Win an ESV Calfskin Study Bible!

"A Boomer in the Pew" blog is giving anyone who is interested, a chance at winning a one of a kind Calfskin ESV Study Bible.

It's retail value is $239.99 and is one of the BEST study bibles you can find.

Here is a link on how to register: here

Biblical Slavery as Opposed to 19th Century Slavery

In a "Bible as Literature" course I am taking that is taught by an atheist, he continually brings up points with no reference to context, culture, or history. This upsets me, the fact that this course is not about studying the Bible as literature, but an attack on the Christian faith. Most points are not even relevant to proving the Bible is irrelevant or flawed... the only agenda for the professor is to give his opinion concerning why the Bible does not meet his standards of a literary work about the one and only God it professes.

His latest quick rant was about slavery in Exodus. He claims that we should all know slavery is in essence "wrong," but compares slavery described in Exodus to Black slavery in the 19th Century. This is very misleading. We would assume that Exodus slavery was based exclusively on a certain race, that the slaves were uneducated, and that those slaves had no chance at freedom other than a lucky escape.

This is not the case. Slavery in the times that Exodus describes was very distinguishable from modern day slavery. Slaves were not chosen only by race, but slavery was more of a social status. Some people even sold themselves as slaves to provide for their families. Slavery was even considered a type of "trade." Slaves were most of the time, more knowledgeable or smarter than their masters, and would carry out favors that their master's could not do themselves. Even doctors and lawyers were sometimes slaves to other masters during biblical times.

Sounds very different from more modern day slavery over the past few centuries, huh? There are also rules for how slavery must be conducted, since God knew it was a way of life during that time - guidelines were made to ensure it was in essence, a "better" form of slavery. These guidelines (which I will list below) give the terms a slave may serve, proper treatment, and etc. Slavery later on in the New Testament wasn't as common, and slave traders were categorized with "those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurer" (gotquestions.org)

Here are the guidelines that were set for slavery in OT times:

• The Bible acknowledged the slave’s status as the property of the master (Ex. 21:23; Lev. 25:46),
• The Bible restricted the master’s power over the slave. Ex. 21:20).
• The slave was a member of the master’s household (Lev. 22:11)
• The slave was required to rest on the Sabbath (Exodus 20:10; Deut. 5:14)
• The slave was required and to participate in religious observances (Gen. 17:13; Exodus 12:44; Lev. 22:11).
• The Bible prohibited extradition of slaves and granted them asylum (Deut. 23:16-17).
• The servitude of a Hebrew debt-slave was limited to six years (Ex. 21:2; Deut. 15:12).
• When a slave was freed, he was to receive gifts that enabled him to survive economically (Deut. 15:14)

My point in writing this is to show the huge difference between Biblical slavery in the Old Testament as opposed to more modern day slavery in the past few centuries. It is much different, and I would say "better" in Biblical times than in more modern times - though I do not condone the idea as "okay." My point is the treatment, roles, and idea of slavery were two completely different things and should not be compared as though they are exactly the same.

Use of Profanity

I have recently been pondering the idea of profanity. What makes "cuss" words so distinctly worse than every day vocabulary. Maybe it's the intention's behind them, sometimes used to cut others down or act unkindly. But what about those profane words that are not used in bad manner?

Let me give you an example: I am walking down a stairway, when suddenly... I trip. I fall down 3 stairs, cutting open my left knee. I exclaim, "Sh**, that hurts!!!" Is saying the phrase sinful? Lets say instead of using that phrase, I exclaim "Shoot, that hurts!!!" In both instances, my vocabulary choices are different, but have the same meaning. I am upset and hurt because of a fall I take down a set of stairs.

So my question is this: what makes substituting other words with same or similar meanings in for a "cuss" word or profane word, any better than actually using a cuss word?!

We know this from scripture - Ephesians 4:29 tells us, "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen."

Is this considered unwholesome talk? If so, why? You are hurt, and your body is alerted to be in pain. That signal is sent to our brain. If we use a profane word, although meaning the same as a "non-profane" word, is one better than the other?

I want to know what you guys think.

Wedding and Absence from Site

My wedding is now officially less than 2 weeks from today: 13 days. I am very excited, nervous, and emotional all at once.

I am truly sorry that I was not able to make many posts these past few months. The reason for this is because of my college courseload. Bringing up my GPA to get into the program I am majoring in is necessary for me to graduate sometime in the next year and a half. I also will be planning to attend graduate school, which will be extremely stressful, but hopefully it will pay off in the long run.

Hope all of you, my readers, out there are having great times with your lives. Please keep me updated to know how things are going.

Grace,
Jeremy

1 Timothy 2:12 - Looking Deeperby Jeremy Nalan

Different Stances on 1 Timothy 2:12

Paul's words in 1 Timothy 2:12, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet," seem to stir up a lot of emotion among the Christian faith. Some interpret this verse as applying to: women can't teach/exercise authority over men in any circumstance, women can't teach/exercise authority over men within the church, or that this verse is interpreted "incorrectly." I will discuss which of the options above is correct.

1 Timothy Taken in Context

History/Background: We should start off first by establishing the context of this passage. 1 Timothy is the first letter of Paul to Timothy. This was the first of three pastoral letters Paul wrote to two of his converts, Timothy and Titus. Both of them had been established as pastors of Churches, and these epistles (1 Tim, 2 Tim, and Titus) were directed to each of them to give instructions for proper management of organized congregations. Even though the letters were directed toward each individual pastor and not to churches, the messages are still applicable to the churches.

Date: It is estimated that Paul was released from a prison in Rome around the time he wrote 1 Timothy (Between AD 63 to 67).

Theme: The theme to 1 Timothy can be found in 1 Timothy 3:15 - 14 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, 15 if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth. Since the apostolic period was ending, there was an increase of local churches and these need to be a definite revelation of questions about order, creed, and discipline.

Purpose: There were four main goals Paul had in mind in his letter to Timothy:

1. To encourage Timothy against false teaching (1 Tim 1:3-7, 1 Tim1:18-20, 6:3-5, 20-21)
2. To give Timothy credentials from himself (1 Tim 3:4)
3. To instruct Timothy in managing ecclesiastical affairs (1 Tim 3:14-15)
4. To urge Timothy to be diligent in his pastoral duties (1 Tim 4:6-6:2)

Attestation/Authenticity: All the pastorals are taken to be genuinely "Pauline" (meaning they were written by Paul) since the evidence of what is within these pastorals reflects Paul's temperament and character.

1 Timothy 2: Closely Observed

1. 1 Tim 2:1-2 - Paul urges people to pray for kings and for a tranquil life.
2. 1 Tim 2:3-6 - Paul speaks about God our Savior who desires all to be saved, that there is one mediator, that Jesus gave himself was a ransom.
3. 1 Tim 2:7-8 - Paul says he was appointed as an apostle and that he wants everyone (men specifically) to lift up holy hands in prayer.
4. 1 Tim 2:9-15 - General instructions to women (plural)
   

1 Timothy 2:12 Examined

In 1 Timothy 2:12, Paul states that women are not permitted to teach nor exercise authority over men, within the church, but to remain quiet. As I stated before, we know that this verse refers to "conduct within the church" (1 Tim 3:14-15). This statement that Paul makes is referring to women as "plural." We know this because the contextual pattern of dealing in the plural with groups such as women, bishops, deacons, and women is consistent through 1 Timothy 2 & 3. Here is an excerpt to explain below:

• In 2:1-8 he is dealing with prayer for a tranquil life, God's desire to save all, Paul as an appointed apostle, and he wants men (andras) to pray. In verses 2:9-14, Paul switches to give instructions to women (plural) about adornment, submission, authority, the created order (Adam first), and Eve being deceived first. Verse 15 3:1-10, Paul gives instructions regarding the requirements to be overseers (plural) and deacons (plural). 3:11, Paul again gives instructions concerning women (plural). In 3:12-13, Paul gives instruction concerning deacons (plural). , Paul then stops giving instructions for a while and speaks about coming to see them, etc. (2)*
  

We can see from above, that if women was not "plural" in 1 Timothy 2:12, it would not be consistent and would not make any sense to be singular.

Applying the Context to 1 Timothy 2:12

Paul writes to Timothy in the first of three pastoral letters, that women (plural) are not allowed to teach or exercise authority over man in the church. We know Paul was not directing woman not to have authority or teach over men "outside" the church, but in the church (as in a church gathering). We know that the "quietness" Paul referred to in 1 Timothy 2:12 referred to instead of women having authority over men, they must instead be quiet. Paul's reason for this is anchored to the order of creation, as he states, "13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor" (1 Tim 2:13-14). This automatically rules out "culture motivating" Paul's reasoning behind not permitting women to teach or exercise authority over man within the church. Paul is stating the sole fact that Adam was formed first, NOT Eve. This assumes God have different roles already applied to both man and women, and created man first for a specific reason.

What does it mean to be quiet?

What does the term "quiet" mean in 1 Timothy 2? We first see this word "quiet" used in 1 Timothy 2:1-2 - "First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way." We can understand from the text here, that Christians are to lead a peaceful and quiet life, but again we know that "quiet" here does not refer to total quietness - because we are called to preach the gospel to all nations. In 1 Timothy 2:12 says, " 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. The word, Hesuchia (hay-soo-khee'-ah), is used for quiet in 1 Timothy 2:12: (as noun) stillness, i.e. desistance from bustle or language -- quietness, silence. Here you can see that women are to be in stillness, quietness, or silence. They are not to teach or exercise authority over men.

Usurp Authority?

In the King James Version of the bible, 1 Timothy 2:12 includes the phrase, "usurp authority." Usurp is defined by Merriam-Webster as:

1.) a: to seize and hold (as office, place, or powers) in possession by force or without right <usurp a throne>
b: to take or make use of without right <usurped the rights to her life story>

2.) a: to take the place of by or as if by force usurp careful judgment>intransitive verb:

b: to seize or exercise authority or possession wrongfully

Many people believe "usurp authority" has a completely different meaning. It would mean women should not take authority by force, or without legal right. Matt Slick quotes, "The logic goes that if this woman, or any woman, were to teach in the Christian congregation, she should do so without usurping her authority. That is, women can teach men in an authoritative context, as long as they do so properly. Of course, defining what is proper would be a problem since opinions abound."

Another problem is that the word "authenteo" in the Greek is only used once in the New Testament. It is translated as "usurp authority" ONLY in the King James Version (KJV) of the bible. ALL other translations of the bible do not translate it this way.

1. "exercise authority", Darby, ESV, NASB,
2. "have dominion", ASV
3. "have authority over", HCSB, ISV, NCV, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, GNB,
4. "usu"usurp authority", KJV

This leads to the question if the "usurp authority" argument is even a legitimate basis for assessing that women should be able to have authority within the church over men, as long as they do not "usurp" authority.


The Apostles Were "All" Men

The twelves apostles that Jesus chose were all men. Why is this significant? It was intentional because they were all given the incredible authority to "found the church." They were just like pastors, except they had even more authority.

Jesus did call women, don't get me wrong. Jesus called them to use their ministry different. He did not call them to be apostles, and it was not because of a culture where men were dominant. It was to because Jesus believed that "men assumed the role of Christ-like, humble, caring, servant-leaders, and if the women came in alongside with their respective gifts to help carry his leadership through according to those gifts."(4)* This view was consistent with scripture Genesis 1-2, Ephesians 5, 1 Corinthians 11, and 1 Timothy 2)

Conclusion

Women are not permitted to teach in the Church according to Paul's teaching. His teaching on this subject is not to be interpreted as anything other than that Paul was referring to "woman" as plural and that quietness meant the opposite of having authority over men, as it would only make sense that way. Not only did this verse tell us not to permit woman to teach or exercise authority over men within the church, but the two verses after it (1 Tim 2:13-14) give us reasoning of why women are not to be in authority over man, the order of creation (and that woman (Eve) was deceived not man (Adam)). Along with that, we see also the Jesus chose "men" as his apostles, not women so men were the leaders and women followed along with their gifts to bring to Christ's ministry.


Coming up soon:

Looking into verses that seem to "oppose" the position that Paul makes on woman's role in the church setting.

Sources*:

(1) "Unger's Bible Dictionary: First Timothy." Bible History. .

(2) Slick, Matt. "1 Tim. 2:12-13 and women pastors and elders." Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry (CARM).

(3) Piper, John. "Manhood, Womanhood, and the Freedom to Minister." Desiring God.

(4) Piper, John. "Should Women Become Pastors?" Desiring God.

Blog News of the Week

I have added a couple new features to my blog, including my AIM screen name and an AIM widget so anyone can IM me when I am online and talk about Christianity or something of that nature. It's located on the right side of my page, and you can type in a temporary screen name and send me a message.

Please take advantage of it and use it often. It's there so I can be as helpful as possible.

I will be re-posting my revised version of: A Deeper look into: 1 Timothy 2:12. It's is long overdue, and not much has changed, just more added information for clarification and easier comprehension.

**If one wants to defend the opposite position from the Christian perspective, feel free to do so. For the "Non-believer's that want to defend their position, you must remember my basis is not starting from the presupposition that there is an all-powerful Creator (God) that has a plan for each of His creations on earth.

The next topic after that is entitled, "God's Perspective on Homosexuality."

Hope your weeks are going well.

Grace,
Jeremy

Powered By Christian Gifts

Opposing Views: Issues, Experts, Answers

I have come in contact with a great new site that is available to the public. The site is called "Opposing Views" and was created with the intent of others voicing their beliefs and opinions on a variety of subjects, including: politics, religion, health, money, and society.

I was contacted by a couple members of the site to check out what they were doing. I believe it is a very innovative site, and I recommend that everyone should at least check it out. It gives you the option of creating your own profile, so that you can debate along side many experts in different fields.

Without a doubt, this site has a lot to bring to the table. It is especially interesting having intelligent conversation with others on each subject, for those of us who are tired of the "opinionated" people who voice their beliefs without anything but emotion ;).

Again, check out Opposing Views.

"Without debate, without criticism... No republic can survive" - John F. Kennedy

Silence over the past Week

I have gone on the journey of creating silence in my life, by clearing the "lesser" things in my life that seem to distract me from God. I made it until today, and it is very hard. Some nights I would just sit there thinking about how my life only consisted of television and music when I have free time. I am also on the phone a lot to catch up with others and to stay in touch.

Over this week I read three books in the Bible, including: 1 and 2 Thessalonians and 1 Timothy. I have read 1 Timothy, but I just decided to read whatever I opened up to that day. I did learn quite alot from those 3 books.

Silence in our lives is almost "non-existent" because of everything else that distracts us. It did help me rely on God more and pray more consistently. It really opens up your mind just to sit and think and pray, and God blessed my week.

I encourage all who are followers of Christ to give it a shot, even just eliminating one of the many that I listed.

Silence

I am committing to a social experiment for Campus Crusade for Christ, that has asked us to voluntarily give up things in our life that cause noise, distracting us from God.

For this entire week, I will not be using:

No computer
No Internet
No IMing
No Movies
No TV
No Music
No phone calls (unless within 10 ft of landline)
No texting
No magazines
No books (other than bible)
No newspapers

I will be deleting this things out of my life so that I can experience God closer to me, and listen to his voice. Although it will be difficult, I am at a time in my life right before marriage, where I need to focus on God alone. I have to let go of "my ways" this week and give God the silence he asks us for, so we can hear and feel him.

I'll post a new blog after the week is over. Next Friday afternoon.

Feel free to give enocouragement, I will need it.

Test: Blog Entry

I am testing this out to see if you guys get my post with the correct information about authorship for this blog if you are my subscribers. Please contact me as soon as you can to see if the problem has been fixed. It should be.

It should come up as: quiet4no1@gmail.com and Innovative Defense - Jeremy

Thanks guys