Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Needing Some Biblical Insight


paid4

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I have recently ran across an issue with our Sunday School classes. I am the Superintendent (that's hebrew for "you do this nOBody else wants to" ) of the Sunday School classes. We have a lady teaching the teens with the oldest ones being 15 which are her 2 sons (twins). The statement was made the other day that we didn't need to have a woman teaching boys over 13 years old. Since then I have inquired about the 13 year old rule.

 

I have asked a few deacons, preachers, and friends. Only a few have a different answer. Most stick to the 13 year old rule. I decided to search out the Bible first and foremost. The issue of the matter is revolved around a woman not assurp authoruty over a man 1 Timothy 2:12.

Their argument is that a boy needs to have a male authority/role model for a teacher. They site Jesus teaching in the temple when He was 12. I have also been told that Jewish "tradition" has a boy becoming a man at the age of 13.

They also site it isn't good to have a woman in the same room with teenage boys without her husband present. It's a temptation. Political correctness of the situation with what goes on today.

I've heard some of it all. I would also like to state that I will be submissive to my pastor should he say we need to seperate them. BUT......

 

Here is what I have found so far.

Exodus 30:14

Exodus 38:26

Leviticus 27:3-5

all throughout Numbers when they were numbered it started at 20 yrs old.

Numbers 32:11

 

It seems to me that a boy doesn't become a man until he is 20 years old.

 

Any input would be helpful.

Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Honestly I think it's more personal opinion than Bible doctrine.

 

My hubby and I believe that the earlier boys receive their biblical training from men the better - and it certainly doesn't hurt girls, either!  But it would be up to each particular church to decide what age that is. Especially with a different number of people available to teach in different churches.

 

In our church, we separate the boys and girls in fourth grade (Sunday School...they still have a woman teacher in school, even for Bible, until Jr. High).  The boys in grades 4-6 have men teachers and workers, while the girls have women.  Their course lessons are geared towards them as well (like the girls will study Esther and Ruth, etc).  Once they hit 7th grade, the boys and girls are back in the same class, and the youth pastor does the teaching.

 

It is my own personal opinion that, having raised a son, it would be best for that lady's sons (and for her) if they had a man teacher.  But not because the woman will be usurping authority.  Those teens have no authority over any woman - and to teach that will cause them prOBlems. I was in a church once where one of the pastors taught the boys that if they didn't have a little bit of rebellion in them when a woman teacher told them to do something (even a school teacher) they weren't going to be strong men.  My Bible still says rebellion is sin, and minors are still in subjection - in every way - to adults.  Because of that teaching, I was disrespected pretty badly by a couple of the boys - both of whom went on to lead messed up lives for quite a while (because they thought they were some real he-men because they could sass their female teachers).  Sad, really.

 

Usurping authority is taking the reins of authority that don't belong to one into one's own hands.  That particular verse was speaking to controlling issues at church...If a man is in ultimate charge (you are superintendent and you answer to the pastor) and has appointed a woman to be a teacher in a class, she is not usurping authority. She is submitting to the spiritual authority who has appointed her as teacher.

 

Even today when my son and I talk, he respects me and listens when I talk to him. Am I in authority over him? No, of course not. He's 27 and married, so no way (and no way would I want to be...we raised him to be the leader in his home, not a follower of mommy)!  But because we never allowed him to believe that I was usurping authority over him (really, that's just silly to think, if we really think it through...) by instructing him even as a teen, he doesn't have a prOBlem with respect.  Just last July he and I spent several hours together discussing spiritual things - and, yes, I did tell him some things the Bible taught. And, no, I didn't usurp authority over him. Basically because he doesn't have spiritual authority over me.  Only my husband and my pastors (in line with what my husband allows) (and BroMatt as relating to OB, again in line with what my hubby allows) do...and that's the same for any woman. That's not rebellion. That's Bible.  God's Word tells us who a woman's authorities are, and it isn't every man that exists.

 

It wouldn't be a bad thing at all to have men teach teen boys. But it's not a usurping authority issue (unless mom gets OBstinate about it and demands that she remain their teacher).  Sorry I haven't cited scripture - because, again, it's all actually personal opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Persomally, I believe it would be ideal for a married couple to be teaching a class of mixed teens together. Again, we really don't get much from the Bible, because the youth in those days were generally either taught by their parents, or in Israel, they were prOBably separated-the boys went to synagogue, I don't know that the women did. And of course, Sunday School is a relatively new concept in churches-there wss no such animal more than 200 years ago-=the children attended with their parent, learned from the preacher and from parents, so we don't really have biblical direction.

 

But better safe than sorry in this day and age-a married couple would do well, as they could tag-team, there would be two sets of eyes on the kids, and protection against any kind of assumed or charged improprieties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Typically the Jews instructed the boys and girls separately. While Scripture doesn't mention ages, when it does address the instructing of male/female, it points to males instructing males and females instructing females.

 

Not only in Hebrew culture but in many around the world, a boy was considered a young man at about age 13. Typically, most often the boy had been primarily instructed by males and the girls by females. This served, and still does in some places, many other important factors other than just biblical instruction.

 

The age of 20 referred to in Scripture wasn't an age appointing when a boy became a man, but seems to indicate the young men were not allowed into battle.

 

Until rather modern history teens were viewed as young men/young women and expected to conduct themselves as such. Many were starting their own families at that age.

 

Many churches have done a disservice to the youth, and to families, by following the worlds guidelines and ways of raising and instructing boys and girls, young men and young women; even older men and women and families in general. This, in part, is why many of the same prOBlems which befalls secular youth, befalls many of our own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...