The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum "Usurp authority" 1Tim. 2:12 KJV

I was recently reading something that said that the word “usurp” in 1 Tim. 2:12 in the KJV actually supports an egalitarian interpretation, rather than a complementarian interpretation.
1Tim 2:12 “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

Basically egalitarians say that “usurp” makes it sound like Paul is against the inappropriate assumption of authority, not women over-men authority in general.
I must admit that I am not sure how they come to that conclusion; however before I make an informed judgment I thought it best to consult others who might be a little more knowledgeable on the matter than I am.

Thoughts
Tom

Tom,

I'm not sure why you are asking this question since the text itself is clearly self-explanatory, particularly when taken in context:

“Let a woman learn in silence with complete submissiveness. But to teach I do not permit a woman, nor exercise authority over a man, but to remain silent.”

The English translation above is a faithful and accurate one of the Greek. Now, Tom can you tell me how anyone can read that text and deny that Paul says that in the assembly of the Church [during corporate worship contextually implied], women are not allowed to teach, nor take on positions of authority over men, but rather they are to remain silent in this regard? The larger context of this passage establishes Paul's teaching on God's creative order; man first and the head then woman second who is to function under the man's authority.

Okay, so the following is old, but relevant to much of this feminist blabber and it deals with 1Tim 2:12: An Open Letter.

Pilgrim

Believe it or not, what I said came from a complementarian, not an egalitarian. Basically he was saying that egalitarians like the rendering of the KJV "usurp authority"; rather than other versions that use "exercise authority".
This person agreed with egalitarians that "usurp authority" has a different meaning than "exercise authority".

This person is very much a complementarian like you and I, but he believes the KJV is wrong in this particular verse.

I am just trying to understand his reasoning.

By the way thank you for the article, it is a good one.

Tom

Tom,

The CONTEXT (1Tim 2:11-15) establishes the demarcation of gender; male and female and the subjective role of the female to the male. We might call this "functional subordination", i.e., as saved individuals before God they are equal (cf. Gal 3:28), but in the relational aspect, e.g., home and Church, women are subordinate to men and under their authority. It is this authority that Paul is addressing focusing upon the aspect of teaching in the assembly of the saints in corporate worship. Men are given God-ordained and established authority and women are forbidden to do so. The word Paul uses in 1Tim 2:12, which the KJV renders as "usurp authority" is authenteo. Arndt, Bauer & Gingrich, A Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 120c, defines this word as: "have authority, domineer [over someone]". FYI, the noun form of this word, authentas, means "master". Thus either translation is accurate; "usurp authority" or "to exercise authority" over a man. The meaning is the same. A woman is forbidden to take upon herself that authority which God has given to men only. For a woman to do so is to exercise authority which she is not authorized to have or do, which would entail subjugating men to her, aka: usurping authority.

Methinks this person is nit-picking over semantics.

Pilgrim

Thank you, I was thinking that this person was arguing over samantics.

Tom