I grew up in the CRC, and am still here, along with my family. I'm married to Daryl, who has a construction business. I had a CPA license for 10 or so years, then I added EX to the front, and MOM to the back, so now I'm an EX CPA, MOM =). I am MOM to Duncan, Ian and Samantha. Our family also owns a raspberry farm, and in the summers we get to work out there together.
thanks again for responding in a respectful way, Patrick. I really appreciate your heart for God's Church, for His people, both men and women to fulfill His purposes for us, for His glory and our good. I believe God is calling men to persevere in these 2:15 ways as well, as Paul uses she, then "they" possibly referring to the woman and man in 2:12. However, commentaries are mixed on who the "they" refers to. I will share about God's wise ordering in a future post.
The article you share confirms some of what I have found but the author only addresses Artemis, at least here.
There are things I disagree with on both the comp and the egalitarian sides, and as I shared earlier, I do not agree that this verse/passage is strictly for the 1st century Ephesians and agree with the comps that whatever Paul meant has a universal principle. Although, if you read some of the author's other posts, you will see, even if you don't agree with it, she shares application for today.
The clear meaning when Paul specifically chose a unique Greek word authentein for the NT, instead of the far more common exousia for authority indicates to me that we need to look deeper into this rare word, which I did, and will present the history and timeline in a future article from multiple sources. Did Paul mean murder? maybe, maybe not... does it matter if most of the evidence until Paul's time suggests a harmful, negative action that Paul was calling out? Murder is a possibility based on how the authente family is used elsewhere pre Paul, especially its usage in the Septuagint, and obviously murder is not ok by anyone! But we cannot ignore that murder/suicide was part of the understanding that Paul would have been aware of a. according to earlier usage, one who with his own hand kills either others or himself. (Thayer's Greek Lexicon)
So far, I have not found a good answer from the comp side for why Paul uses authentein instead of exousia if he meant a neutral or positive authority. I've read some of Dr. Wolter's work, some from Kostenberger, and other articles here and there. Numerous egals have wrestled with it, and pretty much all of them indicate it is a negative meaning. The importance for me is not whether Paul meant murder even though I share that this was part of authentein's violent history as evidence of a negative meaning, but whether this word is negative, neutral or positive in Paul's usage.
You mention that in 1 Tim 2:8 God's instructions are to be applied in every place, yet, ironically, I don't see men lifting their hands in prayer everywhere, including the CRC. I'm wrestling with that inconsistency as well as a number of other inconsistencies based on this part of Paul's letter. Any ideas on raising hands in prayer? These are the types of questions that I cannot ignore.
My presupposition had been essentially the comp view for most of my life.
Eric, I really do appreciate the concerns you share. Thank you! that's ok if I don't convince you (or others) that murder is what Paul meant, but can you see the possibility that murder seems to be a primary meaning of the hapax authentein / authente word family before Paul? I've maybe become a bit numb to what a big & shocking stretch this might be from general authority, it didn't go over well with comp scholars and theologians in the 80's when this meaning was re-introduced.
This isn't secret or special knowledge. I'm very thankful there is tangible evidence to support what I share, whether people agree with it or not. That's what some people do, examine and research and dig, especially when there are questions that don't make sense or don't add up. Biblically, this was considered a noble task and we are still called to do that. I am making a case based on what I have found.
I love the word metanoia, recognizing being off track, going the wrong way, and changing in a new direction with deep conviction. Sadly and harmfully, metanoia was translated as "do penance" by Jerome's Vulgate, which got the Church off track for over 1000 years with indulgences, etc. In 1516 Erasmus translated it as repentance instead which inspired Luther's 95 thesis as part of the reformation! Why did this take over a 1000 years?
There are some things that in various ways got lost over the ages through traditions of man/elders (God/Jesus literally warns us that this can happen per Matt 15 and Mark 7, which is still applicable for today), through translations, through literally being buried, and other means. This was part of the story of the historian Josephus. He wrote a lot about this amazing city Caesarea that Herod built, but it was buried under silt over the centuries so modern theologians dismissed Josephus as a unreliable historian as there was no evidence of this luxurious city... until Caesarea was discovered by archeologists, and even then it took decades for Josephus to be commonly accepted as a reliable historian, which most do now.
For whatever reason, these are fascinating stories for me. Another one Justinian von Welz (1600s)... love this guy!!! He literally gave up his titles as a nobleman bc only Jesus deserves to be called "Lord"... but he was literally condemned as an agent of satan by the church for wanting to follow the great commission and share the gospel in other countries. He died in Surinam and was mostly forgotten for 20-30 years. How did the Matt 28 Great Commission get lost over time? Baron Justinian Von Welz :: Gospel Fellowship Association Missions
I also love Zinzendorf and the Moravians and how they restored the Great Commission in 1732 using Von Welz ideas 50-60 years later! William Carey's attempts to start a missionary society, inspired by the Moravians, was originally rebuffed by the church leaders as well with "sit down young man, God is sovereign and He doesn't need your help or mine". A significant improvement from 100 years before when Von Welz was called an agent of satan by the church leaders.
These were some of the significant gaps in the church over the ages that God allowed for a time, and some for even a 1000+ years.
I don't know Eric. There are other pretty significant examples that I'm aware of, where key spiritual principles, etc. somehow were forgotten for centuries. These are honest wrestlings with information I cannot ignore that are not special revelation or secret knowledge. The irony is I'm literally including the proto gnostic influence as part of the problem that Paul and Timothy are dealing with along with the other pagan cults.
I'm going to keep wrestling, keep asking, keep seeking, keep researching, keep testing, keep sharing, etc.... pray, ponder, process... I believe this journey actually strengthens faith in God, His word, His principles, because His profound ways will stand up to serious scrutiny!
Blessings Aaron, have an amazing day of worship, celebration, fellowship and rest... DV, I will respond Monday or Tuesday. I don't say the DV lightly because I was hit by a car when I was in a crosswalk Friday evening and PTL, He protected me, and I walked away!
This shouldn’t be too surprising, but this will not be a short response, some of it will be addressed/included at some point in future posts, but here’s a bit of a preview…
I completely agree, God’s Holy Word, as He intended, is universal, eternal and directed for all people in all times and places (translational integrity is another discussion recognizing God’s sovereignty works through the various versions, keeping in mind we are warned specifically about being deceived and traditions of man/elders, so we still need to test). If I have ever indicated anything else, that is not my intention. I have already responded earlier to that same concern shared by someone else and hopefully it was clear that my view is not limiting this passage or any other to one single culture. I believe God gives us a responsibility to use the resources / gifts / talents we have available to us to study His word and test (pray, ponder, process) what we find when something seems off and not to avoid/bury/ignore something out of fear like the man with one talent, instead a fear of the Lord is part of what compels us to be obedient to His calling in our lives.
I am testing (via prayer, ponder, process) what man did to His word. God warns us 30+ times in NT alone not to be deceived and He warns us that His word can be nullified by traditions of men/elders. The potential nullification of God’s word through traditions of man such as gnosticism, astrology, etc., can and does still happen and some of it has been around for a long, long time.
I do not have a problem with the historic understanding of authentein pre-Paul (500BC-100AD) and I believe the meaning was very clear, not confusing or controversial to Timothy and anyone he shared Paul’s letter with at that time.
I do have a problem with the shift of the historic understanding of authentein post Paul (starting for the most part around100AD & ff). Unfortunately, when the meaning was shifting over the next several hundred years at such a critical juncture in time shortly after Paul and the Apostles, this has caused much confusion since the early church that is still concerning. That demonically compromised astrology/zodiac experts, along with similarly compromised gnostics (who were involved in not only astrology, but also sorcery, secret knowledge, mystery religions, etc.) co-opting this specific authente word family to refer to planets and the gnostics supreme deity (not YHWH) over the next century after Paul’s usage in his letter to Timothy, makes their sources a red flag to put us on the alert that the enemy is probably sowing confusion through those who are following deceiving spirits and things taught by demons! When I research uses of authentein from 500 BC until several hundred years after Paul, I noted whether the source is Gnostic/astrological, and the dates being pre or post Paul. I have a worked on compiling a chart of uses to show the historical understanding before Paul and after Paul and will share more on this in a future post.
Something that I came across were some scholars who researched the use of authentein between 200 BC and 200AD. Makes sense, get a couple of hundred years before and after Paul right? Except in this case, the Gnostic & astrological traditions co-opted it in the second century post Paul and the astrological and Gnostic usage became the predominant choice for what it meant instead of what it meant pre-Paul. The early Latin, Syriac, Coptic and Arabic translations give evidence of that but also still give authentein a negative connotation as well, while dropping the violent part of the meaning. I do not have a problem with the historic understanding if we only consider the primary meaning when Paul would have known how it was used compared to uses after his life that he could not have known. So athentein went from negative/violent (pre Paul), to a mix of negative/domineering (various translations) and neutral positive (in gnostic re their deities and astrological texts re the planets) (100ish-1500AD), to neutral authority taken in a negative way/usurped (1500s), to a positive general authority (current understanding) over time.
That is why I am making a case for how authentein particularly has become confusing, controversial, difficult and not clear anymore after Paul's time/use.
One of the questions I have wrestled with is what did Paul / Holy Spirit have in mind when using authentein and not exousia, a word Paul uses around 30x in other places. I believe that a high view of scripture requires us to look into this as it is inspired and intentional! So far what I have seen via research of a number of lexicons incl BDAG, etc. seems to be a heavy leaning on meanings post Paul (potential anachronism) based on Gnostic/astrological texts and dismissing or ignoring a source where evidence supports that Paul seems to have known that source fairly well, the Septuagint, which is written pre Paul which he cites, quotes, alludes to, echoes from the Septuagint around 100-250+ times. Interestingly, there seems to be some notable echoes/parallels between Paul’s letter to the Romans and the Wisdom of Solomon. Coincidence? This would fit with his strategy to engage in what was commonly known in that cultural context.
I have been specifically going back to study (including using the BDAG & other lexicons) some of the many rare Greek words (often hapax legomenon), that Paul liked to use, especially in his letters to Timothy, and how they were used around Paul’s time, in his culture and context. Authentein is probably the most controversial estimating the amount of energy, ink and time spent on it. You can consider it higher criticism, I consider it testing, discerning, examining and searching the Scriptures. It has been a fascinating study of Paul and how the Holy Spirit inspired and used Paul’s gifts, education, and intelligence for his ministry and writing in a way that connected and related to the common culture of that time. It’s a bit like a treasure hunt!
And the link to MM’s article on authentein… I do not agree with her in several more recent matters, but I thought this article from 2017 gives a reasonable, fairly extensive yet somewhat brief history on authentein with original sources cited and how it has been used historically both pre and post Paul along with noting the various possibilities by other scholars and theologians, without me writing up something similar to that extent. There has been much written, especially in the last 50 or so years on this one rare Greek word.
I am not interpreting, I am analyzing by going back to the historic understandings/sources and making a distinction between pre Paul and post Paul, especially pointing out the Gnostic & astrological influence with this word family, including in lexicons.
Our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the spiritual forces of darkness. That was written first for the Ephesians! I am making a case that the enemy is the one sowing confusion, especially through gnostic and astrological texts, and it started around 100-200 AD regarding this particular Greek word. Sadly, the tradition of man that women are inferior to men (not just different) allowed it to perpetuate over the ages. Thankfully that view has shifted (although not in some cultures/religions), even though the shift seems mostly in about the last 50 years.
Thanks, Jeff, for taking time to read the post, comments and then responding! I read your bio and noted your time @ TCC... I attended there a long time ago ;).
Also, thanks for your concerns re the accident. I call it my "wild ride"! PTL, He protected me! I am doing amazingly fine after that accident, a little sore and achy from when I landed on the ground. There was some of God's miraculous intervention, because it could have been very serious and, instead, I walked away praising the Lord with my coffee cup still in my hand after being on the hood of the car, then rolling/sliding off as they stopped. I don't even have bruises on my legs where the car should have hit me, because in that split second between when my friend yelled to warn me & I turned and saw the car about 5 feet away this went through my head "you don't have time to get out of the way, get on the hood", and it seems like there was Divine assistance that got me on the hood in that split second. Being wired with curiosity, as I was on the hood for several seconds, I was thinking pay attention to what this feels like, and realized I was calm, at peace, and actually felt comfortable. That's a God story!
I appreciate any and all feedback as this particular debate between comps and egals can become very passionate and often generated more heat than light.
I love that you have spent some time researching authentein as well. Thanks for sharing that. As far as I can tell, Erasmus is the one who first used usurp authority with his 1516 Greek-Latin translationl. There's a bit of unraveling the history of this word! But I love that we can research the rare words used in Scripture, literally reading the sources incl the translation into English. Erasmus probably had to travel from monastery to university to wherever these old documents were kept as he studied the Greek and worked on his translations...
Question for you Jeff, have you used the TLG (TLG - Home)? I cried when I found this site several years ago (thanks to Dr. Leland Wilshire's use of it) and read their story of how it was inspired, began and expanded since 1971. TLG - History
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Patrick, for taking the time to read, ask questions and share your thoughts. For now, here is a short response, I will post a more complete response later this week... but some of the response is already included in articles that will be posted in the future as each concern is a discussion on its own. (I'm letting the CRC network moderate that!)
I want the hard questions! I pray we can wrestle through these together in community for His glory, for His beautiful and profound principles that are for our good. God warns us to test everything, to examine and search His Scriptures and I really appreciate that you are testing what I share.
A brief history of my journey, I didn't go looking for this particular debate, it was barely even on my radar, until someone (non CRC) asked me very specifically in 2008. I gave them my standard answer at that time which was let the men be the leaders because I don't want them to abdicate their responsibilities, and I had very little interest in any of whatever it was that happened with council, classis or synod or whatever committee, yet felt prompted to take some time to research the various views as I had never done my own research on it, but was vaguely aware the CRC had a dual position on this. I researched, wrestled, prayed and processed for about 3 months and came to the same conclusion as the 1995 CRC Synod. I prayed "God, You will have to make it clear, because I can see both sides and how the CRC came to the same dilemma..." was my conclusion after wrestling with the information I had available at that time! After that, this issue was not part of my focus for almost 10 years. Although the question remained in the background, I was not actively pursuing it. That changed in late 2017-early 2018 when a very specific and significant piece of the pagan culture came to my attention and I started researching again. I am now sharing various pieces, that as far as I have found so far, were not part (or at least a significant part) of the discussion back in the 1990's, were not easily accessible in 2008, and have since become more accessible through the internet.
Patrick, I understand your concern that some say this passage applies only to 1st century Ephesus. That is not my view, I believe there are universal principles here because it is part of God's word. But the cultural pagan context is a significant lens that needs to be included in this discussion and for the most part has not been for various reasons until fairly recently. Dr. Clinton Arnold (starting in the 1990's- current) was one of the first theologians to re-acknowledge Artemis and the pagan cults after centuries of it being off the Ephesians & Timothy context radar, but this aspect didn't really get much attention until the last 5-10 years, and it still is not a commonly considered context or if it's considered, often quickly dismissed by one side.
Yes, on Kostenberger (and our own CRC Dr. Albert Wolters)... That they believe 'it means “to have authority” or “to exercise authority” in a neutral or positive sense"' is included in one of the articles that will be posted in the future. I also bring up created order and 1 Tim 2:13-14 in a subsequent article not yet posted. (Due to the nature and amount of material, this is a series of articles in shorter segments (700-1,500 words each) so it is not an overwhelming firehose and TLDR! This post is just the introduction.)
I believe the meaning was clear and plain to Timothy, and to others that might have heard or read this letter from Paul. Unfortunately, the plain reading has been muddled over the ages through translations, traditions, and confusing uses by the Gnostics, starting shortly after Paul & Timothy's time. Mike Winger's 11+ hours long video on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 alone that took him a year to research and record tells us there is a lot of confusion and controversy here, let alone all the other writing that has been done on especially 1 Tim 2:12. ALL The Debates Over 1 Tim 2:11-15: Women in Ministry part 12 (it took me a year to make this)
I leave you with the same question expanded a bit... is it possible this verse/passage is not a burden, but something more beautiful that God intended for both men and women in His family... when we understand it more fully in the context that Paul and Timothy were ministering in in Ephesus? That possibility/potential is what I hope to share through this series and I pray the conclusion is an increased awareness of a powerful and profound Biblical principle that has been somehow lost &/or minimized for far too long!
This response was meant to be brief. Again, thank you and look forward to continuing to test and wrestle together. My heart is for God's Church/people to be the family and witness God intended and share some things that we might have misunderstood because we were missing some significant pieces.
God warns us in His Word, over & over, at least 30 times, to not be deceived. Something is significant when it is repeated so many times, especially by the Creator of the Universe!
I have a long list of laments over things I was taught somewhere along my journey of life that, in some cases, actually was the opposite of what I find when I have searched & examined the Scriptures more in depth, and in other cases, hyper focused on one doctrine at the expense of others. I often use the phrase, both/and. Often both views are right in ways, and both views are wrong in ways. Ie. complementarian & egalitarian.
I love the Greek word "peithesthe". This was a word that opened Greek debates in various forums (this word is an entire discussion on its own). It is a word that means to be open to being persuaded/convinced. It is so important in this time of confusion and deepening division, that we, especially as the family of God, continue to be curious and conversational with others. When we love one another as He loves us, we treat each other with dignity and respect even when we deeply disagree. Jesus still washed Judas' feet, Jesus still served Passover, the Lord's supper, to Judas. Jesus still went to the synagogue, even though He compared it to a den of vipers. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for them. Not saying, those we disagree with are Judas or enemies, but sharing how Jesus treated those whom He knew would harm Him.
God also warns us to test everything, to use discernment/wisdom.
It is a painful yet profound journey to admit where we have been deceived/wrong, yet God's truth is far more beautiful than whatever the deception was we were believing, and the process of discovery is often life changing and healing.
Just reading the Banner article on Doubt... it seems to be a bit of a theme since Synod 2025...
Doubt is often part of the process of recognizing deception and deconstructing that deception, I call it a red flag that says pay attention to this. Something causes you to question something you have been taught over the years, it's part of the discerning/testing that is God warns us is necessary in our journey of faith. It shouldn't be scary or threatening, but an intentionally wanted and welcome part of the powerful practice of discernment.
In my journey, of what I call deconstructing and reconstructing aka re-form-ation, what is reconstructed is often far more beautiful than what I originally believed. The discerning process is work through prayer, pondering, and processing. It's often painful & heartbreaking, recognizing & lamenting where we have caused harm, been deceived, wrong, whatever, but it is also deep, rich & profound. It often will be life changing!
Unfortunately, questioning the status quo (reformed in our context) is often treated as a threat, instead of being encouraged and affirmed like the Bereans who examined and searched the scriptures as they tested what they were taught and told. It seems the powers that be are ok with minor, trivial corrections, but other subtle yet significant shifts are silenced and those who share these more significant concerns are often considered persona non grata, not wanted, not welcome, the very opposite of scripture.
I have many more thoughts on this, but again, this seems to be a theme, and what we find might make many of us uncomfortable as the status quo of some of our reformed doctrines might be seriously challenged.
In case anyone wants a short context for the purpose of the Nicene Creed: here is a list of the heresies it was addressing... I have done my own research on this, but Grok summarizes this way better, faster & shorter than I can...
I find it fascinating and heartbreaking we are dealing with some of the same beliefs today... Ie eternal subordination of the Son (ESS) to limit women's serving in the church in certain ways (this is an entire discussion on its own even today still!).
The following is the Grok/AI compilation that I have researched in the past, but would take me awhile to compile:
The Nicene Creed, established at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, was primarily formulated to address theological disputes, particularly those concerning the nature of Christ and the Trinity. Below is a list of the major heresies it aimed to counter, based on the theological context of the time:
Arianism
Description: Taught by Arius, a presbyter from Alexandria, Arianism claimed that the Son (Jesus Christ) was a created being, subordinate to the Father, and not co-eternal or consubstantial with Him. Arius argued that "there was a time when the Son was not," denying the full divinity of Christ.
Nicene Response: The Creed affirms that the Son is "begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father," emphasizing Christ's full divinity, co-eternity, and equality with the Father.
Sabellianism (Modalism)
Description: Also known as Modalistic Monarchianism, Sabellianism taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct persons but different modes or manifestations of a single divine being. This denied the distinct personhood within the Trinity.
Nicene Response: The Creed clearly delineates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct entities while affirming their unity in one Godhead, countering the idea of God merely appearing in different forms.
Adoptionism (Dynamic Monarchianism)
Description: This heresy posited that Jesus was a human who was "adopted" by God at a point in time (e.g., at his baptism or resurrection), receiving divine power but not being divine by nature.
Nicene Response: The Creed declares that the Son is "true God from true God," eternally begotten and divine by nature, not a human elevated to divine status.
Gnosticism
Description: While not the primary focus, Gnostic influences lingered, teaching that the material world was evil and that Christ was a purely spiritual being who only appeared human (Docetism, a Gnostic variant). This denied the true incarnation of Christ.
Nicene Response: The Creed emphasizes that the Son "became incarnate" and "was made man," affirming the reality of Christ's human nature alongside his divine nature.
Subordinationism
Description: A broader tendency in some early Christian thought to view the Son and Holy Spirit as subordinate to the Father in essence or rank, even if not as extreme as Arianism.
Nicene Response: The Creed’s use of "consubstantial" (homoousios) ensures that the Son is of the same essence as the Father, rejecting any hierarchy of essence within the Trinity.
Context and Notes:
The Council of Nicaea was convened by Emperor Constantine to resolve disputes, particularly Arianism, which was causing significant division in the early Church.
The Creed was later expanded at the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) to further clarify the role of the Holy Spirit, addressing additional heresies like Macedonianism (which denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit).
The primary focus in 325 AD was Arianism, as it posed the most immediate threat to orthodox Christian doctrine regarding Christ’s nature.
This list is based on historical accounts of the theological debates surrounding the Council of Nicaea, as found in early Church writings and scholarly analyses of the period. If you’d like a deeper dive into any specific heresy or the Creed’s phrasing, let me know!
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
thanks again for responding in a respectful way, Patrick. I really appreciate your heart for God's Church, for His people, both men and women to fulfill His purposes for us, for His glory and our good. I believe God is calling men to persevere in these 2:15 ways as well, as Paul uses she, then "they" possibly referring to the woman and man in 2:12. However, commentaries are mixed on who the "they" refers to. I will share about God's wise ordering in a future post.
The article you share confirms some of what I have found but the author only addresses Artemis, at least here.
There are things I disagree with on both the comp and the egalitarian sides, and as I shared earlier, I do not agree that this verse/passage is strictly for the 1st century Ephesians and agree with the comps that whatever Paul meant has a universal principle. Although, if you read some of the author's other posts, you will see, even if you don't agree with it, she shares application for today.
The clear meaning when Paul specifically chose a unique Greek word authentein for the NT, instead of the far more common exousia for authority indicates to me that we need to look deeper into this rare word, which I did, and will present the history and timeline in a future article from multiple sources. Did Paul mean murder? maybe, maybe not... does it matter if most of the evidence until Paul's time suggests a harmful, negative action that Paul was calling out? Murder is a possibility based on how the authente family is used elsewhere pre Paul, especially its usage in the Septuagint, and obviously murder is not ok by anyone! But we cannot ignore that murder/suicide was part of the understanding that Paul would have been aware of a. according to earlier usage, one who with his own hand kills either others or himself. (Thayer's Greek Lexicon)
So far, I have not found a good answer from the comp side for why Paul uses authentein instead of exousia if he meant a neutral or positive authority. I've read some of Dr. Wolter's work, some from Kostenberger, and other articles here and there. Numerous egals have wrestled with it, and pretty much all of them indicate it is a negative meaning. The importance for me is not whether Paul meant murder even though I share that this was part of authentein's violent history as evidence of a negative meaning, but whether this word is negative, neutral or positive in Paul's usage.
You mention that in 1 Tim 2:8 God's instructions are to be applied in every place, yet, ironically, I don't see men lifting their hands in prayer everywhere, including the CRC. I'm wrestling with that inconsistency as well as a number of other inconsistencies based on this part of Paul's letter. Any ideas on raising hands in prayer? These are the types of questions that I cannot ignore.
My presupposition had been essentially the comp view for most of my life.
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
Eric, I really do appreciate the concerns you share. Thank you! that's ok if I don't convince you (or others) that murder is what Paul meant, but can you see the possibility that murder seems to be a primary meaning of the hapax authentein / authente word family before Paul? I've maybe become a bit numb to what a big & shocking stretch this might be from general authority, it didn't go over well with comp scholars and theologians in the 80's when this meaning was re-introduced.
This isn't secret or special knowledge. I'm very thankful there is tangible evidence to support what I share, whether people agree with it or not. That's what some people do, examine and research and dig, especially when there are questions that don't make sense or don't add up. Biblically, this was considered a noble task and we are still called to do that. I am making a case based on what I have found.
I love the word metanoia, recognizing being off track, going the wrong way, and changing in a new direction with deep conviction. Sadly and harmfully, metanoia was translated as "do penance" by Jerome's Vulgate, which got the Church off track for over 1000 years with indulgences, etc. In 1516 Erasmus translated it as repentance instead which inspired Luther's 95 thesis as part of the reformation! Why did this take over a 1000 years?
There are some things that in various ways got lost over the ages through traditions of man/elders (God/Jesus literally warns us that this can happen per Matt 15 and Mark 7, which is still applicable for today), through translations, through literally being buried, and other means. This was part of the story of the historian Josephus. He wrote a lot about this amazing city Caesarea that Herod built, but it was buried under silt over the centuries so modern theologians dismissed Josephus as a unreliable historian as there was no evidence of this luxurious city... until Caesarea was discovered by archeologists, and even then it took decades for Josephus to be commonly accepted as a reliable historian, which most do now.
For whatever reason, these are fascinating stories for me. Another one Justinian von Welz (1600s)... love this guy!!! He literally gave up his titles as a nobleman bc only Jesus deserves to be called "Lord"... but he was literally condemned as an agent of satan by the church for wanting to follow the great commission and share the gospel in other countries. He died in Surinam and was mostly forgotten for 20-30 years. How did the Matt 28 Great Commission get lost over time? Baron Justinian Von Welz :: Gospel Fellowship Association Missions
I also love Zinzendorf and the Moravians and how they restored the Great Commission in 1732 using Von Welz ideas 50-60 years later! William Carey's attempts to start a missionary society, inspired by the Moravians, was originally rebuffed by the church leaders as well with "sit down young man, God is sovereign and He doesn't need your help or mine". A significant improvement from 100 years before when Von Welz was called an agent of satan by the church leaders.
These were some of the significant gaps in the church over the ages that God allowed for a time, and some for even a 1000+ years.
I don't know Eric. There are other pretty significant examples that I'm aware of, where key spiritual principles, etc. somehow were forgotten for centuries. These are honest wrestlings with information I cannot ignore that are not special revelation or secret knowledge. The irony is I'm literally including the proto gnostic influence as part of the problem that Paul and Timothy are dealing with along with the other pagan cults.
I'm going to keep wrestling, keep asking, keep seeking, keep researching, keep testing, keep sharing, etc.... pray, ponder, process... I believe this journey actually strengthens faith in God, His word, His principles, because His profound ways will stand up to serious scrutiny!
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
Blessings Aaron, have an amazing day of worship, celebration, fellowship and rest... DV, I will respond Monday or Tuesday. I don't say the DV lightly because I was hit by a car when I was in a crosswalk Friday evening and PTL, He protected me, and I walked away!
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
Thanks for sharing this, Lloyd! May you enjoy rich worship, celebrating Who He is and what He has done, together with the Family of God!
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
This shouldn’t be too surprising, but this will not be a short response, some of it will be addressed/included at some point in future posts, but here’s a bit of a preview…
I completely agree, God’s Holy Word, as He intended, is universal, eternal and directed for all people in all times and places (translational integrity is another discussion recognizing God’s sovereignty works through the various versions, keeping in mind we are warned specifically about being deceived and traditions of man/elders, so we still need to test). If I have ever indicated anything else, that is not my intention. I have already responded earlier to that same concern shared by someone else and hopefully it was clear that my view is not limiting this passage or any other to one single culture. I believe God gives us a responsibility to use the resources / gifts / talents we have available to us to study His word and test (pray, ponder, process) what we find when something seems off and not to avoid/bury/ignore something out of fear like the man with one talent, instead a fear of the Lord is part of what compels us to be obedient to His calling in our lives.
I am testing (via prayer, ponder, process) what man did to His word. God warns us 30+ times in NT alone not to be deceived and He warns us that His word can be nullified by traditions of men/elders. The potential nullification of God’s word through traditions of man such as gnosticism, astrology, etc., can and does still happen and some of it has been around for a long, long time.
I do not have a problem with the historic understanding of authentein pre-Paul (500BC-100AD) and I believe the meaning was very clear, not confusing or controversial to Timothy and anyone he shared Paul’s letter with at that time.
I do have a problem with the shift of the historic understanding of authentein post Paul (starting for the most part around100AD & ff). Unfortunately, when the meaning was shifting over the next several hundred years at such a critical juncture in time shortly after Paul and the Apostles, this has caused much confusion since the early church that is still concerning. That demonically compromised astrology/zodiac experts, along with similarly compromised gnostics (who were involved in not only astrology, but also sorcery, secret knowledge, mystery religions, etc.) co-opting this specific authente word family to refer to planets and the gnostics supreme deity (not YHWH) over the next century after Paul’s usage in his letter to Timothy, makes their sources a red flag to put us on the alert that the enemy is probably sowing confusion through those who are following deceiving spirits and things taught by demons! When I research uses of authentein from 500 BC until several hundred years after Paul, I noted whether the source is Gnostic/astrological, and the dates being pre or post Paul. I have a worked on compiling a chart of uses to show the historical understanding before Paul and after Paul and will share more on this in a future post.
Something that I came across were some scholars who researched the use of authentein between 200 BC and 200AD. Makes sense, get a couple of hundred years before and after Paul right? Except in this case, the Gnostic & astrological traditions co-opted it in the second century post Paul and the astrological and Gnostic usage became the predominant choice for what it meant instead of what it meant pre-Paul. The early Latin, Syriac, Coptic and Arabic translations give evidence of that but also still give authentein a negative connotation as well, while dropping the violent part of the meaning. I do not have a problem with the historic understanding if we only consider the primary meaning when Paul would have known how it was used compared to uses after his life that he could not have known. So athentein went from negative/violent (pre Paul), to a mix of negative/domineering (various translations) and neutral positive (in gnostic re their deities and astrological texts re the planets) (100ish-1500AD), to neutral authority taken in a negative way/usurped (1500s), to a positive general authority (current understanding) over time.
That is why I am making a case for how authentein particularly has become confusing, controversial, difficult and not clear anymore after Paul's time/use.
One of the questions I have wrestled with is what did Paul / Holy Spirit have in mind when using authentein and not exousia, a word Paul uses around 30x in other places. I believe that a high view of scripture requires us to look into this as it is inspired and intentional! So far what I have seen via research of a number of lexicons incl BDAG, etc. seems to be a heavy leaning on meanings post Paul (potential anachronism) based on Gnostic/astrological texts and dismissing or ignoring a source where evidence supports that Paul seems to have known that source fairly well, the Septuagint, which is written pre Paul which he cites, quotes, alludes to, echoes from the Septuagint around 100-250+ times. Interestingly, there seems to be some notable echoes/parallels between Paul’s letter to the Romans and the Wisdom of Solomon. Coincidence? This would fit with his strategy to engage in what was commonly known in that cultural context.
I have been specifically going back to study (including using the BDAG & other lexicons) some of the many rare Greek words (often hapax legomenon), that Paul liked to use, especially in his letters to Timothy, and how they were used around Paul’s time, in his culture and context. Authentein is probably the most controversial estimating the amount of energy, ink and time spent on it. You can consider it higher criticism, I consider it testing, discerning, examining and searching the Scriptures. It has been a fascinating study of Paul and how the Holy Spirit inspired and used Paul’s gifts, education, and intelligence for his ministry and writing in a way that connected and related to the common culture of that time. It’s a bit like a treasure hunt!
And the link to MM’s article on authentein… I do not agree with her in several more recent matters, but I thought this article from 2017 gives a reasonable, fairly extensive yet somewhat brief history on authentein with original sources cited and how it has been used historically both pre and post Paul along with noting the various possibilities by other scholars and theologians, without me writing up something similar to that extent. There has been much written, especially in the last 50 or so years on this one rare Greek word.
I am not interpreting, I am analyzing by going back to the historic understandings/sources and making a distinction between pre Paul and post Paul, especially pointing out the Gnostic & astrological influence with this word family, including in lexicons.
Our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the spiritual forces of darkness. That was written first for the Ephesians! I am making a case that the enemy is the one sowing confusion, especially through gnostic and astrological texts, and it started around 100-200 AD regarding this particular Greek word. Sadly, the tradition of man that women are inferior to men (not just different) allowed it to perpetuate over the ages. Thankfully that view has shifted (although not in some cultures/religions), even though the shift seems mostly in about the last 50 years.
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
Thanks, Jeff, for taking time to read the post, comments and then responding! I read your bio and noted your time @ TCC... I attended there a long time ago ;).
Also, thanks for your concerns re the accident. I call it my "wild ride"! PTL, He protected me! I am doing amazingly fine after that accident, a little sore and achy from when I landed on the ground. There was some of God's miraculous intervention, because it could have been very serious and, instead, I walked away praising the Lord with my coffee cup still in my hand after being on the hood of the car, then rolling/sliding off as they stopped. I don't even have bruises on my legs where the car should have hit me, because in that split second between when my friend yelled to warn me & I turned and saw the car about 5 feet away this went through my head "you don't have time to get out of the way, get on the hood", and it seems like there was Divine assistance that got me on the hood in that split second. Being wired with curiosity, as I was on the hood for several seconds, I was thinking pay attention to what this feels like, and realized I was calm, at peace, and actually felt comfortable. That's a God story!
I appreciate any and all feedback as this particular debate between comps and egals can become very passionate and often generated more heat than light.
I love that you have spent some time researching authentein as well. Thanks for sharing that. As far as I can tell, Erasmus is the one who first used usurp authority with his 1516 Greek-Latin translationl. There's a bit of unraveling the history of this word! But I love that we can research the rare words used in Scripture, literally reading the sources incl the translation into English. Erasmus probably had to travel from monastery to university to wherever these old documents were kept as he studied the Greek and worked on his translations...
Question for you Jeff, have you used the TLG (TLG - Home)? I cried when I found this site several years ago (thanks to Dr. Leland Wilshire's use of it) and read their story of how it was inspired, began and expanded since 1971. TLG - History
Posted in: Getting the Whole Picture: Women and Ministry in 1 Timothy
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Patrick, for taking the time to read, ask questions and share your thoughts. For now, here is a short response, I will post a more complete response later this week... but some of the response is already included in articles that will be posted in the future as each concern is a discussion on its own. (I'm letting the CRC network moderate that!)
I want the hard questions! I pray we can wrestle through these together in community for His glory, for His beautiful and profound principles that are for our good. God warns us to test everything, to examine and search His Scriptures and I really appreciate that you are testing what I share.
A brief history of my journey, I didn't go looking for this particular debate, it was barely even on my radar, until someone (non CRC) asked me very specifically in 2008. I gave them my standard answer at that time which was let the men be the leaders because I don't want them to abdicate their responsibilities, and I had very little interest in any of whatever it was that happened with council, classis or synod or whatever committee, yet felt prompted to take some time to research the various views as I had never done my own research on it, but was vaguely aware the CRC had a dual position on this. I researched, wrestled, prayed and processed for about 3 months and came to the same conclusion as the 1995 CRC Synod. I prayed "God, You will have to make it clear, because I can see both sides and how the CRC came to the same dilemma..." was my conclusion after wrestling with the information I had available at that time! After that, this issue was not part of my focus for almost 10 years. Although the question remained in the background, I was not actively pursuing it. That changed in late 2017-early 2018 when a very specific and significant piece of the pagan culture came to my attention and I started researching again. I am now sharing various pieces, that as far as I have found so far, were not part (or at least a significant part) of the discussion back in the 1990's, were not easily accessible in 2008, and have since become more accessible through the internet.
Patrick, I understand your concern that some say this passage applies only to 1st century Ephesus. That is not my view, I believe there are universal principles here because it is part of God's word. But the cultural pagan context is a significant lens that needs to be included in this discussion and for the most part has not been for various reasons until fairly recently. Dr. Clinton Arnold (starting in the 1990's- current) was one of the first theologians to re-acknowledge Artemis and the pagan cults after centuries of it being off the Ephesians & Timothy context radar, but this aspect didn't really get much attention until the last 5-10 years, and it still is not a commonly considered context or if it's considered, often quickly dismissed by one side.
Yes, on Kostenberger (and our own CRC Dr. Albert Wolters)... That they believe 'it means “to have authority” or “to exercise authority” in a neutral or positive sense"' is included in one of the articles that will be posted in the future. I also bring up created order and 1 Tim 2:13-14 in a subsequent article not yet posted. (Due to the nature and amount of material, this is a series of articles in shorter segments (700-1,500 words each) so it is not an overwhelming firehose and TLDR! This post is just the introduction.)
I believe the meaning was clear and plain to Timothy, and to others that might have heard or read this letter from Paul. Unfortunately, the plain reading has been muddled over the ages through translations, traditions, and confusing uses by the Gnostics, starting shortly after Paul & Timothy's time. Mike Winger's 11+ hours long video on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 alone that took him a year to research and record tells us there is a lot of confusion and controversy here, let alone all the other writing that has been done on especially 1 Tim 2:12. ALL The Debates Over 1 Tim 2:11-15: Women in Ministry part 12 (it took me a year to make this)
I leave you with the same question expanded a bit... is it possible this verse/passage is not a burden, but something more beautiful that God intended for both men and women in His family... when we understand it more fully in the context that Paul and Timothy were ministering in in Ephesus? That possibility/potential is what I hope to share through this series and I pray the conclusion is an increased awareness of a powerful and profound Biblical principle that has been somehow lost &/or minimized for far too long!
This response was meant to be brief. Again, thank you and look forward to continuing to test and wrestle together. My heart is for God's Church/people to be the family and witness God intended and share some things that we might have misunderstood because we were missing some significant pieces.
Posted in: We Are Blessed
Thank you, Eric, for reading through these and responding!
YES, the beautiful Aaronic blessing!!
It was listed #2 in my draft that I sent to the CRC network to publish, but not sure why it is not in included here.
Thank you for noticing that omission!
...
Posted in: We Are Blessed
Again, thanks Eric. I submitted an edit with the Aaronic blessing back in the list & added the rest of my title before the last paragraph ;)
WE ARE BLESSED... TO BE A BLESSING TO ONE ANOTHER
Posted in: In Search of Wisdom in the Midst of Doubt
God warns us in His Word, over & over, at least 30 times, to not be deceived. Something is significant when it is repeated so many times, especially by the Creator of the Universe!
I have a long list of laments over things I was taught somewhere along my journey of life that, in some cases, actually was the opposite of what I find when I have searched & examined the Scriptures more in depth, and in other cases, hyper focused on one doctrine at the expense of others. I often use the phrase, both/and. Often both views are right in ways, and both views are wrong in ways. Ie. complementarian & egalitarian.
I love the Greek word "peithesthe". This was a word that opened Greek debates in various forums (this word is an entire discussion on its own). It is a word that means to be open to being persuaded/convinced. It is so important in this time of confusion and deepening division, that we, especially as the family of God, continue to be curious and conversational with others. When we love one another as He loves us, we treat each other with dignity and respect even when we deeply disagree. Jesus still washed Judas' feet, Jesus still served Passover, the Lord's supper, to Judas. Jesus still went to the synagogue, even though He compared it to a den of vipers. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for them. Not saying, those we disagree with are Judas or enemies, but sharing how Jesus treated those whom He knew would harm Him.
God also warns us to test everything, to use discernment/wisdom.
It is a painful yet profound journey to admit where we have been deceived/wrong, yet God's truth is far more beautiful than whatever the deception was we were believing, and the process of discovery is often life changing and healing.
Metanoia: Moving Beyond Mere Repentance | CRC Network
Being humble and open in our communication with love is a key!
Posted in: In Search of Wisdom in the Midst of Doubt
Just reading the Banner article on Doubt... it seems to be a bit of a theme since Synod 2025...
Doubt is often part of the process of recognizing deception and deconstructing that deception, I call it a red flag that says pay attention to this. Something causes you to question something you have been taught over the years, it's part of the discerning/testing that is God warns us is necessary in our journey of faith. It shouldn't be scary or threatening, but an intentionally wanted and welcome part of the powerful practice of discernment.
In my journey, of what I call deconstructing and reconstructing aka re-form-ation, what is reconstructed is often far more beautiful than what I originally believed. The discerning process is work through prayer, pondering, and processing. It's often painful & heartbreaking, recognizing & lamenting where we have caused harm, been deceived, wrong, whatever, but it is also deep, rich & profound. It often will be life changing!
Unfortunately, questioning the status quo (reformed in our context) is often treated as a threat, instead of being encouraged and affirmed like the Bereans who examined and searched the scriptures as they tested what they were taught and told. It seems the powers that be are ok with minor, trivial corrections, but other subtle yet significant shifts are silenced and those who share these more significant concerns are often considered persona non grata, not wanted, not welcome, the very opposite of scripture.
I have many more thoughts on this, but again, this seems to be a theme, and what we find might make many of us uncomfortable as the status quo of some of our reformed doctrines might be seriously challenged.
Posted in: Resources to Commemorate the 1,700th Anniversary of the Nicene Creed
In case anyone wants a short context for the purpose of the Nicene Creed: here is a list of the heresies it was addressing... I have done my own research on this, but Grok summarizes this way better, faster & shorter than I can...
I find it fascinating and heartbreaking we are dealing with some of the same beliefs today... Ie eternal subordination of the Son (ESS) to limit women's serving in the church in certain ways (this is an entire discussion on its own even today still!).
The following is the Grok/AI compilation that I have researched in the past, but would take me awhile to compile:
The Nicene Creed, established at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, was primarily formulated to address theological disputes, particularly those concerning the nature of Christ and the Trinity. Below is a list of the major heresies it aimed to counter, based on the theological context of the time:
Context and Notes:
This list is based on historical accounts of the theological debates surrounding the Council of Nicaea, as found in early Church writings and scholarly analyses of the period. If you’d like a deeper dive into any specific heresy or the Creed’s phrasing, let me know!