"Personal Liberty Under The New Covenant" - Page 1"Personal Liberty Under The New Covenant" - Page 1Freedom-Liberty and Religion-Page 1 - The New Testament And Religious Liberty
The Biblical God is a moral God. This idea is not in the Bible. An online Bible study regarding this recent myth, can be found here:
http://talkingethics.50megs.com/index.html
False Assumptions = Error
The idea that there is a right to remove a Bible subject from its historical (and the "subject") context the writer placed it within, when teaching about the Bible is a foundational error that has caused much confusion about Bible subjects.
There is no moral authority for anyone to remove a Bible subject from its historical setting and subject context the writer placed it within.
There is no moral authority given anyone to redefine the "example" choices made by Paul regarding the formation of the first century Christian community, as a commandment or required "pattern" for every generation to implement.
The Bible does not teach that an "example choice" (regarding how to serve each other within a local Christian community setting) of one generation of believers is a "commandment" that must be implemented by every generation after the first.
Christ gave personal liberty to His followers, not a moral law of narrow conformity to choices made by the first century Christians that would imprison every generation after them within Paul's choices for how Christian community would function.
Paul provided the evidence of such personal liberty by disregarding the first apostles initial choice for how Christians were to form a Christian community (Acts 2:44-47).
He choose not to use it as a pattern for new congregations.
Paul rejected the apostles earlier "all-things-in-common" concept of Christian community formation.
Paul established his preferred Christian community structure within a concept that Christians should retain private finances as individual property.
Christians who were familiar with the Hebrew Bible and the teachings of Jesus Christ would serve as elders (serving as the public defenders/debaters of doctrine for the local community), within another area of service would be deacons, who would implement the supportive services for the rest of the Christian community.
There is no moral authority for anyone to insist that what "appears" (to some Bible readers) a contradiction in Christian teachings to then arbitrarily define the most restrictive view of the subject as that which is the determinative teaching.
Many of the Christian documents are letters, not books on Christian theology. These letters hold the responses of Paul to some local concern within a specific congregation.
This historical reality can present an initial quandary (to some) on how to deal with what appears to be contradictory teachings of Paul.
Spending Time With Paul Regarding Women
The Timothy Letter
Paul wouldn't contradict himself - the logic behind his response in the Timothy context supports the situation as being one in which the husband had the "moral authority" to ask his wife not to teach at that time.
Because Paul was supporting his request, Paul provided the evidence that in this specific situation she was teaching over her husband's "moral authority" - in other words, she had made a decision that was not based on the moral realities of her many obligations.
The subject of this context is "moral authority." This husband was morally right and this fact was not being respected by his wife.
Paul does not contradict himself. He did not support the right of women to speak out and teach in their assemblies (or outside of them) in one letter and then write in another letter it was forbidden.
He was not teaching in the Timothy letter that no women had a moral right to teach a man or men or "males."
Jesus had forbidden discrimination based on gender (the only basis for moral discrimination is human behavior).
Paul was not writing that no woman could speak or teach in the Christian community when men were in the audience. He was not supporting the idea that based on gender alone, a Christian cannot teach in/to or among the Christian community.
He was responding to a combative situation between at least one husband and his wife. These types of misunderstandings about human rights in the church reveal the importance of the Bible passage that reminds its reader to rightly divide the Word of Truth.
The Greek word "authenteo" (chosen by Paul in his reply) cleared up this question taking place in this local Christian community regarding a wife teaching over her husband's request that she not take on that time-consuming service at that time.
The word, "authenteo" provided the answer (to them) regarding how wives were to make the decision (i.e., on what moral basis they were to make the decision) to teach in the Christian community.
Paul was not inconsistent in his teaching. He was not teaching that wives could not teach their husbands or men who were not their husbands.
He was teaching the same thing he had always taught. Christians - male or female - are not to become a law unto themselves.
When Paul referred back to Adam and Eve in this letter to this local congregation (regarding this disruptive situation that was taking place among them), he was not claiming that only Eve had sinned in the Garden.
Paul keeps all his teachings within the proper context:
For those who have asked this question - Why then did Paul write in I Timothy:
"For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control. 1 Timothy 2:13-15
Salvation And Babies: Paul is not teaching that women are saved differently than men are saved.
He is not teaching that women must have babies to be saved. He is teaching within the context of his focus that when you have children, you are responsible for their care and in doing your situational responsibility, you will be preserved by that moral choice and be saved.
Paul was also not claiming that a woman who cannot biologically give birth is lost. Jesus Christ saves both men and women in exactly the same way.
Thus, this passage is not teaching that women must have babies to be saved. This passage is not teaching that women have no human rights because Eve sinned in the Garden (it is also not denying that Adam sinned also when they both fell into transgression in the Garden).
Romans 5:12 " Therefore, just as through one MAN sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned-- "
Adam’s sin was not the same type of sin as Eve’s sin. His sin was in keeping silent when he knew better. He stood silently by while Satan was deceiving his wife. He did not remind her what God had told them about the tree in the middle of the Garden. He didn't warn her. He kept his mouth shut!
Eve was deceived.
Adam sinned deliberately.
Both Adam and Eve sinned in the situation of their temptation.
Paul wasn't required to debate all things related to the moral fall of Adam and Eve in the Timothy letter. His context was the husband and wife relationship, thus, he kept within the context he was speaking into at that time to make his moral point.
In this context of his focus, Paul referred back to the time of Adam and Eve’s moral failure before God, and in referring to that historical moment, Paul reminded them that God had given Adam the care and protection of his wife and children as part of God's judgment on his sin (they had lost the safety of the Paradise God had placed them within and would now be living within a morally-fallen - evil - world)
In presenting his viewpoint, Paul reminded them, that Eve was required to respect her husband's duty before God (see Genesis 3:16).
Consistently then, the wife who was teaching over her husband’s moral authority was being reminded by Paul of her duty to submit to her husband’s viewpoint -- because he was right -- thus, he had the moral authority to ask her not to teach at that point in her life.
In another time and another situation he might not have had that moral authority, but because Paul was backing the husband in this situation, the Bible reader can know the husband was morally correct in his request (in this specific situation).
There is no other way this passage can be rationally and contextually understood within a consistent Biblical examination. Women did teach in the local Christian community with Paul's full support (and outside of it). They taught men.
Furthermore, Paul was not speaking to unmarried women. The Bible reader can know that the situation Paul was speaking into was a combative situation taking place between a husband and his wife because of his examination of Adam and Eve's moral-fall and childbirth reference.
Single women didn’t give birth to children in the Christian community (thus, Paul was not referring to single women who were teaching among them in this context).
Today, as during the first century, the definition of "authenteo" can provide the Bible student clarification regarding what had been taking place that had caused this group of Christians to contact Paul for determinative help regarding this issue.
The Greek word, "authentio" that Paul presented to them comes from, "...autos, 'self,' and a lost noun hentes, probably signifying working (Eng, 'authentic') 'to exercise authority on one's own account, to domineer over...'" [See Greek Lexicon].
The definition of the word "authenteo" is indicative of a person who dismisses all rights of others and who chooses to act on his/her own.
No Christian under the New Covenant had (has) a moral right to live only unto him/herself. Yes, Christians had been freed from all earthly religious authority, but they were not free to dismiss the rights of others.
In other words, Paul was telling them, that they had not been liberated from the morality of Jesus Christ.
Because of Paul's consistency in teaching the morality of Christ, he is consistent in this reply to them that no wife had a moral right to make decisions with utter disregard for her husband's correct moral viewpoint.
Passages such as, Eph 5 provide this consistent view on how to make moral choices within the Christian community.
Eph 5 ".....always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father; and be subject to ONE ANOTHER in the fear of Christ.
In the Corinthian letters, Paul supports a woman's right to preach and pray in public meetings. The congregations he worked among had women serving as deacons and Paul urges one congregation that Phoebe (a deacon in the church) should be helped in all that she requests.
The author of Acts writes of the learned evangelical Christian woman, Priscilla, who, along with her husband, teaches a man, "...mighty in the scriptures..," more fully in the truth. Acts 18:24-26
Further, Paul describes Priscilla and her husband, Aquila, as "...co-labourers in Christ Jesus..." with Paul, himself - using the greek word, sunergos - 'co-labourer'- to describe his missionary partnership with them. This couple had risked their own lives to save his. Romans 16:3-4
The Greek word, "sunergos" is the same word, Paul uses when speaking about Titus in 2 Corinthians 8:23. "As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow-worker ('sunergos')...."
Some Christians have attempted to mis-use this passage to imprison Christian women in a thundering silence in the church (and often outside of it).
That this idea is foreign to the meaning of the New Covenant, the historical evangelical activity of Christian women in the first century and stands in opposition to the teachings of Christ and Paul's understanding of New Covenant liberty, (...along with every passage that supports that there are no earthly "authorities" in the Body of Christ), brings into question the singular motive of those who would throw out the rights of personal freedom of any Christian and enthrone this false idea as the "determinative" rule in the public church.
When a Bible passage cannot be understood by a Bible reader within a consistent moral framework of Christ's teachings because of an apparent conflict (for some) in a specific contextual explanation of the subject/issue being examined, there is no moral basis to enthrone as "determinative" the passage with the more restrictive requirements on human liberty.
Jesus commanded:
"...do NOT be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do NOT call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
Do NOT be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.
But the greatest among you shall be your servant.
Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted."
Matthew 23:8-12
"There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for ALL of you are ONE in Christ Jesus." ~ Galatians 3:28
"But Jesus called them unto him, and said,
'You know that the rulers of the Gentiles LORD it over them, and their great ones exercise authority OVER them. NOT SO SHALL IT BE AMONG YOU: but whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.'"
Provacative Christian Writer Robin Calamaio generously shares His Collection Of Articles Dealing With Many Facets Of Life
"God does not dwell in error.
It does not matter if the error is innocent - or malicious.
It does not matter if it arises from simple ignorance - or calculated deception.
He can not be found in those wastelands.
He is the God of truth,
and it is only there He can be found."
Robin Calamaio
TheChoiceMaker
"Until the oppressors discover that wisdom only just begins with a respectful acknowledgment of The Creator, The Creation, and The Choicemaker, they will be ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. The rejection of Creator-initiated standards relegates the mind of man to its own primitive, empirical, and delimited devices. It is thus that the human intellect cannot ascend and function at any level higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values."
J. Baxter - TheChoiceMaker
"He asked, 'Are you asking me if I want you right or wrong?'"
"Yes..."
"Is there no 'right' way to you?"
"No..."
He stopped walking. His throat tight, his hands locked deep into his jacket pockets, he stared into her eyes.
Allowing his despairing anger to burst through another dead-end, he said urgently, 'Tell me you haven't felt what I've felt? Tell me you can walk away from me and not die inside more each day... By God! Tell me!'"
Page 3 - An Origins Viewpoint - Supportive Analysis
