PART 4 "TROUBLING THE CHRISTIAN PATRIARCHY" APOSTLES AND REAL WOMEN "

THE MINISTRY AI AND I
Part 3 “TROUBLING THE CHRISTIAN PATRIARCHY”
Apostles and Real Women**
**Part 2 also deals with “mutual submission and women”

Part 1 is her auto bio, training pertaining to ALL of this

Taveau’s stance:

I submit all of this as Selah,for I have ongoing researched this all of my life. So it is not hardcore authoritarian etched in steel dogma. Also I have no secret agenda, not a women’s libber, but instead the opposite (which I explained in depth in PART 1)

My View: Each person answer to the Lord, on the Final Day, for what they choose to model and train. I realize that myself. So this is WHY I submit “Selahs’ not Dogma for there is too confusion. Hence, each person must deeply know their Bible,history, the Letter of the Lord AND “freedom in Christ” which is not use licentiousness, greasy grace, nor Bible thumping name calling accusation. It must be ‘humble, and be read,also regarded “apart from the Letter of the Law” and maturely read..Also please get wise advice, to pray and seek the Lord and then to “work out their own salvation” to see WHAT God teaches them out of all of the many ministry trainings, big and small Christian traditions, and then they pray, then submit to whatever God Says“

Therefore, in accord with First Church, Bible Apostle Paul

Philippians 2:12 “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”

“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” Mark 7:13

Taveau asks Chat GPT AI to

Discuss the servant leader Christian’s Bible ‘freedom in the things of Christ” also Jesus, Paul, First Church views, practices about women in the church. compare with Back Under the Old Testament Law, also Christian passed religious traditions accepted, I Timothy 2:11-12. Write in depth, use Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic when needed.

ChatGPT replies:

Ministry Freedom in Christ (Jesus, Paul, and First Church) vs. Old Testament Law and Christian Religious Traditions

When discussing ministry freedom, especially in light of passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-12, it’s essential to distinguish between:

The Freedom Brought by Christ (Jesus’ and Paul’s teachings)
The Old Testament Law (and how it was fulfilled in Christ)
Christian Religious Traditions (often shaped by cultural patriarchy and human interpretation)

This passage has often been used to restrict women’s roles in ministry, but a deeper look at the historical context, Greek wording, and biblical principles of freedom in Christ reveals a more nuanced understanding.

1 Timothy 2:11-12 in Context “The Famous Apostle Paul “woman” Verse

KJV Translation:
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

This passage, taken at face value, has often been used to prohibit women from teaching or leading in the church. However, there are significant cultural, linguistic, and interpretative considerations that we must explore.

1. Cultural Context of 1 Timothy 2

The Setting in Ephesus: Paul’s letter to Timothy was written while Timothy was overseeing the church in Ephesus.
Ephesus’ Religious Environment: Ephesus was a center for the worship of the goddess Artemis (Diana). Women held priestly roles in the Artemis cult, and this religious culture may have influenced the church in Ephesus.
Paul may have been addressing specific issues of disorder or false teaching influenced by this pagan religious cult

Apostle Paul:

A Deep Dive into 1 Timothy 2:11-12: Historical, Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic Context

1 Timothy 2:11-12 has been one of the most debated and divisive passages in the Christian scriptures, particularly in relation to the role of women in the church. To understand the original intent behind these verses, it’s critical to explore them in their historical, linguistic, and cultural contexts, particularly how they fit within the broader themes of Paul’s ministry and New Testament theology.

The Passage (1 Timothy 2:11-12)

“Let a woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
— 1 Timothy 2:11-12 (KJV)

Historical Context and Setting

Ephesus and the Role of Women in the Church The letter to Timothy was written by the Apostle Paul to Timothy, who was serving as a pastor in Ephesus, a city known for its significant cultural, religious, and social challenges. The city was the site of the great temple to the goddess Artemis, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, which fostered a pagan and matriarchal environment.
- The temple of Artemis was an influential center for women’s worship, and the women of Ephesus were often involved in religious rituals and teachings. This cultural backdrop provides essential context for understanding Paul’s admonition to women in the Ephesian church.
- Women in pagan religions were often seen in roles of spiritual authority and leadership. These roles and teachings were sometimes contrary to Christian doctrine and Paul’s theology, leading to concerns about women taking positions of spiritual leadership within the Christian community.
The Situation in the Ephesian Church The church in Ephesus faced significant challenges related to false teachings and disorder. Paul had been

The situation in the Ephesian church was complex, with many distractions and false teachings circulating among the believers. Paul’s letter addresses some of these challenges, including improper conduct in worship, disruptions caused by certain teachings, and the potential influence of pagan religious customs. The church faced problems with false teachers, many of whom promoted doctrines contrary to Paul’s gospel.

Paul’s guidance in 1 Timothy 2 is not an isolated instruction on women but part of a broader concern for order and sound teaching in the Ephesian church, where the influence of the surrounding culture and religious practices might have led to confusion about proper roles and authority within the Christian community.

Greek and Language Analysis

The original Greek language of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 can give us insights into what Paul may have meant:
1. Verse 2:11 – “Let a woman learn in silence with all subjection.”
  - The Greek word used for “learn” is μανθάνω (manthano), which emphasizes the idea of acquiring knowledge. This is not simply a passive action, but an active process of being taught, which was significant in a culture where women were often excluded from formal education. Paul encourages women to engage in learning, which contrasts with other traditions where women were kept from studying.
  - The term “silence” here is ησυχία (hesychia), which implies an attitude of quietness or peaceable behavior, not absolute silence. It is important to note that this word is also used in 1 Timothy 2:2 for everyone’s prayers to be made in a quiet, peaceable environment. The silence Paul refers to is not a directive to never speak, but to maintain order and not disrupt teaching, particularly in a setting where the culture may have caused confusion.
2. Verse 2:12 – “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
  - The phrase “teach” is derived from the Greek word διδάσκω (didasko), which means to instruct or teach. In the first-century church, teaching was a role of great responsibility and authority, which was often reserved for apostles and those in leadership positions. Paul’s prohibition here is likely connected to protecting the church from false teachings, not necessarily an indictment of all forms of women’s leadership.
  - The phrase “usurp authority” uses the Greek word αὐθεντέω (authenteo), which has been historically debated. It suggests not just exercising authority, but seizing or taking authority in a domineering way. The term has connotations of overbearing or abusive authority, which helps us understand that Paul’s concern was not about women in leadership in general, but about improper authority that was usurped or misapplied, especially in a context where heresy was a concern.
  So, Paul is not simply forbidding women from teaching or holding authority but is specifically concerned with the manner in which authority is exercised and the context of that authority. This would have been particularly relevant in Ephesus, where the Ephesian women might have been influenced by Artemis worship and might have taken independent, possibly disruptive roles in their newfound Christian communities.
Cultural Context: Women and Authority in the Early Church

In the early church, women held various roles, many of which were significant and respected:
- Priscilla and Aquila, a married couple, are often mentioned as co-workers with Paul in the ministry, and Priscilla is credited with helping to teach Apollos (Acts 18:26).
- Phoebe, a deacon, is mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:1-2, and she is commended for her ministry, leadership, and assistance to many.
- Junia, mentioned in Romans 16:7, is described as “outstanding among the apostles.”
However, 1 Timothy 2:11-12 indicates that Paul did place limits on certain women’s roles, especially in terms of teaching or leading in a way that would usurp authority over men. This likely reflects a cultural concern about women in the Ephesian church who may have been misapplying their influence or aligning with false teachers.

Paul’s Larger Theology on Women in Ministry

Paul’s broader teaching on women in ministry is not one-dimensional. He acknowledges their significant contributions and roles within the church, even though certain roles, like being an elder or overseer, may have been restricted based on the cultural and doctrinal context of the early church.

For example:
- Galatians 3:28 presents a powerful affirmation that in Christ, there is no distinction between male and female, implying equality before God in salvation, spiritual gifts, and calling.
- In Romans 16, Paul speaks highly of several women leaders and workers in the church, including Priscilla, Phoebe, and Junia.
- 1 Corinthians 11:5 acknowledges that women can pray and prophesy in the church, though with appropriate head coverings, suggesting a distinction in roles, but not in value or gifting.
Theological Implications for Today

The interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 in modern times often reflects two extremes:
1. The Complementarian View, which holds that women’s roles in the church are restricted to certain functions, typically focusing on teaching and authority over men.
2. The Egalitarian View, which argues for gender equality in all aspects of church leadership, emphasizing that Paul’s instructions were culturally specific and do not apply universally.
Given Paul’s broader ministry and his acknowledgment of women’s involvement in the church, it seems more likely that 1 Timothy 2:11-12 was intended as a temporary instruction for the specific issues that were happening in the Ephesian church, rather than a universal rule for all churches.

Paul was working within a specific cultural context where the church was still learning to navigate the tension between the old cultural norms (such as those surrounding authority in Ephesus) and the new kingdom dynamics established through Christ. Therefore, it is important to see this passage in light of the entire biblical narrative, which speaks to both the value of women in the kingdom and their specific roles within the church community.

Conclusion

Paul’s instruction in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 can be understood more clearly by examining the linguistic, historical, and cultural contexts of the time. While the restriction of teaching and authority for women in these verses is clear, it was not a blanket prohibition of all women’s roles in the church, nor was it an endorsement of patriarchy or inequality. It was a reflection of the particular challenges facing the church in Ephesus and an effort to ensure order and doctrinal purity during a time when the church was being shaped and formed.

Today, this passage must be considered in light of the whole of Scripture and the broader historical context of the early church, with an eye toward mutual respect, godly leadership, and the empowerment of all believers—male and female—within the body of Christ.

Taveau asks:

How would Apostle Paul 2:12 handle strict traditions of I Timothy 1:11-12

Chat GPT AI replies:

How Would Apostle Paul Handle Strict Traditions of 1 Timothy 2:11-12?

To understand how Apostle Paul would handle the strict interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, it is essential to consider several key factors:

Paul’s Emphasis on Context and Specific Issues
His Broader Teachings on Freedom in Christ
The Role of Women in Paul’s Ministry and the Early Church
How Paul Interpreted the Law vs. the Freedom in Christ

Let’s break this down in light of his ministry approach.

1 Timothy 2:11-12 Contextualized

The passage in question states:

KJV: “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

At first glance, this seems like a universal prohibition. However, when we consider Paul’s other writings and the cultural setting in Ephesus, it becomes clear that Paul did not universally silence women. He was addressing specific issues in a particular cultural moment

1. Paul’s Ministry Context: Addressing Ephesus

The church in Ephesus faced false teachings, possibly stemming from local religious practices and cultural norms (e.g., worship of Artemis, where women held high religious status and authority). Paul was likely addressing:

Disruptive behavior in teaching or worship: The word translated as “silence” in Greek (Greek: hēsychia) means quietness or peacefulness, not absolute muteness. Paul was likely calling for orderly behavior, not banning women from speaking.
Authority vs. domineering: The Greek word for “usurp authority” is authentein, which has a negative connotation and implies a domineering, controlling type of authority. It does not refer to general teaching authority but rather the abuse of authority.

Thus, Paul may have been prohibiting a specific abuse of authority or false teaching, not forbidding all women from teaching or leading

2. Paul’s View of Tradition and Freedom in Christ

Paul’s ministry was characterized by a radical departure from Jewish traditions and freedom in Christ:

Galatians 3:28 (KJV): “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”
Paul upheld equal spiritual value for men and women in Christ.

In Romans 7:6, Paul taught that believers are no longer “bound” by the old written code (the Mosaic Law) but live by the Spirit’s guidance. Paul’s mission was to bring believers into this freedom, not back under restrictive traditions.

Therefore, Paul would likely caution against applying 1 Timothy 2:11-12 as a rigid, universal law that contradicts the New Testament principles of freedom and equality

3. Paul’s Ministry Practice: Women Leaders in the Early Church

Paul worked with numerous women in leadership roles, showing that he did not hold to a rigid exclusion of women from ministry:

Priscilla: In Acts 18:26, Priscilla (alongside her husband Aquila) taught Apollos, a well-known male teacher, and corrected his doctrine. Paul never condemned this.
Phoebe: In Romans 16:1-2, Paul refers to Phoebe as a deacon (Greek: diakonos) of the church at Cenchrea and commends her for her service.
Junia: In Romans 16:7, Paul refers to Junia as “outstanding among the apostles,” which suggests an authoritative leadership role.

If Paul had a blanket prohibition against women teaching or leading, these examples would directly contradict his actions

4. Old Testament Law vs. the New Covenant in Christ

Paul’s teachings consistently emphasized that believers are not bound by the Law of Moses but live under the freedom of the New Covenant:

Galatians 5:1 (KJV): “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.”
Paul recognized that Jewish traditions often placed burdens on believers that were incompatible with the grace of Christ.

Thus, Paul would likely argue that rigid, authoritarian interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 are a return to legalism and Old Testament-like control, which is contrary to the freedom of the Spirit.

Conclusion: How Would Paul Handle Strict Interpretations?

Paul would likely reject strict, legalistic interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 that silence or exclude women from leadership and ministry. Instead, he would encourage:

Order and Peace: Encouraging peaceful, respectful participation in worship and teaching for both men and women.
Freedom and Equality in Christ: Embracing the equal spiritual status of men and women in ministry roles.
Cultural Sensitivity: Addressing cultural issues without creating universal laws that violate the gospel’s freedom.

Paul’s ultimate mission was to build the church according to Christ’s example of servant leadership, where gifts and callings are not restricted by gender, race, or status. Thus, 1 Timothy 2:11-12 should be understood as a situational instruction for Ephesus, not a universal prohibition on women in ministry.

‘

Apostle Taveau asks Chat GPT AI

1. In big Apostles Church history how did Jesus, Paul, First Church line up with the view of women?

2. Some say the First Church was not so ardently ”against leader women” as the Modern Church, in many parts. Explain.

3. Once again, explain “the patriarchy” in the Church. Did start out that way of was it Ephesians 5:21?

4. If were all First Church persons, observed Ephesian 5:21″ servant leadership” (authority offices, elders, lay, married couples)(this Submission verse is addressed in Part 2 also) then the evolving the ministry into “patriarchal” authoritarian” “anti women ” but only that is truly what happened, as I deal with (my coined term) Levitical Patriarchism and many of all races, speaking in tongues or not, but WELP is my color and the worst for WELP ( Western European Levitical Patriarchism which deep ancestry residing mostly colonial, patriarchal, “big boss”subculture) which repeatedly resembles a class system, hierarchy authoritarian, a non servant leader model, which more akin to a required status, human pecking order, .

How does this paint a better picture of Jesus and the First Church or else?

Chat GPT AI replies:

This is a deep and complex topic, and you’re hitting on some of the most significant historical, theological, and cultural shifts in church history. To fully unpack how Jesus, Paul, and the First Church approached authority and women, and how patriarchal authoritarianism later evolved in the church, we need to look at multiple layers: biblical teachings, cultural influences, and historical developments. I’ll break it down in several sections

1. Jesus, Women, and Authority: A Radical Approach

Jesus broke cultural norms when it came to how He treated women. In His ministry:

No Gender-Based Hierarchy: Jesus had female disciples (e.g., Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, Joanna). Though not named as the Twelve Apostles, these women were pivotal to Jesus’ ministry, especially as the first witnesses of the resurrection (John 20:11-18).
He Encouraged Women to Learn: In Luke 10:38-42, Mary of Bethany sits at Jesus’ feet—a position reserved for disciples (learners of rabbis). Jesus affirmed her right to be there despite Martha’s societal expectation that Mary should serve in the kitchen.
He Defended Women’s Dignity: Jesus protected the woman caught in adultery (John 8:3-11) and spoke publicly with the Samaritan woman (John 4:7-26), which was unheard of for a Jewish man.
No Authoritarianism: Jesus modeled servant leadership (Matthew 20:25-28), rejecting the hierarchical, domineering leadership common in the Roman and Jewish cultures. His style was relational, compassionate, and based on mutual submission and service.

Jesus’ Model: Women were not marginalized under Jesus’ leadership. He modeled equality, respect, and freedom from oppressive authority

2. Paul and Women: More Complicated but Not Anti-Woman

Paul’s writings are often cited to support patriarchal structures, but a closer look reveals a more nuanced reality:

Women as Leaders and Co-Laborers: Paul mentioned several female leaders by name:
- Phoebe (Romans 16:1-2): A deaconess and benefactor, possibly carrying Paul’s letter to Rome.
- Priscilla (Acts 18:26): A teacher of Apollos, one of the early church’s leading preachers.
- Junia (Romans 16:7): Described as “outstanding among the apostles.” Historically, Junia’s identity was later debated, with some scholars changing her name to “Junias” (a masculine form) to erase her apostolic authority.
Equality in the Spirit: Paul declared that in Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). This reflects Paul’s belief in spiritual equality for men and women.
Mutual Submission: In Ephesians 5:21-33, Paul taught mutual submission in marriage before addressing specific roles. His emphasis was not on hierarchy but on husbands loving sacrificially and wives responding in respect.

Cultural Challenges in Paul’s Day: Paul’s more restrictive statements (e.g., 1 Timothy 2:12) are often understood as addressing local cultural issues, not universal bans on female leadership.

3. The First Church: A Balance of Freedom and Order

The early church, especially before Constantine (4th century), was largely charismatic and community-driven. Leadership was often informal, with house churches led by both men and women. There was no rigid hierarchical system at this stage:

House Churches: Many early house churches were hosted and led by women, such as Lydia in Philippi (Acts 16:14-15).
Prophecy and Teaching: Both men and women exercised gifts of prophecy, teaching, and leadership. The early church valued spiritual gifting over strict roles.
Servant Leadership: Following Jesus’ model, the early church prioritized servant leadership over authoritarian structures.

4. Challenges due to Church Expansion:

The Rise of Patriarchy in the Church

As Christianity expanded beyond its Jewish roots into the Greco-Roman world, cultural forces began to shape church leadership:

Influence of Roman Patriarchy:
- Roman society was hierarchical and patriarchal. Men held authority over women, children, and slaves. This cultural structure influenced how leadership roles were viewed.
- Roman law and customs began to creep into the church, leading to more rigid distinctions between men and women.
Shift to Institutionalization (Constantine and Beyond):
- When Constantine made Christianity the state religion (4th century), the church transitioned from a grassroots movement to an institutional power structure.
- Bishops and clergy became political figures, adopting Roman-style authority and hierarchy.
- Clericalism (the elevation of clergy over laity) began, reinforcing male dominance in leadership.
Greek Philosophy’s Influence:
- Greek philosophers like Aristotle taught that women were inherently inferior to men. These ideas permeated church thinking.
- Some church fathers (e.g., Tertullian, Augustine) absorbed Greek views of women, leading to more exclusionary practices.
Theological Justification for Patriarchy:
- Passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 were increasingly interpreted in literal, universal ways, ignoring cultural and historical contexts.
- Women were barred from formal leadership roles, and the church became more hierarchical and authoritarian.

5. Patriarchy as Authoritarianism, “Cult Spirit,” and a “Man’s Club”

Many of the characteristics of Levitical Patriarchism or authoritarian church structures mirror what you describe:

Authoritarian Control: Patriarchal systems often rely on strict obedience to male authority figures, suppressing dissent or individuality.
“Cult-Like” Dynamics: In extreme cases, authoritarian leaders use manipulation, fear, and isolation to maintain control, much like cult leaders.
Exclusion of Women: Patriarchal systems often reduce women to subordinate roles, stifling their gifts and voices in ministry.
Hierarchy Over Servanthood: Instead of following Jesus’ model of servant leadership, authoritarian churches emphasize power, control, and pecking orders.

6. How the Early Church’s Egalitarian Vision Was Lost

By the Middle Ages, the church had fully embraced a hierarchical, male-dominated structure. Women were largely relegated to the roles of nuns, wives, or widows. Female prophets and teachers were often labeled heretics or witches if they challenged male authority.

Yet, even during these periods, God raised up women like Hildegard of Bingen, Catherine of Siena, and Teresa of Ávila, who defied patriarchal norms to lead and teach with authority.

7. Returning to the First Church Model

Many Christians today are rediscovering the original biblical model of servant leadership and mutual submission:

Jesus’ Model of Authority: True authority is not about dominance but about sacrificial love and service (Matthew 20:25-28).
Paul’s Vision of Equality: Galatians 3:28 reminds us that in Christ, men and women are spiritually equal and can both lead and serve.
Holy Spirit Gifting: The Holy Spirit distributes gifts to all believers, regardless of gender (Acts 2:17-18).

Final Picture: Jesus’ and Paul’s Vision vs. the Evolution of Authoritarianism

Jesus and the First Church emphasized equality, mutual submission, and servant leadership.
Patriarchal Authoritarianism emerged through cultural influences (Roman law, Greek philosophy) and church institutionalization.
Today, many believers are reexamining these historical shifts and seeking to restore the biblical model of leadership that values all voices, both male and female.

Chat GPT Asks Sister T:

Would you like a more detailed breakdown of any specific part? Or further discussion on how to address Levitical Patriarchism today?

Sister T responds

Yes. And please delve into “women’ being accused, labeled, and biased against in certain sects, doctrines of the growing Church

Chat GPT AI continues:

Your term, Levitical Patriarchism and its tendency to label women as “witches” or suspect them of spiritual rebellion has roots in multiple cultural, religious, and historical influences. To understand how this false teaching developed, we need to examine its connection to:

Old Testament Legalism and Distortion
Greek Monk Influence & “The Hammer of Witches” (Malleus Maleficarum)
The Salem Witch Trials and Puritan Suspicion
Cultural Lore, Superstition, and Control over Women

Let’s explore how these streams of influence fed into today’s Levitical Patriarchism.

1. Levitical Patriarchism: Misuse of Old Testament Law and Control

Levitical Patriarchism stems from a distorted use of Old Testament Levitical law, often blended with superstition. Its characteristics include:

Legalism: A hyper-focus on rules, especially concerning purity, gender roles, and submission.
Hierarchy and Male Dominance: Men are viewed as divinely appointed rulers over women, often justifying control or suppression of female leadership and voice.
Misapplication of Law: Scriptures like Leviticus 20:27 (“A man or woman who is a medium or necromancer shall surely be put to death”) are sometimes cited to accuse women of witchcraft or rebellion.

While Levitical law was meant to preserve Israel’s holiness and separation from pagan practices, it was not designed to grant men control or label women as witches. Jesus fulfilled the law and moved beyond its rigid framework, promoting grace and equality instead of authoritarian rule (Matthew 5:17).

Levitical Patriarchism distorts Jesus’ teachings by reverting to hierarchical, controlling patterns under the guise of “holiness.”

2. Greek Monk Influence and “The Hammer of Witches”

The “Hammer of Witches” (Malleus Maleficarum) was a 15th-century treatise written by two Dominican monks, Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, under the authority of the Catholic Church. This book became a foundational text for witch hunts across Europe.

Key Elements of the Malleus Maleficarum

Women as Suspect: The text promoted the belief that women were more susceptible to witchcraft because of their supposed “weakness” in faith and morality. It stated that women’s bodies, emotions, and sexuality made them prone to demonic influence.
Spiritual Rebellion vs. Submission: The book tied witchcraft to insubordination—any woman who did not conform to societal and religious expectations was at risk of being accused.
Obedience as a Virtue: The underlying message was that “righteous” women were submissive and silent. Rebellious or outspoken women were considered dangerous and possibly in league with Satan.

This mindset planted the seeds for deep mistrust of women’s leadership and discernment, particularly in spiritual contexts. Many church leaders embraced this false doctrine of inherent female suspicion.

Impact on Modern Patriarchy

The Hammer of Witches essentially formalized suspicion of women in church leadership. It deeply influenced church law, which was absorbed into the broader European and American cultural mindset.

3. Salem Witch Trials and Puritan Suspicion

The Salem Witch Trials (1692) were an extreme example of suspicion and hysteria within a patriarchal, authoritarian Puritan culture. Several factors fed this environment:

Fear of Spiritual Rebellion: The Puritans believed in strict, male-dominated hierarchy. Any deviation from this hierarchy—particularly by women—was seen as potential evidence of spiritual rebellion.
Women and Power: The women accused of witchcraft were often those who defied social norms: widows, healers, or women with strong opinions. Their independence was seen as a threat to male authority.
Spectral Evidence: The Salem trials relied heavily on “spectral evidence”—the idea that a person’s spirit or image could be seen performing witchcraft, even if there was no physical evidence. This was subjective and impossible to disprove, leading to many false accusations.
Superstition and Control: Women were scapegoated as a way for the community to explain suffering or societal instability. It became a tool to reinforce male-dominated societal structures.

Salem and Levitical Patriarchism share the same underlying principles:

Mistrust of women’s independence or spiritual authority
Use of religious justification to suppress, accuse, or control women
A tendency to label female leaders as rebellious or dangerous

4. Cultural Lore and Superstition in Western Christian Tradition

The fear of women’s spiritual authority did not begin in Salem or with the Malleus Maleficarum. It has roots in ancient pagan lore and superstitions about women’s connection to the spiritual realm.

Greek and Roman Superstitions: In ancient Greece, women were often associated with mystery, fertility, and magic. Goddesses like Hecate (the goddess of witchcraft) became symbols of female rebellion and power. Over time, these cultural myths were absorbed into church tradition, leading to fear of women’s spirituality.
Christian Syncretism: As Christianity spread through Europe, pagan superstitions merged with church teachings. Female healers and midwives, for example, were often labeled as witches or heretics because they held knowledge and authority outside of male-dominated church structures.

Tradition-Based Patriarchy: Over centuries, these superstitions became embedded in church teachings and cultural expectations. Women were often relegated to roles of submission and silence to prevent any hint of “witchcraft” or rebellion.

5. False Teaching: Fear-Based Control in Today’s Church

The legacy of mistrusting women in spiritual settings still exists today, especially in certain authoritarian, patriarchal churches. Modern expressions of Levitical Patriarchism may include:

Labeling Female Leaders as Jezebels or Witches: Women with prophetic gifts or leadership roles are sometimes accused of being rebellious or manipulative. The “Jezebel spirit” accusation is often used as a weapon to discredit strong, independent women in ministry.
Spectral Evidence in Modern Form: Some charismatic movements engage in “inner readings” or “discernment” without biblical relationship or evidence—similar to the subjective accusations used in the Salem Witch Trials. This practice can easily devolve into false accusations and spiritual abuse.
Fear of Female Spiritual Power: Just as in medieval and Puritan times, there is often a fear that women exercising spiritual authority will bring chaos or rebellion. This fear is rooted in false teaching, not in the gospel of Christ.

6. Jesus’ Response: Freedom from Fear and Control

Jesus modeled the exact opposite of the fear and control seen in Levitical Patriarchism and witch-hunting cultures:

He Empowered Women: Jesus gave women like Mary Magdalene and the Samaritan woman freedom to speak, lead, and testify (John 4:29, John 20:18).
He Rejected Fear-Based Authority: Jesus consistently exposed the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, who used religious rules to control others (Matthew 23:4).
He Taught True Spiritual Discernment: Jesus taught that discernment must be rooted in truth, love, and relationship—not fear, suspicion, or accusations (Matthew 7:16).

Paul’s teachings also affirmed this freedom, emphasizing that all believers are equal in Christ (Galatians 3:28).

Summary: Cultural and Historical Roots of Patriarchal Fear of Women

Levitical Patriarchism is a legalistic distortion of Old Testament law, used to control women’s roles and authority.
Malleus Maleficarum and the Salem Witch Trials represent historical extremes of suspicion and accusation against women, fueled by superstition and male control.
Cultural Lore and Superstition further embedded fear of women’s spiritual power in church tradition.
Jesus and the First Church rejected authoritarian, fear-based control, offering women dignity, freedom, and spiritual equality.

Understanding these historical and cultural dynamics can help us expose false teaching and return to the biblical model of mutual submission** and servant leadership**. (**also see Part 2 in this series for more depth on this topic)

Taveau requests:

Please expound upon any the developing, Modern Church and describe false doctrines, applications, scriptures, affecting many long held, past down ministry traditions concerning “women”

Chat replies:

Let’s expand on the modern applications and scriptural references to clarify how these issues manifest today, how they deviate from biblical teaching, and how Jesus’ and Paul’s ministry provide a model of true spiritual discernment and freedom.

Modern Applications of Levitical Patriarchism and Witch Accusations in Church Culture

The “Jezebel Spirit” Labeling as a Modern Witch Accusation
- In some charismatic and prophetic circles, the term “Jezebel spirit” is frequently used to accuse women in leadership or prophetic ministry.
- Jezebel, a biblical queen from 1 Kings 16:31-33, is often linked with rebellion, manipulation, and idolatry. However, labeling a woman as “Jezebel” based on subjective “discernment” can become a weapon of control, much like the Malleus Maleficarum’s depiction of women as inherently suspect.
- Unbiblical Behavior: These accusations are often made without direct relationship, biblical protocol (Matthew 18:15-17), or evidence—similar to how Salem Witch Trials relied on spectral evidence.
Biblical Refutation:
- Jesus warned against false accusations and harsh judgment (Matthew 7:1-5).
- Paul emphasized that believers should restore others gently, not harshly or without proof (Galatians 6:1).
- Spiritual accusations should be handled with truth and relationship, not emotional or fear-based guesswork.

“Inner Reading” and Modern Spiritual Speculation
- Some churches practice “inner reading” or subjective spiritual discernment without interaction or evidence. This practice often leads to accusations of witchcraft, rebellion, or manipulation, especially against women.
- Ties to Spectral Evidence: This is eerily similar to Salem’s use of spectral evidence—accusing people based on subjective impressions of “seeing” their spiritual actions, rather than concrete proof.
Biblical Refutation:
- True discernment in the Bible is rooted in knowing the fruits of a person’s life and actions (Matthew 7:16-20), not mystical impressions or speculation.
- Paul’s teaching on prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:29) urges believers to test prophecy and discern truth through community judgment, not one individual’s subjective perception.
- Jesus’ ministry emphasized personal relationship and compassion—not blind judgment or witch-hunting.

Character Assassination through Gossip and False Teaching
- Accusations of witchcraft, Jezebel spirits, or rebellion are often accompanied by gossip, backroom discussions, and public shaming. This aligns with the same fear-driven control seen in the Puritan and Salem traditions, where accusations were often spread through whispers and paranoia.
- Public Confrontations: Some leaders even stage confrontations to shame or “expose” others in front of the congregation—a practice that is Pharisaical and spiritually abusive.
Biblical Refutation:
- Jesus condemned the Pharisees’ public displays of righteousness and harsh judgments (Matthew 23:23-28).
- True correction should be private first: Matthew 18:15-17 outlines a process for confrontation that begins with one-on-one conversation, not public accusations.
- Paul condemned those who quarreled over words and promoted division (1 Timothy 6:4-5).

Jesus’ and Paul’s Model of Women in Ministry

To counter these fear-driven practices, we need to examine how Jesus and Paul interacted with women in ministry:

Jesus’ Dignity and Empowerment for Women
- The Samaritan Woman (John 4): Jesus broke multiple cultural norms by speaking openly with a Samaritan woman at the well. Instead of treating her as suspect or unworthy, He revealed His identity as the Messiah to her and empowered her to share her testimony in her village.
- Mary Magdalene (John 20:18): Jesus entrusted Mary with the message of His resurrection, making her the first witness and messenger of the gospel.
- The Woman Accused of Adultery (John 8:1-11): Jesus protected the woman from being condemned by a legalistic mob, challenging the crowd to examine their own sins first.
These examples show that Jesus rejected the legalistic, accusatory culture of His day and replaced it with grace, restoration, and freedom.
Paul’s Acknowledgment of Women in Ministry
- Paul affirmed multiple women in leadership and ministry roles, including:
  - Phoebe (Romans 16:1): A deacon of the church at Cenchreae, entrusted to deliver and explain Paul’s letter to the Romans.
  - Priscilla (Romans 16:3-4): A leader in the early church who, alongside her husband Aquila, helped teach and disciple Apollos.
  - Junia (Romans 16:7): Identified as “outstanding among the apostles,” Junia is a clear example of female apostolic leadership.
Paul’s teachings on submission and order were never meant to suppress women’s leadership or label them as witches. His letters emphasized servant leadership, mutual submission, and the equality of all believers in Christ (Galatians 3:28).

The Danger of Superstition and Spiritual Abuse

Superstition, subjective discernment, and authoritarian control create a dangerous environment for spiritual abuse. Levitical Patriarchism, much like the Puritan witch trials, uses fear to silence and control women. This has no place in the Body of Christ.

Superstition and Fear are not from God:
- “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and a sound mind.” (2 Timothy 1:7)
- True spiritual discernment should always be rooted in love, sound judgment, and truth—not fear or paranoia.
Spiritual Abuse Mirrors False Authority:
- The Bible warns against leaders who use religious authority to oppress or control others:
  - “Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves!” (Ezekiel 34:2)
  - Jesus condemned leaders who “tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders” (Matthew 23:4).
Freedom in Christ Replaces Legalism and False Accusations:
- Jesus came to bring freedom from the law’s bondage and human control:
  - “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” (Galatians 5:1)

Practical Steps for Today’s Church

To break free from fear-driven control and accusations in the church:

Encourage Transparent, Biblical Relationships: Build communities where concerns are addressed privately, relationally, and with biblical discernment (Matthew 18:15-17).
Avoid Subjective Accusations: Discernment should be rooted in observation, relationship, and Scripture—not speculation or inner readings.
Promote Women’s Leadership as Modeled by Christ: Celebrate and affirm women’s roles in ministry, following the example of Jesus and Paul.
Call Out False Authority: Leaders who use fear, gossip, or false accusations must be held accountable according to Scripture (1 Timothy 5:19-20).

LAST ….JUST FOR CURIOSITY:

Pastor Taveau ask Chat GPT AI
Which modern day, current Christian ministry group most resembles First and Paul in light 1 Timothy 2:11-12/

Chat GPT answers:

Who Would Pass for the First Church and Pauline Ministry in Light of 1 Timothy 2:11-12?

In light of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, the discussion about which modern-day Christian ministry groups or churches align most closely with the First Church (as seen in Paul’s ministry) and the biblical, balanced teachings of Paul requires an understanding of several aspects:

The Context of the First Church
Paul’s Ministry Philosophy
Modern Groups and Their Alignment to Pauline Ministry
The Balance of Freedom and Order in Ministry

Let’s break this down and look at who might best represent the biblical principles of early Christian ministry, including how 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is handled.

1. The Context of the First Church

Early Christian Ministry: The First Church, as established by Jesus and expanded through Paul’s ministry, was characterized by equality, unity, and the empowerment of the Holy Spirit in believers.
The church’s focus was not rigidly structured or authoritarian but was shaped by servant leadership and spiritual gifts that transcended gender, race, or social standing.
Pauline Ministry Approach: Paul’s ministry was all about planting churches, mentoring leaders, empowering individuals, and breaking down societal barriers (e.g., Jews and Gentiles, slaves and free, men and women). He constantly affirmed the freedom of the believer in Christ, and he celebrated the diverse roles that different individuals could play in the church.

2. Paul’s Ministry Philosophy on Women in Ministry

Paul’s teachings on women in ministry reflect a biblically balanced view that allowed for teaching and leadership, though with careful attention to cultural context and order:

Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This verse suggests that, in Christ, all believers have equal spiritual value.
Priscilla & Aquila: Paul worked alongside Priscilla, a woman who was a teacher and leader in the early church (Acts 18:26), demonstrating his support for women in leadership.
Phoebe: In Romans 16:1-2, Paul calls Phoebe a deacon and commends her service to the church, which implies a leadership role.
Junia: In Romans 16:7, Paul refers to Junia as an “outstanding among the apostles,” suggesting she held a position of leadership in the early church.

Thus, Paul’s ministry model allowed women to teach, lead, and serve in various capacities, contradicting the restrictive view of women seen in some modern interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:11-12.

3. Modern Ministry Groups That Align Closely with Pauline Ministry

While there are many different Christian ministry groups, the ones that most closely align with Paul’s view of ministry — especially regarding women in leadership — tend to be:

a. Egalitarian Churches and Ministries

These groups believe in the equal participation of both men and women in ministry and leadership roles. They emphasize spiritual gifts and calling, over and above gender distinctions.

Examples:
- The Evangelical Covenant Church (ECC)
- The United Methodist Church (in many cases, although not universally)
- The Church of the Nazarene
- Pentecostal and Charismatic denominations that endorse female leaders, such as Assemblies of God in some regions
- The Christian & Missionary Alliance
- Certain Baptist groups (e.g., those who uphold the principles of women in ministry, like the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship)

These groups emphasize biblical equality for men and women, support women preaching, leading, and teaching, and focus on empowering the body of Christ.

b. Charismatic and Pentecostal Ministries

Many Pentecostal and Charismatic churches embrace the ministry of both men and women. They often emphasize the gifting of the Holy Spirit and spiritual equality, which is more in line with Paul’s teachings. Women are often pastors, prophets, evangelists, and leaders in these traditions.

Examples:
- The International Pentecostal Holiness Church (IPHC)
- The Full Gospel Fellowship of Churches
- Vineyard Churches
- Bethel Church (Redding, CA)
- The Assemblies of God (certain regions support women in leadership)

These churches tend to focus on empowering women through the Holy Spirit, allowing them to serve and lead in the same capacity as men, aligning with Paul’s view of women in the early church.

c. House Churches and Organic Church Movements

Some house church movements or organic churches reflect the egalitarian model of the early church, where leadership is often shared, non-hierarchical, and gender-inclusive. These churches place a high emphasis on spiritual gifting and community involvement, rather than strict hierarchical structures.

Examples:
- Simple/Organic Churches
- The Missional Church Movement
- Certain Emerging Church groups
- Some Anabaptist/Quaker groups

These groups tend to be flexible in their approach to leadership and ministry, believing that everyone in the body of Christ is empowered to use their gifts, regardless of gender. This aligns with the early church model and Pauline teachings on shared ministry and leadership.

4. How These Groups Handle 1 Timothy 2:11-12

1 Timothy 2:11-12 has been interpreted variously depending on a group’s stance:

Egalitarian Groups typically view 1 Timothy 2:11-12 in its historical and cultural context, acknowledging that Paul was addressing specific issues in Ephesus, not giving a universal, timeless prohibition against women teaching. They believe the passage refers to issues of order and authority abuse, not to gender inequality in ministry.
Complementarian Groups, on the other hand, hold to the traditional interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, arguing that it establishes gender roles where men hold the teaching authority in the church, and women are restricted from teaching or exercising authority over men. These groups often uphold the hierarchical structure of authority, where women may be leaders in some contexts (e.g., in women’s ministries) but cannot be in pastoral or elder roles overseeing men.

Conclusion: Who Passes for the Pauline Ministry Model?

The modern ministry groups that best reflect Paul’s balanced view on women in ministry — as seen in Galatians 3:28, Priscilla’s teaching ministry, Phoebe’s diaconal role, and Junia’s apostolic leadership — tend to be those that:

Affirm women in leadership roles (e.g., pastor, teacher, elder, deacon, evangelist).
Emphasize spiritual gifts over cultural barriers, understanding that gifting, calling, and leadership are not restricted by gender.
Interpret 1 Timothy 2:11-12 in light of Paul’s overall ministry, acknowledging cultural issues in Ephesus and not using the passage to impose gender-based restrictions in the church today.

Churches that adopt these principles most closely align with the First Church model Paul laid out: one where the gospel and spiritual gifts empower all believers, regardless of gender, to serve and lead.

Closing from Sister Taveau: It’s usually the male leader that needs to learn and to grow in perspective, relating with ALL kinds of Christian women, (at home, church, and real life)

The phrase “dwell with your wife according to knowledge” comes from 1 Peter 3:7, where the Apostle Peter gives instructions to husbands. The full verse reads:

“Husbands, likewise, dwell with them (your wives) with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.” — 1 Peter 3:7 (NKJV)

This passage offers profound wisdom and reveals several key principles for a godly marriage and relationship between a husband and wife. Let’s break it down, focusing on the term “dwell with your wife according to knowledge.”

1. The Greek Word for “Dwell” (συνοικέω – syneikéō)

The word “dwell” in Greek, συνοικέω (syneikéō), means to live together, cohabit, or share a life together. This implies more than just physical cohabitation; it refers to the whole of living as companions, sharing life’s moments, and supporting one another emotionally, spiritually, and mentally.

2. The Key to “According to Knowledge” (κατὰ γνῶσιν – kata gnōsin)

The phrase “according to knowledge” (κατὰ γνῶσιν, kata gnōsin) is very important here. The word γνῶσις (gnōsis) is often translated as knowledge or understanding. It refers to deep, personal insight, not just intellectual or surface-level knowle

I submit this to any reader as Selah, respecting your own conscious, inner voice, Christian Bible perspective, for I intentionally this objective’ I did as many slanted questions, to bring out traditions and anti biases. But this person has no hidden agenda, except to make all ministry, leader, and lay MEN and WOMEN respected, not attacked, for sitting there calmly and showing up,trying to hear from the Lord, as I have been But ONLY among false teaching which I renounce “impure hiding subliminal, tareting Good Ole Persons, usually the WELP .however, all colors, styles, have ministry bias, misogyny and Law, which is about patriarchal control.
I would advise Man in Ministry to inquire of the Lord. Also to resemble the following:

Apostle Paul informs the Christian married husbands to “dwell with your wife according to knowledge” Reason for this, for women do not come with a training manual. They be given regular time, attention and conversation (one to one ongoing relation) to get to understand, their perspective and each ones invidual gift. This applies to man also, however, do the latter more often by second nature, hence there is First Church Pauline command to seemingly to invest(carve out) time,in order to relate to grow and understand and mature..in such.

I would say that the class system hierarchists, “objectify, use and conquer (like Eli’s sons I Samuel, who were more the LP Patriarchs of their temporal ministry time, can be the most gifted, respected, and talented, financially well off..but the very worst in “all church, human person relationships” This is just a handy Selah, experience often object Helpful Selah Type. (Eli ‘s sons had definite “women REAL issues”(weaknesses) (Maybe the fear in much the deep patronizing, aloof, sin spying harlot divining Elder Patriarchy (NOT ALL assuredly)

THE FINAL WORD: “He is our peace, who has broken down every wall of partition, to make us both one ” Apostle Paul Ephesians 4:14-15

Post Views: 12