Three-year Bible reading plan for 25 October 2012

King James Version (en)

King James Version (en)

1 Timothy, Chapter 2, verses 8-15

¹ That it is meet to pray and give thanks for all men, and the reason why, ⁹ How women should be attired, ¹² They are not permitted to teach, ¹⁵ They shall be saved, notwithstanding the testimonies of God's wrath, in childbirth, if they continue in faith

⁸I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

⁹In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

¹⁰But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

¹¹Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

¹²But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

¹³For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

¹⁴And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

¹⁵Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Read more:1 Timothy, Chapter 3

NOTES

Many of us may be surprised by the apostle Paul's request to pray "for kings and for all who are in authority"...

Many of us may be surprised by the apostle Paul's request to pray "for kings and for all who are in authority" (1 Tim 2:1). We are even less surprised by the request for thanksgivings "for all people." It is easier to pray for humanity as a whole, but for the government...

Some people say that "they" are hypocrites, others that they are unbelievers, but most forget that first of all they are people. And we Christians, members of the Body of Christ, are called to be His presence in this world. We are not of the world, but "kings and those in authority" have been given authority in this world, and we are called to pray for them so that, even in the smallest measure, and even through earthly authority, the will of the King of Heaven may be done on earth.

This is possible, for there have been holy emperors, kings, and princes in history, from the most ancient times to our own day. It may seem to us that our prayer means nothing: to pray for someone's healing, for peace in a friend's family, that is still acceptable; but to pray for those who hold power, for peace on earth, that is too much. But it is not so. For example, in our own day, through the prayers and efforts of Christians, two African tribes were reconciled. And do we know what else happens, or does not happen, in this world through the prayers of our more responsible brothers and sisters in Christ? We so rarely realize the measure of our responsibility, yet we truly are members of one Body of the Church, and our prayer and our righteousness or sinfulness are not "our problems," as people now like to say, but pain or joy for the whole Church, for the Body of Christ.

Of course, each person answers for himself before God, but there are baptized people who were not raised in the faith or later lost it. And still a baptized unbeliever differs from an unbaptized person, because the whole Church prays for him at the Eucharist. That is the measure of our responsibility. We answer for these people, for those who have been joined to the Church by the sacrament of baptism but do not pray themselves. That is why it is so important to ask, pray, and give thanks for all people, "lifting up holy hands without anger or doubting."

Continuing the theme of a "quiet and peaceable life," Paul speaks about what it should be filled with...

Continuing the theme of a "quiet and peaceable life," Paul speaks about what it should be filled with: prayer and good works (vv. 8-10). Such a way of life would be quite acceptable for any religious person, regardless of the religion he professes. The only exception might be those bearers of the spirit of militant religiosity who accept no one but themselves and consider it their duty to wage holy war against the whole world until the complete triumph of their religion. But the point is not only that the spirit of peaceful religiosity was personally closer to Paul than the spirit of militant religiosity. In any case, the image of Paul when he was not yet either Paul or an apostle testifies rather to the opposite: he did not adopt either the spiritual calm or the religious breadth of his teacher Gamaliel, the Gamaliel of the Book of Acts. But when, after the meeting on the Damascus road, Paul understood what the Kingdom was, he also understood something else: religion is not the main thing in a person's life; it is not religion that makes him righteous, and it is not religion that saves.

The Christian's main task, as the apostle sees it, is not the spread of a new, final, and absolutely true religion, but witness to the Kingdom. But one cannot bear witness to it by words alone: one must show seekers that the Kingdom is not a beautiful dream, but a reality already accessible now to those who want to be joined to it. How could the Kingdom be demonstrated to those who do not yet know anything about it? Answering this question, Paul points to the Church's prayer gatherings as the place where the Kingdom can be seen with one's own eyes. But if those who presented themselves in the prayer gathering as examples of an inhabitant of the Kingdom were no different from pagans the rest of the time, the witness could hardly be considered complete. And the good works the apostle mentions became a manifestation of the same life of the Kingdom in everyday life. Hence also the requirement of hierarchy and order in church gatherings about which Paul speaks, forbidding women to be church preachers, "to teach," vv. 11-15. This is connected, of course, not with any inferiority or second-class status of women, as some readers of the Bible think today, but with the calling given to woman by God and, accordingly, with the ministries entrusted to her by God, among which church preaching is not included.

And the point here is not church discipline as such, but what stands behind it, provided that the Church is living a normal spiritual life, one that is not distorted or perverted: the order proper to the life of the Kingdom, determined not by external laws, but only by God's providence for each of its inhabitants and, accordingly, by each person's calling. In that case even outward order becomes not something self-important and often self-sufficient, but a witness, a witness to the Kingdom that determines this order.

The apostle Paul is one of those specific people against whom feminists raise objections. “How can this be? What he says is simply demeaning”...

FAQ

I once heard that there is an ancient Hebrew legend saying that along with the fallen angels who descended to Earth from heaven (this is mentioned in Genesis), a certain Azazel came to people, an angel who taught the art of war to men and the use of cosmetics to women. In some translations of the Old Testament, the name Azazel is still found... But what interests me is the following (perhaps this does not concern the told legend): is it a sin, or are there even any references in the Bible to how God relates to female makeup, is the application of cosmetics condemned by the Bible, or is there absolutely nothing on this matter?

The name Azazel translates to "dismissal of the goat" or "scapegoat". The Mosaic Law contained a provision according to which the high priest, once a year, laid his hands on a goat, thereby transferring to it all the sins of Israel...

The name Azazel translates to "dismissal of the goat" or "scapegoat". The Mosaic Law contained a provision according to which the high priest, once a year, laid his hands on a goat, thereby transferring to it all the sins of Israel. This goat was then driven into the wilderness. It was this goat that was called the "scapegoat". In non-Jewish translations, and later in Jewish tradition, the word "Azazel" came to be regarded as the name of this goat.

The tradition of Azazel as one of the fallen angels does indeed exist. It arose rather late (no earlier than the 3rd century BC) in the Jewish milieu, and is recorded, in particular, in the apocryphal Book of Enoch. It belongs not to the Bible, but to mythological folklore, and, accordingly, its authority is very slight.

As for the attitude towards makeup and cosmetics, it is not spoken of directly anywhere. It is known that women of Old Testament times used cosmetics quite widely (in hot countries, eyeshadow helps protect the eyes from sunburn, and various creams and ointments help protect the skin from drying out by the sun). In any case, the Bible does not contain condemnation of this custom (for women). It is known that the trade of cosmetics was developed in Jerusalem during the earthly life of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The apostles in the epistles, however, speak quite definitely on this topic, in particular, the Apostle Peter ( 3:3) and the Apostle Paul ( 2:9-10). Without forbidding the use of cosmetics, they state that a Christian (and a woman as well) should care primarily for inward, spiritual beauty, and adorn themselves with modesty and good works. Thus, in this matter, as in practically everything else, the New Testament shifts the emphasis from the external to the internal, leaving the external to the conscience of each individual.

So the negative attitude of many modern Christians towards makeup is explained by the fact that makeup can be perceived as an expression of immodesty. In this case, of course, it does not deserve approval. But this is far from always the case, and there are no general rules here, nor can there be.

${currentDateString}