By Maria Merola אריאל
© Copyright Double Portion Inheritance, October 2007
This topic has become a subject of much controversy in the body of Messiah today, as many are using only one isolated passage of scripture from 1st Timothy 2:12 in order to divide the female and male gender within the congregations.
I am often asked about this subject since I have been called as a female to be a “Watchman to the House of Yisra’el” in these last days.
The mandate which YaHuWaH has given me is to warn the body of Messiah about false pagan mixture within the Christian Church and within Judaism and to teach about the Hebraic Roots of the faith to those who have “ears to hear” what the Spirit of YaHuWaH is saying. The message that YaHuWaH has given me to preach is without gender as both men and women alike find themselves hearing what the Ruwach (Spirit) of YaHuWaH is saying in these last days:
Ma’aseh Shlichiym (Acts) 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
What does the word “prophesy” mean here in this passage? The Greek Strong’s Concordance defines this word:
#4395. prophēteuō: to prophesy, to be a prophet, speak forth by divine inspirations, to predict, to utter forth, declare, a thing which can only be known by divine revelation, to break forth under sudden impulse in lofty discourse or praise of the divine counsels, under like prompting, to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, comfort others, to act as a prophet, discharge the prophetic office.
As you can see, the scriptures expressly state that the Spirit of YaHuWaH would be poured out upon “all flesh” to include females in the last days before the return of our Messiah, Yahuwshuwa. The Greek word for “prophesy” is much broader than the English word, for it encompasses all forms of speaking under inspiration---even teaching!
As a woman who is called to teach and preach to the body of Messiah, I am under the apostolic authority of other men who are also ministry leaders. Now that I have cleared that up, let me get to the meat of this message concerning the role of women in the ministry. In order to understand what the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was referring to in 1st Timothy 2:12 concerning women teaching men, we have to read his letter to Timothy in context.
As a woman who is called to teach and preach to the body of Messiah, I am under the apostolic authority of other men who are also ministry leaders. Now that I have cleared that up, let me get to the meat of this message concerning the role of women in the ministry. In order to understand what the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was referring to in 1st Timothy 2:12 concerning women teaching men, we have to read his letter to Timothy in context.
The Male & Female Relationship in Marriage
The Apostle Paul was telling a woman not to usurp her own husband’s authority. When you look up the original Greek word in 1st Timothy 2:12 for “woman” the actual word means “wife.”
The Greek word is “gune” which literally means “wife.”
#1135. gune: goo-nay’ probably from the base of 1096; a woman; specially, a wife:--wife, woman.
There is a more generic word for woman in Greek which means “female” and that word is “thelus.”
#2338. thelus: thay’-loos from the same as 2337; female:--female, woman.
The original Greek word in 1st Timothy 2:12 in the Strong’s Concordance here for “man” is “aner” which literally means “husband.”
#435. aner: an’-ayr a primary word (compare 444); a man (properly as an individual male):--fellow, husband, man, sir.
Some would try to argue the fact that the word “aner” is sometimes used to describe a man in general and not always specifically to a husband. But in the Greek language, there is no word for “husband” that is not also used to describe “man.”
Case in point:
Ephsiym (Ephesians) 5:25 “....husbands (aner) love your wives (gune) ....”
The reason why the word “aner” (husband) is used in Ephesians 5:22 is because the word “aner” is more specifically used to apply to the term “husband” and not the male gender.
Sha’uwl (Paul) used “aner” because that is the only word in Greek that applies to both husband and man. There is no Greek word that is used for “husband” only. Hence, in 1st Timothy 2:12 Sha’uwl was not making a case against the female gender being allowed to teach the male gender.
The word for “male” in Greek pertaining more specifically to the male gender is as follows:
#730. arsen: male (as stronger for lifting); male, man.
In Galatians 3:28 Sha’uwl (Paul) is expressly stating that there is no difference between Male & Female because the genders are “one in Messiah:”
Galatiym (Galatians) 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male (arsen) nor female (thelus): for you are all one in Messiah Yahuwshuwa.
If the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was making a ruling against females teaching males, he would’ve used the terms “thelus” and “arsen”
in 1st Timothy 2:12 and he would’ve stated “I do not permit a female to teach a male” but he was not saying this at all. He was specifically addressing the chain of command with regard to marriage, and that is why he went on to explain that Adam came before Eve.
in 1st Timothy 2:12 and he would’ve stated “I do not permit a female to teach a male” but he was not saying this at all. He was specifically addressing the chain of command with regard to marriage, and that is why he went on to explain that Adam came before Eve.
So with that understanding of the original Greek words, let’s see what the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was referring to:
1st Timotiyos (Timothy) 2:
12 But I suffer not a woman (gune, wife) to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man (aner, husband), but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
You will note that the Apostle Sha’uwl is addressing the marriage relationship specifically because he goes on to describe the marriage relationship between Adam and Eve, and he explains that the woman (just like Eve) was and is saved through child bearing. In other words, the woman’s deceptive nature is purged from her when she goes through the tribulation and suffering of giving labor.
Bereshiyth (Genesis) 1:26 And Elohiym said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
The Hebrew word for “man” in this verse is:
#120. Adam: human being, mankind, person, individual.
This word “Adam” is not merely the male gender, but all of mankind. Therefore, Elohiym made mankind (to include the female gender) in his image.
This is where the Greek word “anthropos” for “mankind” comes from. This word “anthropos” is the Greek counterpart for the Hebrew word “Adam:”
#444. anthropos: anth’-ro-pos from 435 and ops (the countenance; from 3700); man-faced, i.e. a human being:--certain, man.
The Female Dominance Cult in Ephesus
In order to understand Sha’uwl’s (Paul’s) letter to Timothy when he commanded wives (gune) not to usurp the authority of their husbands, we must first become aware of the historical background of this congregation that he was writing to in Ephesus. It is important to understand that Sha’uwl was not making a ruling for all women for all times in every congregation, and in every situation.
The Assembly at Ephesus was a group of former pagans who worshipped the Great Diana Artemis. This religion taught that Eve came before Adam and that she conceived Adam. This cult would emasculate men by making them eunuchs (removing their reproductive parts), and then the women would be dominant over the men, and they would sacrifice men to this pagan goddess Diana.
This is the reason why the Apostle Paul made reference to this:
1st Timotiyos (Timothy) 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Why would the Apostle Sha’uwl need to explain that Adam was formed first and then Eve? Don’t we know this already? Well obviously, the Assembly at Ephesus did not already know this because they had been taught the lie that Eve was the mother of Adam. This lie is much like the lie in the Catholic Church today where it is taught that “Mary, the mother of Jesus was born without original sin, hence it was her divinity which was passed on to Jesus…”
Why would the Apostle Sha’uwl need to explain that Adam was formed first and then Eve? Don’t we know this already? Well obviously, the Assembly at Ephesus did not already know this because they had been taught the lie that Eve was the mother of Adam. This lie is much like the lie in the Catholic Church today where it is taught that “Mary, the mother of Jesus was born without original sin, hence it was her divinity which was passed on to Jesus…”
Since Catholicism teaches that Mary is the Holy Spirit, hence they conclude that “Mary is the author of Jesus” just like the lie that the Ephesians taught about Eve being the author of Adam.
This is why in 1st John 4:3 (KJV) we have the litmus test for identifying the Spirit of Anti-Messiah. Listen to what the Apostle John wrote:
1st Yahuwchanon (John) 4:3 “....every spirit which does not confess that Yahuwshuwa Messiah is come in the flesh, this is that spirit of Anti-Messiah…”
What does this verse mean? The word “flesh” here is the Greek word “sarx” and it means “carnal, sensual.” This means that Yahuwshuwa our Messiah had a mortal body which he inherited from his mother Miryam (Mary).
But his spiritual nature was “incorruptible” (immortal) because he had the blood of his Heavenly Father in his veins. Yahuwshuwa had to possess both natures at the same time in order to be the perfect sacrifice. He had to have a corruptible nature “physically” so that he could destroy sin in the flesh (Romans 8:3). But he also had to be sinless, having an incorruptible spiritual nature at the same time. If he had sinned, his blood could not have atoned for us. He had to be a male lamb without blemish according to the Towrah.
Okay, so getting back to our study about the congregation at Ephesus, we can see how this cult from ancient Babylon has been duplicated today in the Catholic Church with the deification of Mary/Miryam the mother of our Messiah, Yahuwshuwa (Jesus).
The Holy Spirit fertilized Mary’s egg producing a human body for Yahuwshuwa (Jesus). But the blood came from the Heavenly Father.
We can even read this in Zechariah 12:10 where YaHuWaH says: “they will look upon ME whom they have pierced and they will mourn for HIM as one mourns for his only son.”
This means that it was the blood of YaHuWaH that was in Yahuwshuwa when he died for us on the Tree!
Even biology proves this. Below is a diagram showing that the mother’s blood never touches the baby during gestation.
The child’s umbilical cord is attached to the placenta. It is the placenta which is attached to the mother. The placenta acts like a giant clearing house for the baby, taking nutrients and other things out of the mother’s blood and passing them on to the baby’s blood stream through the umbilical cord.
Why did I go down this rabbit trail? I am trying to show that Yahuwshuwa our Messiah was the one who is eternal and he is the one who created Miryam (Mary)—she did not create him!
Qolasiym (Colossians) 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Yahuwshuwa created Mary, not the other way around. But the Roman Catholic Church teaches that Mary was sinless, divine, and eternal. They call her the “Queen of Heaven” just like the Babylonians called Semiramis (Nimrod’s mother & wife) the “Queen of Heaven” (Jeremiah 7 & 44). Roman Catholicism thus denies that “Yahuwshuwa Messiah is come in the flesh” (having a mortal, corruptible physical nature) and this is the very essence of the Anti-Messiah Spirit!
You see, Catholicism teaches that Mary’s conception in her mother’s womb was “immaculate” and that she was born without original sin from birth making her divine. This very doctrine known as “The Immaculate Conception” is the crux of the Spirit of Anti-Messiah. If Mary was born without original sin, then she is eternal and a goddess like Venus, Diana, Isis, Semiramis, Asherah, Easter and all of the other pagan goddesses whom she embodies as a supposed reincarnation according to paganism. Many Protestants think when they hear the term “Immaculate Conception”that this is about the virgin birth of Yahuwshuwa Messiah, but it is not. It is about Mary’s alleged conception without original sin, making her divine and eternal. This would then lead to the lie that says “Eve conceived Adam” or “Mary conceived Jesus.” The Catholic Church teaches that “Mary is the Holy Spirit and that he can only work through her.”
Pope John Paul II gave a speech in Lithuania in 1993 showing that the Catholic Church believes that Mary is the Holy Spirit!
Time Magazine comments in September 1993’s issue:
“according to modern Popes” Mary is “the Queen of the Universe, Queen of Heaven, Seat of Wisdom…..”
In the Pope’s September 1993 speech in Lithuania, he spoke of Mary as “Mother of the Church, Queen of the Apostles, and dwelling place of the Trinity!” Pope John Paul finalized his speech by saying, “To Mary I entrust all of you….”
His final petition was a prayer to Mary:
“Hail, holy Queen of heaven, Mother of Mercy! Our life, our sweetness, and our hope! To you do we cry, poor banished children of Eve; to you do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping, in this valley of tears. Turn, then most gracious Advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us: and after this our exiles show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus: O clement, loving sweet Virgin Mary.”
This statement is blasphemy!
Qolasiym (Colossians) 3:4 declares that Yahuwshuwa Messiah is our life---not Mary!
1st Yahuwchanon (John) 2:1 declares that Yahuwshuwa alone is our Advocate with the Father!
According to Soul Magazine, the official publication for The Blue Army of Our Lady of Fatima, “Mary is so perfectly united with the Holy Spirit that he acts only through her, his spouse…all our life, word and deed is in Her hands…at every moment, She herself must instruct, guide, and transform each one of us into Herself, so that not we but She lives in us, as Jesus lives in Her, and the Father in the Son.”
According to the Roman Catholic Church, Mary has replaced the Holy Spirit as teacher, guide and the Spirit of YaHuWaH!
Now we can understand why Paul had to go to great lengths to deprogram the way that the Ephesians were taught. He had to re-establish the order of things that had been perverted by the Babylonian Mystery Religion of Diana Artemis. You can imagine how these women were treating their husbands and how it affected the entire family.
The answer to “female dominance” is not “male dominance” which only continues to keep the “enmity” between male and female. For this reason Sha’uwl stated in Galatians 3:28 that “there is neither male nor female… for we are one in Messiah.” Nobody likes to be dominated by another human being. In a marriage relationship wives are commanded to submit to their own husbands, because in the unique relationship of marriage, this is a picture of Messiah and his bride. That is why wives must submit to their OWN husbands. You will notice that Sha’uwl used the term “own husbands” so that women would not submit to another woman’s husband thereby causing adultery!
Ephsiym (Ephesians) 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto YHWH.
Ephsiym (Ephesians) 5:24 Therefore as the congregation is subject unto Messiah, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
Qolasiym (Colossians) 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands as it is fit in YHWH.
Even though YaHuWaH allowed polygamy in the TaNaKh (Old Testament), but from the beginning it was not so, as Yahuwshuwa stated. He said that “A man shall leave his mother and father and shall cleave unto his wife (singular) and the TWO shall become one flesh.” See my other article entitled “Does Scripture Really Condone Polygamy?”
Mattithyahuw (Matthew) 19:5 ….For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they two shall be one flesh.
You will notice that Yahuwshuwa did not say that a “man shall cleave to his wives (plural) and he did not say “many of his wives shall become one flesh with him.”
At this website, more information can be gleaned about this female dominance cult at Ephesus:
Women Keeping Silent in the CongregationsSome people read the following verses without reading the entire letter to the Corinthian Assembly to understand what Paul was saying and they form a doctrine out of these next two verses:
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 14:
34 Let your women keep silence in the congregations: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also says the law.
35 And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the assembly.
One explanation that I have found during my research reveals that Paul’s statement in verse 1st Corinthians 14:34 was originally in quotation marks, because he was quoting from the Talmud (not Mosaic Law or Towrah). Paul was correcting the thinking of these men in this congregation who had written to him in a letter and they were asking him about this law in the Talmud. Paul was quoting it right back to them and then he followed up by asking them this question: “What! Was it from you that the Word of Elohiym first went forth? Or has it come to you only?”
What person reads a 10-page letter and skips to the 5th page and then reads 2 lines from the letter and forms a conclusion from those 2 lines without reading the entire letter? No person in their right mind does this.
First of all, Sha’uwl was addressing this problem that they were having with certain women in the congregations. The women and the men were segregated so that the women sat on one side of the congregation and the men on the other. Some of the women were shouting across the room to their husbands asking them what the congregation leader was teaching about. But Sha’uwl was telling these women to “keep silence” and to ask their husbands when they went home.
How do we know that Sha’uwl was not forming a doctrine against women teaching in the assembly? Because it would be in direct contradiction to what he says in 1st Corinthians 11:5 concerning women having their head covered when they pray or prophesy.
What was Paul talking about? Obviously he knew that women would be allowed to “prophesy” in the assembly, so long as her “head” is covered. But this does not necessarily mean a literal veil or a head covering. The veil is an outward symbol of being under the authority (covering) of her husband and the Messiah. Paul goes on to say that a woman’s hair serves as her covering. He says that if she does not have her head covered (under authority), let her head be shaven. Why does he say this?
Because pagan temple prostitutes would shave their heads and this was a shameful thing for a woman to do. And so if a woman is not under the authority (covering) of her husband and the Messiah himself, she should have her head shaven like a temple whore. This is what Sha’uwl was saying.
Are women allowed to prophesy or teach in the assembly, so long as her “head” is covered (she is under authority)? Yes, she is! Should a woman wear a literal head covering as an outward sign that she is under her husband’s authority and the authority of Messiah? I believe that it is optional but there is no direct commandment in the Towrah telling a woman that she must wear a literal head covering.
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 11:5 But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
The Greek word for “prophesy” here is:
#4395. propheteuo: prof-ate-yoo’-o from 4396; to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office:--prophesy; to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, comfort others, to act as a prophet, discharge the prophetic office.
This means that a woman may speak under divine inspiration so long as she is under the authority of her husband and her Messiah,Yahuwshuwa.
If a woman is not under the authority of her husband and Messiah, she is dishonoring “her head” or her earthly husband and her Messiah.
I don’t believe it is necessary for a woman to wear a literal head covering as I believe that the Apostle Paul was speaking of the “head” being the husband:
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is Elohiym.
When Sha’uwl speaks of a woman having her “head” covered, the head he is referring to is her husband, not her literal head:
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonours his head.
*NOTE: This is the Doctrine of the Nicolaitanes which Yahuwshuwa said that he hates in Revelation 2:15. This is the doctrine where people subjugate themselves to another authority or a Rabbi instead of Messiah. When a man-made institution or a man-made doctrine attempts to usurp the authority of Messiah in the life of the believer, this is called the “Doctrine of the Nicolaitanes.”
The Corinthians were setting up denominational heads over themselves instead of Messiah:
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you says, I am of Sha’uwl (Paul); and I of Apollos; and I of Keefa (Cephas); and I of Messiah.
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 3:4 For while one says, I am of Sha’uwl (Paul); and another, I am of Apollos; are you not carnal?
This is why Sha’uwl said that a man should not “cover his head” meaning that he should be directly under his Messiah and not under a man-made doctrine or institution.
The woman’s “head” is her husband and she should be under her husband’s covering when she prays or prophesies. Since I am unmarried, my Messiah is my husband, and I am under his authority.
I wear a tallit (prayer shawl)-- not because I think it makes me more holy nor does it make me appear more “Jewish.” I wear one when I pray because I want to remind myself that I am under Messiah’s authority. But Paul says that a woman’s hair is given to her as a covering, so I believe this is sufficient.
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 11:
5 But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of Elohiym: but the woman is the glory of the man.
This verse is not making a case against men wearing kippas or hats. I believe that it is fine for men to wear hats, because Yahuwshuwa wore his prayer shawl in the Temple, and the Lewiytes (Levites) wore a head covering also while serving in the Temple. Sha’uwl was talking about a man not covering his “head” as in not coming under all of these man-made doctrines and denominational leaders instead of Messiah. See my other article entitled
In the days when Sha’uwl wrote 1st Corinthians 14, women could not read or write for the most part. Men were allowed to go to school to learn the scriptures but women stayed at home and took care of the children and did housework. Women often-times took much abuse from men in those days because they were treated as substandard and men looked down upon women by treating them as property instead of as human beings.
But Yahuwshuwa changed all of that by making both male and female of the same joint heirs to the covenant promises with him, to include working for the kingdom of heaven.
After the Samaritan woman had an encounter with Yahuwshuwa, she went and told everyone that she had encountered the Messiah. It means that she did what? She testified---she preached! Did she only preach to women? No! To EVERYONE!
Yahuwshuwa knew that she would and go testify of him, but did he tell her to keep silence to the community of believers that she would convert? No, he knew that she would become an evangelist and this is why he spoke to her of the living water.
The Samaritan woman went on to become an Evangelist:
Yahuwchanon (John) 4:
39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.
40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days.
Now consider the dialogue that Yahuwshuwa had with the Samaritan woman. She was a member of the Ten Northern Tribes of the Lost Sheep of the House of Ephrayim (Yisra’el), and the House of Yahuwdah (Judah) would have no dealings with these people because they had been divorced by YaHuWaH in Jeremiah 3:8 after they had gone astray with false pagan deities in 1stKings 12 under King Jeroboam. This is why the House of Judah was not willing to welcome these other ten tribes back home again. But our Messiah informed the leaders of the House of Yahuwdah (Judah) that he had come for the “Lost Sheep of the House of Yisra’el” (Jeremiah 50:6; Matthew 10:6 & 15:24).
Now consider the dialogue that Yahuwshuwa had with the Samaritan woman. She was a member of the Ten Northern Tribes of the Lost Sheep of the House of Ephrayim (Yisra’el), and the House of Yahuwdah (Judah) would have no dealings with these people because they had been divorced by YaHuWaH in Jeremiah 3:8 after they had gone astray with false pagan deities in 1stKings 12 under King Jeroboam. This is why the House of Judah was not willing to welcome these other ten tribes back home again. But our Messiah informed the leaders of the House of Yahuwdah (Judah) that he had come for the “Lost Sheep of the House of Yisra’el” (Jeremiah 50:6; Matthew 10:6 & 15:24).
In John 4:9, the Samaritan woman marveled that he would even speak to her since the Yahuwdiy (Jews) “have no dealings with the Samaritans.” This woman was a prophetic picture of the Lost Sheep of the Ten Tribes of Ephrayim, and this is why he paid special attention to her. He went on to offer her “living water” in John 4:10 saying to her: “If you knew the gift of Elohiym, and who it is that says to you, Give me to drink; you would have asked of him, and he would have given you living water.”
*Note:now why would Yahuwshuwa the Messiah offer this woman living water (the gift of the Holy Spirit) if she was expected to hold it all in and keep it to herself? I mean, what is the point of having a fountain living on the inside of you, if you are not going to refresh others who are thirsty?
Yahuwshuwa went on to explain to her: “Whosoever drinks of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.”
This woman obviously had a spiritual thirst, for she went on to ask of him the following question: “Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.”
Now, you will notice in John 4:16-26 that he asked her to call her husband, but he already knew that she was living in sin with a man whom she was not married to. He knew that she had had “five husbands” which is symbolic of the “five books of the Mosaic Law” (Towrah). In Psalm 119:142, King David wrote concerning the Towrah (Mosaic Law): “Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness and your Towrah (law) is the truth.” This is the reason why he was telling this woman to worship the Father in “spirit” (having the living water inside) and also in “truth” by obeying the Towrah!
This woman symbolized the nation of Yisra’el who had taken vows on Mount Sinai with YaHuWaH and they had agreed to obey the Towrah! Now this woman was in an illegitimate relationship to a man she was not married to! In other words, she symbolized the entire nation of Yisra’el being married to Ba’al!
Now he could have shunned this woman just like the other Yahuwdiy (Jews) did, but what did he do instead? He gave her offered her the gift of eternal life so that she could in turn publish the “good news” to others!
Listen to what he said to her in John 4:21-22:
“….Woman, believe me, the hour comes, when you shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Yerushalayim (Jerusalem), worship the Father…You worship you know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Yahuwdiy (Jews)….
*Note: why was he telling her that salvation of is of the Yahuwdiy (Jews)? It is because in Genesis 49:10, Ya’aqob (Jacob) spoke over his son Yahuwdah (Judah) and said the following words over him: “The sceptre shall not depart from Yahuwdah (Judah), nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.”
In other words, the Tribe of Yahuwdah (Judah) were called to be the lawgivers! In Romans 3:1-2, the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) also reiterated this truth when he wrote the following words: “What advantage then has the Yahuwdiy (Jew)? Or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of Elohiym.”
What does this word “oracles” mean in the original text? It is Strong’s #G3051– logion which means “the contents of the Mosaic law.”
Messiah was teaching this woman the correct way to worship by telling her that she first needed the living water (the Holy Spirit) inside of her so that he could “write his laws in her heart and in her mind” as a sign of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31, Hebrews 8:8-16 & Hebrews 10:16).
This is why he explained to her the true pattern of worship was to first have the Ruwach ha’Qodesh (Holy Spirit) living on the inside and then he would give her the supernatural ability to obey the Towrah (Mosaic Law).
He continued in John 4:23-24: “….But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship him….Elohiym is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” But why was he telling her that worship is not limited to a geographical location such as Jerusalem? It is because under the Renewed Covenant, we are “seated in heavenly places” (Ephesians 2:6) when we worship the Father through Messiah and his blood atonement, therefore we are in the New Jerusalem in spirit!
Then in John 4:25-26, the woman replied:
*Note: why was he telling her that salvation of is of the Yahuwdiy (Jews)? It is because in Genesis 49:10, Ya’aqob (Jacob) spoke over his son Yahuwdah (Judah) and said the following words over him: “The sceptre shall not depart from Yahuwdah (Judah), nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.”
In other words, the Tribe of Yahuwdah (Judah) were called to be the lawgivers! In Romans 3:1-2, the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) also reiterated this truth when he wrote the following words: “What advantage then has the Yahuwdiy (Jew)? Or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of Elohiym.”
What does this word “oracles” mean in the original text? It is Strong’s #G3051– logion which means “the contents of the Mosaic law.”
Messiah was teaching this woman the correct way to worship by telling her that she first needed the living water (the Holy Spirit) inside of her so that he could “write his laws in her heart and in her mind” as a sign of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31, Hebrews 8:8-16 & Hebrews 10:16).
This is why he explained to her the true pattern of worship was to first have the Ruwach ha’Qodesh (Holy Spirit) living on the inside and then he would give her the supernatural ability to obey the Towrah (Mosaic Law).
He continued in John 4:23-24: “….But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship him….Elohiym is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” But why was he telling her that worship is not limited to a geographical location such as Jerusalem? It is because under the Renewed Covenant, we are “seated in heavenly places” (Ephesians 2:6) when we worship the Father through Messiah and his blood atonement, therefore we are in the New Jerusalem in spirit!
Then in John 4:25-26, the woman replied:
“I know that Mashiyach comes, which is called Messiah: when he is come, he will tell us all things.”
Now what he says to this woman next absolutely blows my mind, because he revealed his true identity to her as the Messiah, yet he would not reveal himself to the religious male leaders of the Jewish Sanhedrin! He replied to her with the following words: “I that speak unto you am he!”
Now what is this woman supposed to do with this encounter that she just had with the Creator of the Universe? Is she supposed to keep silent?
In Luke 19:38-40, the multitudes were crying out “Blessed be the King that comes in the name of YaHuWaH: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest!” But some of the Pharisees asked him to silence them. But what did our Messiah say to these Pharisees? He answered them“I tell you that if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out!”
Now if stones (which are inanimate objects) are allowed to cry out to proclaim the King of Kings, why should women (human souls with the very breath of YaHuWaH) keep silent?
Now this account would seem to contradict what Sha’uwl commanded in 1st Corinthians 14:34 concerning women keeping silent in the congregations. But as I have stated before, nobody receives a 10-page letter in the mail and then skips over to page 5 and only reads 2 lines on page 5, and comes to an erroneous conclusion based on those 2 lines of that 10-page letter. That is what people often do with 1st Corinthians 14:34. If we read the entire letter of 1st Corinthians in context and more specifically chapter 14, Sha’uwl is addressing this problem of people speaking out of turn as there was much confusion in the services. He is laying out the guide-lines for giving prophecy and sharing revelation in the previous verses:
1st Qorintiym (Corinthians) 14:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the congregation; and let him speak to himself, and to Elohiym.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30 If anything be revealed to another that sits by, let the first hold his peace.
31 For you may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For Elohiym is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all congregations of the saints.
Sha’uwl was obviously addressing this problem with people talking out of turn, and this is the reason why he tells women to ask their husbands when they get home. Many women were illiterate or unlearned in those days, and so they were asking their husbands questions during the meetings and causing disruptions.
In those days in Jerusalem, the women sat across the room segregated from the men due to the “Law of Niddah” for when a woman was on her menstruation cycle. See my other article entitled “What is the Law of Niddah?”
Women would remain segregated from the men also due to the fact that they were often-times breast-feeding the babies and they had to cover themselves. These women would shout across the room to their husbands and this became a problem.
But when a woman is asked by a Pastor or an Apostle to get up and speak or testify, then she has the validation or the ordination of the man in office do to so, and therefore she is not causing disruption or confusion! And this is why Sha’uwl (Paul) was asking the congregations to help Phoebe, Euodias, and Syntyche in their ministries of preaching the besowrah (gospel). Was he telling these women to keep silent? No! Why not? Because he was not making a doctrine against women preaching in 1st Corinthians 14:34. He was specifically addressing women asking their husbands questions during the Bible study.
In those days in Jerusalem, the women sat across the room segregated from the men due to the “Law of Niddah” for when a woman was on her menstruation cycle. See my other article entitled “What is the Law of Niddah?”
Women would remain segregated from the men also due to the fact that they were often-times breast-feeding the babies and they had to cover themselves. These women would shout across the room to their husbands and this became a problem.
But when a woman is asked by a Pastor or an Apostle to get up and speak or testify, then she has the validation or the ordination of the man in office do to so, and therefore she is not causing disruption or confusion! And this is why Sha’uwl (Paul) was asking the congregations to help Phoebe, Euodias, and Syntyche in their ministries of preaching the besowrah (gospel). Was he telling these women to keep silent? No! Why not? Because he was not making a doctrine against women preaching in 1st Corinthians 14:34. He was specifically addressing women asking their husbands questions during the Bible study.
Today women are equally as educated as men and women are commissioned into leadership roles by whom? Men! It is the men who ordain the women into these roles just as Sha’uwl (Paul) was ordaining these women and asking the congregations to assist these women in ministry. You will note that the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was giving certain women his “stamp of approval” for ministry:
Romiym (Romans) 16:
1 I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the congregation in Cenchrea,
2 that you may receive her in YHWH in a manner worthy of the qadowshiym (saints), and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself also.
Pilippiym (Philippians) 4:
2 I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of the same mind in YHWH.
3 And I intreat you also, true yoke-fellow, help those women which laboured with me in the besowrah (gospel), with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.
Examples of Females in Leadership in the Bible are as follows:
The Female Apostle Junia:
Romiym (Romans) 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Messiah before me.
The Female Disciple Tabitha/Dorcas:
Ma’aseh Shlichiym (Acts) 9:36 Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did.
The Deaconess Phoebe:
Romiym (Romans) 16:
1 I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the congregation in Cenchrea,
2 that you may receive her in YHWH in a manner worthy of the qadowshiym (saints), and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself also.
Female Evangelists Eudodias & Syntyche:
Philippians 4:
2 I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of the same mind in YHWH.
3 And I intreat you also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the besowrah (gospel), with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.
The Prophetess Channah (Anna):
Luqas (Luke) 2:
Luqas (Luke) 2:
36 And there was one Channah (Anna), a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;
37 And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years (84 years old), which departed not from the temple, but served Elohiym with fastings and prayers night and day.
38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto YHWH, and spoke of him to all them that looked for redemptionin Yerushalayim (Jerusalem).
*Note: You will notice that this elderly woman had no earthly husband as her covering and yet she spoke to “ALL” not just women and children! In other words, Channah (Anna) also spoke to men and preached the word of YaHuWaH to them!
*Note: You will notice that this elderly woman had no earthly husband as her covering and yet she spoke to “ALL” not just women and children! In other words, Channah (Anna) also spoke to men and preached the word of YaHuWaH to them!
The Prophetess Deborah:
Shophetiym (Judges) 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Yisra’el at that time.
Shophetiym (Judges) 5:7 The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Yisra’el, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Yisra’el.
Deborah the prophetess was called by YaHuWaH to lead a 10,000-man army!
The following is a Bible Commentary about Deborah:
http://www.usnews.com/news/religion/articles/2008/01/25/as-a-military-leader-deborah-is-a-rare-biblical-character
In answering the call, Deborah became a singular biblical figure: a female military leader. She recruited a man, the general Barak, to stand by her side, telling him Elohiym wanted the armies of Israel to attack the Canaanites who were persecuting the highland tribes. Barak was reluctant, and he insisted that Deborah go with him to the battle. Her answer was assertive and prophetic: “I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for YaHuWaH will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.”
Deborah the prophetess was called by YaHuWaH to lead a 10,000-man army!
The following is a Bible Commentary about Deborah:
http://www.usnews.com/news/religion/articles/2008/01/25/as-a-military-leader-deborah-is-a-rare-biblical-character
In answering the call, Deborah became a singular biblical figure: a female military leader. She recruited a man, the general Barak, to stand by her side, telling him Elohiym wanted the armies of Israel to attack the Canaanites who were persecuting the highland tribes. Barak was reluctant, and he insisted that Deborah go with him to the battle. Her answer was assertive and prophetic: “I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for YaHuWaH will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.”
So it was an unlikely commander who led the Army to a decisive battle with the Canaanites. Faced with “900 chariots of iron,” the height of military technology at the time, Deborah’s army of 10,000 Israelites rushed down from the hills, clashing with the Canaanite general Sisera near the Kishon River. The “Song of Deborah,” one of the oldest in the Bible, says the stars strayed from their courses and the river washed Sisera’s armies away in a massive flood. The battle was a total victory. “All the Army of Sisera fell by the sword; no one was left.”
Defeated, Sisera fled, taking refuge in an ally’s tent. Expecting refuge from the army chasing him, the Canaanite general was greeted by a woman named Yael (Jael). Sisera demanded shelter and water. Instead, Yael (Jael) gave him a bowl of milk—and a tent peg through the skull.
*Note by Maria Merola: you will notice that this woman named “Yael” killed the Cannanite General. YaHuWaH used two women, Deborah & Yael to take authority over these wicked men and defeat the Cannaites! If all females are expected to submit to all males, then why did YaHuWaH allow this?
*Note by Maria Merola: you will notice that this woman named “Yael” killed the Cannanite General. YaHuWaH used two women, Deborah & Yael to take authority over these wicked men and defeat the Cannaites! If all females are expected to submit to all males, then why did YaHuWaH allow this?
The violence of Deborah’s story is a radical departure from standard biblical themes, which rarely place women in roles as warriors and generals. “Every other instance we have of women acting in a military context is of a woman acting as an assassin, using sexual attraction to lure male war leaders to their deaths,” says Susan Ackerman, a religion and women’s and gender studies professor at Dartmouth College. “Deborah, in terms of the portrayal of her taking the lead as a military commander, is unique.”
Deborah’s story would stand out even without her unusual role as a military leader. It’s essentially told twice: first in a sort of prose summary in Judges 4 and then in a poem or song in Judges 5. The song may be one of the Bible’s oldest texts, “probably composed not long after the original events, possibly by Deborah herself,” writes University of Chicago Divinity School Prof. Tikva Frymer-Kensky in “Women of Scripture.” The song’s archaic language also sets it apart. Ackerman says the song’s Hebrew is as distinct from the Hebrew in the rest of the Bible as the English of Beowulf is from the modern tongue.
The Prophetess Huldah:
This women lived at the college in Jerusalem, and the priests and elders came to her with questions about the Towrah, and she advised them in matters of the Towrah! In other words, she was teaching men! As a matter of fact, she was an adviser to King Yashiyahuw (Josiah)!
2ndKings 22 - Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary on the Bible
Josiah consults Huldah the prophetess:
The generality of the people were hardened, and their hearts unhumbled, but Josiah’s heart was tender. This is tenderness of heart, and thus he humbled himself before the Lord. Those who most fear Elohiym’s wrath, are least likely to feel it. Though Josiah was mortally wounded in battle, yet he died in peace with Elohiym, and went to glory. Whatever such persons suffer or witness, they are gathered to the grave in peace, and shall enter into the rest which remaineth for the people of Elohiym.”
2nd Melekiym (Kings) 22:14 So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college;) and they communed with her.
2nd Dibrey Ha’Yamiym (Chronicles) 34:22 And Hilkiah, and they that the king had appointed, went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvath, the son of Hasrah, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college:) and they spake to her to that effect.
Queen Esther of Persia
![]()
Every woman who is called into ministry by her Messiah is exercising “HIS” authority under the “scepter” of Yahuwdah (Judah) as she is under her bridegroom’s authority just as Queen Esther was under the “scepter” of her husband, King Ahasuerus.
Queen Esther of Persia
Every woman who is called into ministry by her Messiah is exercising “HIS” authority under the “scepter” of Yahuwdah (Judah) as she is under her bridegroom’s authority just as Queen Esther was under the “scepter” of her husband, King Ahasuerus.
Queen Esther (Hadassah) is a prime example of a woman who was given the “scepter” to rule up to half of the Kingdom of Persia (Esther 5:6 & 7:2).
Was she not given political authority when King Ahasuerus extended to her the golden scepter? The prophecy of Genesis 49:10 was being fulfilled through Esther “the scepter shall not depart from Yahuwdah (Judah), nor a lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh come.”
Even though Esther was from the Tribe of Benjamin, the Tribe of Benjamin was part of the Two Southern Tribes of the House of Yahuwdah (Judah).
Esther was exercising her political power when she made a decree that the House of Yahuwdah (Judah) should keep the “Days of Puwriym” in remembrance of the great deliverance and salvation that YaHuWaH won for the Yahuwdiy (Jews) against their enemies in Persia. Also see my other article entitled: “How Does Puwriym Point to Messiah?”
Miryam the Prophetess
![]()
Shemoth (Exodus) 15:20And Miryam the prophetess, the sister of Aharown (Aaron), took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.
The only place where the distinction of male and female plays an important role is in the marriage covenant. Why? Because marriage is a picture of the relationship between Messiah and his Bride.
Miryam the Prophetess
Shemoth (Exodus) 15:20And Miryam the prophetess, the sister of Aharown (Aaron), took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.
Shemoth (Exodus) 15:21 And Miryam answered them, Sing you to YHWH, for he has triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider has he thrown into the sea.
In the passage above, Miryam, the sister of Mosheh & Aharown (Moses & Aaron) is being called a “prophetess”which is defined in the Hebrew
Strong’s Concordance as follows:
#H5031 – nĕbiy’ah nbiy’ah neb-ee-yaw’ feminine of 5030; a prophetess or (generally) inspired woman; by implication, a poetess; by association a prophet’s wife:--prophetess; one who is consulted for a word; inspired in song.
If YaHuWaH wanted to silence women, why did he call Miryam a prophetess or one who spoke the word of Elohiym? If the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) was commanding all women to be silent in the midst of the assembly, he would’ve been condemning Miryam and all of the other women in the TaNaKh!
One man in particular pointed out to me that Miryam became leprous and she was put out of the camp for seven days in Numbers 12:15 while Aaron was not, even though both Miryam & Aaron spoke against Moses for his marriage to the Ethiopian woman in Numbers 12:1. This man was trying to imply that Miryam was punished because she was a female, while Aaron was not punished because he was a male.
I found this man’s logic most offensive because his attitude against the female gender defies all logic. My response to this man was simply this: “The reason why Aaron was not struck with leprosy and put out of the camp is because he had been ordained as the High Priest and if he was removed, then the people would not have had a High Priest for those seven days. Miryam was an example of the entire nation of Yisra’el, and so she was used to show the people what would happen to all who spoke against YaHuWaH’s anointed one, Mosheh. This had nothing what-so-ever to do with gender.”
Gender Distinction for Marriage Only
One man in particular pointed out to me that Miryam became leprous and she was put out of the camp for seven days in Numbers 12:15 while Aaron was not, even though both Miryam & Aaron spoke against Moses for his marriage to the Ethiopian woman in Numbers 12:1. This man was trying to imply that Miryam was punished because she was a female, while Aaron was not punished because he was a male.
I found this man’s logic most offensive because his attitude against the female gender defies all logic. My response to this man was simply this: “The reason why Aaron was not struck with leprosy and put out of the camp is because he had been ordained as the High Priest and if he was removed, then the people would not have had a High Priest for those seven days. Miryam was an example of the entire nation of Yisra’el, and so she was used to show the people what would happen to all who spoke against YaHuWaH’s anointed one, Mosheh. This had nothing what-so-ever to do with gender.”
Gender Distinction for Marriage Only
The only place where the distinction of male and female plays an important role is in the marriage covenant. Why? Because marriage is a picture of the relationship between Messiah and his Bride.
Are we not all his bride? Are we not all one body? Is he not our bridegroom? Do we think that only the male species are the ones whom Elohiym has called to help usher in the kingdom? Do we believe that the 5 wise virgins who had their oil lamps filled represents only females? That would be absurd, wouldn’t it?
The 5 wise virgins represent the bride of Messiah and that means male and female together make up the “bride of Messiah.” Messiah is the male role and the believers in Messiah makeup the female role. That is why the male/female relationship pertains to marriage only.
But when it pertains to the kingdom of heaven the female role represents the bride of Messiah and it is “she” who brings in the harvest like Ruth who worked for Boaz. It is the “bride” who he comes for and her oil lamp must be ready and filled.
In the kingdom of heaven, the Body of Messiah is a female role and the Bridegroom is a male role. That is why in an earthly marriage relationship the distinction of male and female is still unique in function.
The word of Elohiym clearly teaches that gender does not matter in the kingdom of heaven except for in the unique relationship between a husband and a wife. In that scenario, a woman must not usurp the authority of her husband. But outside of the context of marriage, there are no gender distinctions:
Galatiym (Galatians) 3:28 There is neither Yahuwdiy (Jew) nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Messiah Yahuwshuwa.
Under the order of Melchizedek, all believers (Male & Female) are part of Messiah’s priesthood.
1st Keefa (Peter) 2:9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that you should show forth the praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;
The bride of Messiah is the female role, and the bridegroom is the male role, even though the Lewiytes (Levites) were all male, they are his bride (symbolic of the female role).
If a husband recognizes his wife’s gift of teaching and he covers her to do so, then she is not usurping his authority. Even if a husband asks his wife to teach him something for which he knows she is more qualified then she is doing so under his authority. Case in point was with Smith Wigglesworth. His wife Polly taught him to read and write because he never received more than a 6th grade education. But he asked her to teach him, so was she wrong for teaching him? Of course not!
There is nothing in scripture that says that a woman may not lead a man into battle as with Deborah. As a matter of fact, Elohiym allowed it in her case, but she also had a husband who was a prophet who acted as her covering. If a woman is unmarried like Channah (Anna) then her covering is YaHuWaH himself.
The word “Nicos” means “to dominate” and the word “Laity” means the lay people in the body. Nico-Laity means “The leadership lords themselves over the laity.”
Chazown (Revelation) 2:15 So have you also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
The Greek Concordance defines this word: #G3531 Nikolaïtēs
Nicolaitans = “destruction of people.” A sect mentioned in Rev. 2:6,15, who were charged with holding the error of Balaam, casting a stumbling block before the church of God by upholding the liberty of eating things sacrificed to idols as well as committing fornication.
YaHuWaH Elohiym hates this because it is idolatry when we elevate one person over another in the body of Messiah. This is why Paul said that there is neither male nor female, bond nor slave, Jew nor Greek.
We are equally heirs to the promises in Messiah which includes spiritual gifts.
Does Towrah Silence Women?
Does Towrah Silence Women?
I often will encounter those who would try to discredit the validity of the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul), and one of the arguments that they will often use to convince me that Paul was a false apostle was the fact that he seems to be silencing women in some of his letters to the local assemblies. One man in particular who is “Anti-Paul” wrote to me the following explanation of why Paul could not be a legitimate apostle:
“1st Timothy 2:12 and I quote: ‘But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet.’ Do you stand up to give testimonies or teachings in your Synagogue? If so, you are breaking Paul’s Commandment in 1st Corinthians 14:34-35 and I quote:
‘Let the women keep silent in the assemblies. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a disgrace for a woman to speak in the assembly.’
This man went on to try and convince me that Paul was a false apostle with the following words:
“It is interesting how he says it is according to the Law (Towrah) which I can find no such ordinance in the 613 commandments prohibiting a woman to speak in the assembly….Now here is the blatant contradiction and false teaching of Paul as it relates to women in the assemblies. Remember Paul said women are to have no authority over a man. Perhaps he failed to read Judges 4:4 where it states ‘Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, she judged Yisra’el at that time.’
…Here is a woman of YaHuWaH that Judged Israel including men so she was put in a position of authority OVER men. As a matter of fact there are seven examples of women in the TaNaKh who were given authority to teach, prophesy, and have authority over men….
I am not speaking against you teaching here. I think women have a vital role in the Assemblies that relates to teaching. But you must understand, Yahuwshuwa said Judge not lest you be judged for what MEASURE you judge that so you also shall be judged on. When you use Paul to pass judgment on a certain subject matter like you have done in the replies to me then you set yourself up to be judged by the MEASURE of HIS (Paul’s) writings. If you build doctrines and establish Halacha (Way of Life) based on Paul then you will be judged by everything that is in his letters. This also applies to Talmudic Jews who claim that the Oral Laws are equal to Torah so they will be judged by the merits of Talmud. So if you SERIOUSLY call Paul an Apostle/Prophet and his writing scripture and use them for a judgment then you will be judged on the merits of ALL his writings….As for me and my house I will pick the written Towrah the Prophets, of the TaNaKh, and the Living Towrah, as my MEASURE of judgment and the foundations that establish my doctrines.”
This was my response to this “Anti-Paul” (Ebionite) from the above letter he had written to me:
“First of all I do not hold the letters and commentaries of the Apostle Sha’uwl (Paul) above Mosheh (Moses) or Messiah’s words. In fact, in one of my other articles entitled ‘How Should We Establish New Testament Doctrine?,’ I stated that ‘all scripture’ (1st Timothy 3:16) is to be used for reproof, for doctrine and instruction in righteousness which is the ‘Towrah (Law), Prophets & Psalms’ (TaNaKh)---Luke 24:44….
…The letters written by Sha’uwl (Paul), the Apostle are commentaries to various congregations for various situations and they were answers to questions that they had written to him about. In order for us to accurately understand his letters we must first have the original letter that was sent to him by that congregation and then we can understand his reply back to them…
…But since we don’t have those letters that were written to him in the first place, we have to sift through the misunderstandings and we must gain historical background and look into the original translation of the Aramaic, Hebrew & Greek to find some of the missing pieces to the puzzle. One such missing piece is the fact that there were quotation marks around Paul’s sayings that were removed by the translators whenever he was quoting the Talmud or the Gnostic writings which seemed to contradict scripture. Paul was attempting often-times to answer a question with a question and using the quotes from these other sources to explain in contrast what scripture had to say….
…In my other articles, I address the fact that Miryam, Deborah, & Huldah, were prophetesses ordained by YaHuWaH and they were given authority to judge and teach men in some cases. And so I agree with you that women are allowed to teach in the assembly according to the Towrah and the TaNaKh. However, the Apostle Sha’uwl was not in contradiction with the Towrah. He is often misunderstood because of translation problems, missing quotation marks, and lack of historical background to understand the context of the letter written to that particular congregation….
…The Apostle Sha’uwl even endorsed certain women in helping him advance the gospel such as Junia, Tabitha/Dorcas, Phoebe, Eudodias & Syntyche. This proves that Sha’uwl was not against women teaching or preaching or else he would not have endorsed these women.”
In addition to this dialogue with this Ebionite man, I also found the following research quite enlightening and my hunch that Paul was referring to the “Talmudic Law” about women keeping silent in the Assembly proved to be correct. Below is a study that was done by Jon Zens, the author of the book “What’s With Paul & Women?”
New Light on 1st Corinthians 14:34-36
Would Paul Call the Speaking of Women “Lewd & Filthy?”
A Summary by Jon Zens
July 2007
In “The Elusive Law,” Cheryl Schatz presents evidence to demonstrate that verses 34-35 are not Paul’s words, but the remarks of some in Corinth based on the Talmud’s restrictions on women (DVD #4, Women in Ministry: Silenced or Set Free?, MM Outreach, Nelson, B.C., Canada, 2006).
I’ve been wrestling with the issues raised regarding women in 1st Corinthians 11-14 for twenty-six years. My first article, “Aspects of Female Priesthood,” appeared in 1981. For the first time I feel like significant light has broken through the lingering problems and questions. Without doubt every conceivable explanation of what is entailed in 1st Corinthians 14:34-35 can be challenged from some angle. It is admittedly a difficult passage. However, the position convincingly set forth by Cheryl does the best job I’ve ever seen of doing justice to what the verses actually say and the immediate context, beginning in 1st Corinthians 11.
For a long time I’ve wondered what “law” was in view in verse 34. There is strong reason to believe that it is not the Old Testament, but the Talmud that is being cited. According to Wikipedia, “The Talmud is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs and history.” In Jesus’ day the first part of the Talmud, the Mishnah, was in oral form, but in 200A.D. and 500A.D. it and the Gemara were put into writing. In brief, two key issues point to why the Jewish oral law (Talmud) was behind what was stated in vv.34-35.
1.) Only the Talmud silences women.
2.) Only the Talmud designates the speech of women as “shameful.”
The Talmud Silenced Women
Cheryl observes that “The silencing of women was a Jewish ordinance. Women were not permitted to speak in the assembly or even to ask questions. The rabbis taught that a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff.”
Josephus, a Jewish historian, asserted that “the woman, says the law, is in all things inferior to a man. Let her accordingly be submissive.”
The Talmud clearly affirms the silence of females:
“A woman’s voice is prohibited because it is sexually provocative” (Talmud, Berachot 24a).
“Women are sexually seductive, mentally inferior, socially embarrassing, and spiritually separated from the law of Moses; therefore, let them be silent” (summary of Talmudic sayings).
The Talmud Called the Voice of a Woman “Shameful.”
“It is a shame for a woman to let her voice be heard among men” (Talmud, Tractate Kiddushin).
“The voice of a woman is filthy nakedness” (Talmud, Berachot Kiddushin).
The English translation of the Greek word, aiskron, as “shameful” or “improper” hardly convey the strength of what the word encompasses. The affirmation in verse 35, Cheryl notes, is that a woman’s speaking is “lewd, vile, filthy, indecent, foul, dirty and morally degraded.”
Male and female prophesying was inaugurated on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17-18). Paul approved the prophesying of women in 1st Corinthians 11:5.
In 1st Corinthians 14 he saw the whole body involved in prophesying – “everybody is prophesying” (v.24), “each one of you has a teaching” (v.26), “you may all prophesy one by one” (v.31). How could the same apostle Paul a few pen strokes later turn around and unequivocally designate women’s speech in the body as “filthy, lewd and vile?” It makes no sense at all. I have always felt like verses 34-35 didn’t sound like Paul. Something was awry.
The matter is cleared up by realizing that Paul did not write the negative words about women in vv.34-35. Instead, those basing their view of women on the oral law did. Paul never required women to be silent and never called female speaking “lewd and filthy.” The Talmud was guilty of advocating both.
This is further confirmed in verse 36 when Paul exclaims “What! Did the Word of Elohiym originate with you?”
The “What!” indicates that Paul is not in harmony with what was stated by others from the Talmud in vv.34-35.
Thayer’s Lexicon notes that the “What” is a disjunctive conjunction “before a sentence contrary to the one just preceding, to indicate that if one be denied or refuted the other must stand.”
Sir William Ramsey commented: “We should be ready to suspect that Paul is making a quotation from the letter addressed to him by the Corinthians whenever he alludes to their knowledge, or when any statement stands in marked contrast either with the immediate context or with Paul’s known views.”
Paul contrasts his commands which promote edification by the varied contributions of all with the restrictive prohibitions upon women demanded by the anti-gospel Talmud. Paul saw the voices of the sisters as a vital part of the building up of the body of Messiah. The Talmud, on the other hand, viewed female voices as “shameful” and as “filthy nakedness.”
We know that various concerns and questions came to Paul from the Corinthians in a letter. He refers to this communication several times in 1st Corinthians. If quotation marks are placed at the beginning and end of verses 34-35, thus seeing them as the words of some Corinthians to Paul, then the apparent contradiction between Paul’s encouragement of female participation and then his seeming silencing of them is resolved satisfactorily.
Those who use 1st Corinthians 14:34-35 as a basis for requiring the sisters to be silent in the meetings would do well to consider the strong possibility that the words they cite as proof-texts are non-Pauline, and reflect the non-gospel viewpoint of the Talmud. Are they prepared to maintain, as the anti-feminine Talmud did, that a woman’s voice is “dirty” and “like filthy nakedness?” I submit that it is unthinkable that Paul would assign such awful sentiments to the sisters’ words.
Excerpts from Joanne Krupp’s “Woman: God’s plan not Man’s Tradition, Preparing the Way”, 1999, pp.80-83. (used with the permission of the author).
The Context of 1st Corinthians
What does the rest of 1st Corinthians tell us that will shed light on these verses?
We know the Corinthian Christians had written Paul a letter (7:1) and that in that letter a number of issues were raised that Paul needed to address.
In Paul’s letter, as he addressed a question or issue that had been raised by the Corinthians in their letter to him, sometimes he simply referred to the subject in question, and then responded to it, as in the following examples:
1:11 – “For it was declared to me about you, my brethren, by the ones of Chloe, that there are strifes among you ...”
7:1 – Paul says, “now concerning the things about which you wrote . . .”
7:25 – “now concerning virgins . . .”
8:1 – “now concerning things sacrificed to idols . . .”
9:1 – he asks questions to bring up the next subject, “Am I not free?”
“Am I not an apostle?,” etc. He is obviously referring to their questions regarding his being called an apostle.
12:1 – “now concerning spiritual gifts . . .”
Other times Paul repeated the Corinthian’s erroneous statements and then proceeded to correct, or bring balance to, their thinking.
6:12 – Paul seems to be quoting them: “All things are lawful for me,” then he counters with “but all things are not profitable.”
*Note Added by Maria Merola: Paul was quoting a mantra used by the Libertine Gnostics who believed that all things were lawful. Paul was not declaring that all things were lawful in 1st Corinthians 6:12. He was quoting the Libertine Gnostics and then countering their false mantra by saying “but all things are not profitable.” It would be the equivalent of saying “just because it is legal to smoke cigarettes, does not mean that you should do it.”
Then he repeats again what probably was their statement to him, “All things are lawful for me,” and again balances that statement with, “but I will not be mastered by anything.” The Corinthians were justifying their license by their words because Paul had taught, “You are not under law, but under grace.”
The portion in question here, 1st Corinthians 14:34-35, finds Paul describing in some detail how the gifts of the Holy Spirit are to be in operation in the assembly, and specifically the gift of prophecy. At this point a new subject is being introduced. Paul seems to shift to the subject of women in the assembly.
It is very much in keeping with the pattern of this letter for Paul, in verses 34 and 35, simply to be repeating the words of the Corinthians:
“Let the women keep silence in the congregations; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves just as the law also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in the assembly.”
What follows in verse 36 seem to rebut their statement when he says, “What! Was it from you that the Word of Elohiym (God) first went forth? Or has it come to you only?” Then he closes this chapter with a few more remarks concerning prophecy and speaking in tongues.
Which Law?
The key phrase in verse 34 is “just as the law also says.” Remember, Paul was an educated man. He called himself a Pharisee of the Pharisees. Certainly he knew the law. There is no “Old Testament” (TaNaKh) law or scripture that either silences women or subjects them --– none whatsoever. Check the cross reference notes in your Bible for verse 34, and you’ll find no cross reference in the TaNaKh (Old Testament).
Rather, Psalm 68:11 says, “YHWH gives the command; the women who proclaim the good tidings are a great host.”
Does Paul have the right to silence that “great host of women?” Inconceivable!
However, the Jews were living according to the Talmud, not according to the Old Testament Law. Remember the Talmud contains regulations and traditions had had become more important than the Old Testament book of the Law. In the “Ten Curses of Eve” listed in the Babylonian Talmud, the sixth is summarized this way:
“He shall rule over thee,” the wife being in total submission and subjugation, since the wife is the personal property of the husband.
When he quotes their statement back to them in verses 34 and 35, which makes reference to the law, he is attempting to show them that they are still living and operating by the oral law of the Jews or Jewish traditions.
The great German lexicographer, Schleusner, in his Greek-Latin Lexicon, declares the expression “as also saith the law” refers to the Oral Law of the Jews. Here are his words:
“The oral laws of the Jews or Jewish traditions . . . in the Old Testament no precept concerning the matter exists,” and he cites Vitringa as showing that it was “forbidden by Jewish traditions for women to speak in the synagogue.”
Paul would never have made such a statement such as is quoted in verses 34 and 35 attributing something to Old Testament law that simply did not exist. Not only that but all through his letters he tried to free believers from the bondage of the (Pharisaic) Law, not hold them to it (Romans 6:14; Galatians 2:16, 5:1).
By Paul’s response in verse 36, he is saying, “Who do you think you are, setting yourselves up to proclaim something as from God that is not supported by Scripture?”
We are doing Paul a disfavor and discrediting his intelligence by accusing him of originating this statement rather than understanding that he was simply quoting theirs. Paul is not attempting to establish the silencing of women in the New Testament Church. On the contrary, he is chiding the Corinthians for their attempt to keep women silent and thereby prevent them from freely ministering as the men were free to do.
Paul released women to speak within the church in this chapter, but did he require them to cover their heads while doing so?
[1] Charles Trombley, Who Said Women Can’t Teach? (North Brunswick, NJ: Bridge Publishing, Inc, 1984), 30. Summarized from Genesis with a Talmudic Commentary by Herson.
[2] Johann Friedrich Schleusner, as quoted in Katherine Bushnell, God’s Word to Women (privately reprinted [ca. 1976] by Ray B. Munson, P.O. Box 417, North Collins, NY 14111, [originally published] 1923), 201.
[2] Johann Friedrich Schleusner, as quoted in Katherine Bushnell, God’s Word to Women (privately reprinted [ca. 1976] by Ray B. Munson, P.O. Box 417, North Collins, NY 14111, [originally published] 1923), 201.