This still sets up a sharp either/or, Marshall, that I am uncomfortable with. For example, the Bible tells Christians to greet each other with a holy kiss. It is written not one time, but six times. I am reading you saying that if I think that the holy kiss was a culture-specific teaching, then I don’t believe that the Bible is authoritative. Am I reading you right?

I do believe the Bible is authoritative. I just think that just as we must be careful not to err in not taking it seriously enough, we must also careful not to err by appropriating “commands for all time” out of passages that were never intended to be so .

For me, I look at it as similar to the Christian walk. One the one side, we have sins of the flesh. On the other side, we have sins of legalism. Both will suck the joy out of our faith.

So it is with the Bible. On the one side, we do not meditate and take delight in the words breathed by God through man. On the other side, we set up those words to say things that God never meant them to say. Both sides rob us of what God breathed the Bible for.

The center is the sweet spot, the place in which we read the Bible and meet Jesus in the pages, the “Word” that the “word” was revealing to us.

It’s a balance, albeit often a subjective one (in that it’s hard to “measure objectively” in a concrete way—-if it was, we’d not be having this conversation because we all would easily agree on the topic! ha!), but one of great importance.

My 2 Cents,
Molly

I would say that those things of the Spirit, of morality, eternal truths and similar would be the things that cross the borders of times and places. Those are the things that we want to eat into our spirits to help us draw close to our most Holy God.

But unfortunately humanity has difficulty conceiving what is spiritual and eternal and what are merely things to help us live with each other in our own eras.

Well, one thing to do would be to become somewhat proficient in the original languages. From what I know of NT Greek, there are definitely different ways to take and understand some of the verses/statements in the translation you posted. I.e., one can’t or shouldn’t let “the Bible” become “authoritative” for oneself until one is confident about what it says.

As for whether or not one should or could say that it was “for another time and another culture,” the fact that we have a “New Testament” is proof that for Jesus and Paul and Peter, et al., the “Old Testament,” or parts or much of it, though still “God’s word,” was for “another time and another culture.” I am not saying that we should have our own “Newer Testament” for our time and culture, but it seems strange that a covenant that is not to be of the letter and written on stone and which kills, but of the Spirit, written on our hearts and giving life, should have a similar requirement of unwavering obedience to an authoritative “written letter.”

Woman’s role is not the only question that is at stake. For example, how will we approach what the Bible says about homosexuality? Or polygamy? Or slavery? Or capital punishment? Or the life of a not-yet-born child? Or other things. If we insist that the Bible is infallible in all that it teaches, we will come up on a certain side of things. If we say that the Bible is not really fully authoritative, but that it embodies viewpoints that were only applicable thousands of years ago, we will come up on another side. What do we think about the Bible?

What happens when scriptural boundaries are crossed and we cannot prove our position? Is it then that the authority of the bible is not upheld?

Take 1 Tim 2 for example, one of the passages you quoted. It cannot be proven that Paul prohibited women in general from teaching, and scriptural boundaries within the passage are indeed crossed when it is said that Paul did prohibit women in general.

The authority of the passage lies in what can and cannot be proven from it.

“It is an important issue, because it is the authority of the Bible which is really at stake. Are we willing to accept the authority of the Bible, or will we say it was for another time and another culture. And if we say that is true about God’s role for women, what other problems will arise?”

It is indeed an important issue. But the authority of the Bible is not at stake. Rightly dividing, handling, interpreting the Scriptures is what is at issue.

The particular sentences you quoted above are part of bigger pictures that Paul is addressing. None of them have anything to do with a supposed role or social class that a woman is supposed to restrain herself to. Each of the sections of Scripture that you quote should be addressed in the context of it’s place in the letters Paul was writing. Each has its own relevance in those letters.

I would be glad to start a discussion on one at a time in a new post if you would be willing to discuss your interpretations and how you come to them through the relevant Scriptures.

This was one of my main concerns when I was a comp. I think it’s a very valid concern.

I think my question is whether or not it has to be either/or. For example, the question implies that EITHER the words were meant for a specific culture during a specific time OR the Bible has authority.

That doesn’t seem like the only possible option to me.

I think that both/and is a valid option. What if the words were meant for a specific culture during a specific time AND the Bible has authority?

Another interesting question might be, if the Bible has words for specific people groups or specific cultures or specific situations or time periods, does that take away from its authority?

3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good.
4 Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children,
5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no-one will malign the word of God.

9 ¶ I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,
10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1 ¶ Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behaviour of their wives,
2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives.
3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewellery and fine clothes.
4 Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight.
5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands,
6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.