Quran which command us to eliviate the injustice. With the promise that those who don't work towards removing injustice in this life by implementing his laws, will be punished in the hereafter (severely).

 

[lolwatever]

don, could u space out ur reply a bit so it's more readable.. im happy 2 read it n reply.. but its a bit unreader friendly atm.

 

[don532]

don, could u space out ur reply a bit so it's more readable.. im happy 2 read it n reply.. but its a bit unreader friendly atm.

Thank you for pointing that out. I edited the spacing for readability. I hope that helps.

 

[lolwatever]

Hi don , thx4 that, read thru ur reply.

you quote a number of reports of women, but non of them contradict the verse malaikah posted. or atleast prove that women can teach, or should not be obedient 'just becasue they ahve to' etc.

as for the verse u posted from the quran, there's threads out here that deal specifically with it, but there's a difference between a punishment for being rebellious (and as a last resort, and as ibn abbas explaiend, with a miswak-tooth brush-), and dooming somoene to silence, subservience and inability to teach even fi they're right.

all the bset.

ps: personally i don't believe God revealed commandments like that, if anything it's the word of man and not God. Sicne Allah would never allow cultural norms to prevail if they're not inline with principles of justice.

 

[Keltoi]

Heya Keltoi,

I disagree, if we look at pre-Islamic Arab history, women and other segements of society where very unfairly treated and also had extremely submissive roles. When Islam came on stage, Allah explicitly condemned all that and new laws where put in place (e.g. wrt trading wives, freedom of choice wrt marriage, mother having higher status than father wrt obedience etc...).

Clearly to Allah justice is time independent and doesn't depend on the norms of society, Islam is there to change society and not to leaev it with whatever injustice it already carries.



Because Allah puts the onus on humankind to remove the injustice, there's natural laws that Allah put in place, as well as the laws that he sent down in teh form of the Torah, Injeel and Quran which command us to eliviate the injustice. With the promise that those who don't work towards removing injustice in this life by implementing his laws, will be punished in the hereafter (severely).

You say Islam changed injustice, but are women allowed to be clerics in Islam? What did Islam change as far as women's rights that other societies haven't done?

As far as the "anti-thesis" of judgement topic, you basically answered your own question. It is up to human beings to change the norms of their society if they are not in the spirit of justice.

 

[lolwatever]

You say Islam changed injustice, but are women allowed to be clerics in Islam? What did Islam change as far as women's rights that other societies haven't done?

Yes they are, Ibn Qayyim is one of the most popular scholars of Islam, he had *dozens* of female 'sheikhs' (i put sheikh in quotes coz sheikh is for male, female version would be '3alimah..).

If you're referring to prayer, there's wisdoms behidn why she can't be an Imam, men would prob be thinking about her instead of what she's saying... if u get wat i mean. Other than that there's no limits to what she can do in the field of Islamic dawah and education. Aisha, Julanaar and others are a great example amongst others.

As far as the "anti-thesis" of judgement topic, you basically answered your own question. It is up to human beings to change the norms of their society if they are not in the spirit of justice.

I agree, but if people believe that God supports injustice like the one quoted by malaikah, then why should it be changed if its already "condoned by god"?

tc all the best