For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
No, Paul isn’t contradicting that salvation is by grace through faith. Childbearing is a part of a larger whole, the woman’s wider role to care for the home. This is the same role Paul describes in Titus 2:4–5: “Young women [are] to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.”
So, in both 1 Timothy 2 and Titus 2, Paul declares that wives have a God-ordained role to play in caring for children and the home. This is not claiming that a woman must have children in order to be saved. It is not even teaching that a woman must be married to be saved. But for those women who are married, God assigns a special responsibility to care for the home.
A wife’s fulfillment of this role will be one of the evidences of perseverance in the faith. Women who embrace their God-ordained role while continuing in the Christian virtues of “faith and love and holiness, with self-control” will find themselves saved on the last day.
I have re-read as per your request. Perhaps reconsider re-wording your title to “Married women will be saved through childbearing” so as to reflect the points raised on paragraph 3. Including but not limited to the bolded parts.
The text assumes a woman must be married to have children, but it’s really any woman with children. Paul, under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, was moved to write this because often times motherhood can be a tiring experience. What of late night feedings, changing diapers, calming distressed kids. On top of that, there are domestic chores. Even with a househelp around, one cannot delegate all duties. What feels like an endless cycle of drudgery can make a woman start wondering whether what she does is important work. See, one reason I like the Bible is because there’s an answer for even the littlest things of life! Paul is saying that if a woman remains faithful to her home, raising her children well in the fear of God and submitting to her husband, those acts, which perhaps are rare in worldly women, will be rewarded and she will be saved at the end.
Why not say “Any woman regardless of their marital status who fears the lord will be rewarded and saved at the end.”?
As per your interpretation… It doesn’t seem like the married one with kids who submits to her husband and caters to their needs will be conferred additional rewards. The single woman with no kids and no family just needs to follow God’s teachings and will still draw an equivalent reward.
Unless this is a word of encouragement to the married one, I don’t see pragmatism in this teaching.
I told you this woman is no more a Christian than she is a moslem or buddhist. She had probably never had read a Bible before she met someone who says they are a believer but doesnt even provide for his family and is living off of a woman when the same Apostle Paul said ,
[SIZE=5]1 Timothy 5:8 ESV[/SIZE]
But if any man does not provide for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
But they both have never seen that scripture so now she is taking some scripture out of context then project your issues onto the scripture and then act like you are the first person who has ever read a Bible and you have some insight and revelation nobody has ever had - Religion is bad ,bad,bad ,bad . If Paul really meant this why is it that he never married anyone and never had any children and infact encouraged people to stay single and celibate but to get married if they lack self control. Meaning marriage to him and having kids was second best . So how is it that Paul extols the virtue of being single and celibate as the best and highest way of living then he is like the only way a woman will be saved is by having children as per her interpretation. I dont want beef with this OP because I dont want to deal with someone dealing with the fact that she’s the man and the woman. Its not even role reversal its the woman doing everything just so she can validate her existence. But see you cant deceive your conscience , if you are playing an unnatural role you will feel disturbed so you have to keep justifying your unnatural way of life by quoting scripture out of context.
[SIZE=7]1 Corinthians 7 The Message (MSG)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=5]To Be Married, to Be Single . . .[/SIZE]
7 Sometimes I wish everyone were single like me—a simpler life in many ways! But celibacy is not for everyone any more than marriage is. God gives the gift of the single life to some, the gift of the married life to others.
8-9 I do, though, tell the unmarried and widows that singleness might well be the best thing for them, as it has been for me. But if they can’t manage their desires and emotions, they should by all means go ahead and get married.
I have to agree with you on most of this including your views on @Purple. But I cant be sure that she is playing a reversed role in her marriage. That seems like an overstretch of the truth.
The same way a man works out his salvation through the sweat of his brow, working hard to provide for his family, is how a woman works it out through childbearing. In the garden of Eden, God cursed childbirth by greatly multiplying the woman’s pain. You watch these women who call themselves single and empowered and the perverted lives most are living and tell me it isn’t true. A woman’s position in the home (and church) is clearly elucidated by Paul’s teachings.
Its reversed if the man instead of providing cooks,cleans,gets penetrated,takes family planning,menstruates,goes into labour,gestates and lactates blah blah blah. Which technically isnt even possible so basically so basically when the woman takes the one role the man has which is providing he becomes more of a pet or a surrogate child. Its only that you wouldnt have sex with your child or your pet. Its just messed up is what I am saying.
