Preaching and Teaching

What is the difference (if any) between preaching and teaching?The first time the word preach is used (in the AV) is in Nehemiah 6:7And thou hast also appointed prophets to preach of thee at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and now shall it be reported to the king according to these words. Come now therefore, and let us take counsel together.The Hebrew word here is qaraÆ and here is the Strong's lexicon definition:07121. qaraÆ kaw-raw’; a primitive root [rather identical with 07122 through the idea of accosting a person met]; to call out to (i.e. properly, address by name, but used in a wide variety of applications):—bewray [self], that are bidden, call (for, forth, self, upon), cry (unto), (be) famous, guest, invite, mention, (give) name, preach, (make) proclaim(-ation), pronounce, publish, read, renowned, say. The first time the word teach is used (in the AV) is in Exodus 4:12Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.The Hebrew word here is yarah and here is the Strong's lexicon definition:03384. yarah yaw-raw’; or (#2Ch 26:15) yaraÆ yaw-raw’; a primitive root; properly, to flow as water (i.e. to rain); transitively, to lay or throw (especially an arrow, i.e. to shoot); figuratively, to point out (as if by aiming the finger), to teach:— (+) archer, cast, direct, inform, instruct, lay, shew, shoot, teach(-er, -ing), through. Here are some verses that include both preach and teach to get us started:Matthew 4:23And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease among the people.Matthew 11:1Now it came to pass, when Jesus finished commanding His twelve disciples, that He departed from there to teach and to preach in their cities.Acts 28:31preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him.Romans 2:21You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?Colossians 1:28Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.2 Timothy 4:2Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.

I think a simple way to look at it is this:Preachers proclaim the truth; teachers talk about it.

Preachers proclaim the truth; teachers talk about it. I often share the platform at conferences with a brother here in the UK and abroad. He sometimes says 'I like working with you; you explain why I believe what I believe'. I usually reply 'I like working with you; you tell them what to do with it'.This isn't the whole story of the difference between a preacher and a teacher but it is a definite ingredient.For a bit more detail I would recommend you look at the words used. The word for preacher in the OT and NT usually has links with someone who lifts up his voice; hence a herald. The thrust of his work is usually an heraldic proclamation and his purpose to to provoke a response in the hearer. It is aggressive and penetrating and it will often have a prophetic edge to it; this is the day, thou art the man. You can almost see the pointed finger. The teacher's role is more in terms of pastoral provision. It systematises truth and has in mind 'the full assurance of understanding'. These hands are open to guide, reassure and feed.

Dear Ron,Please, allow me to declare that your graphic deciphering of the two offices receives highest ranking out here.Lars

I know this is going off topic but this was my reasoning behind asking the first question, in 1 timothy 2:12 it says:12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.(NKJV)Are women allowed to preach to men in Churches?

12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.(NKJV)Are women allowed to preach to men in Churches?Are you making a conscious distinction between preach and teach?

Are you making a conscious distinction between preach and teach?Not at this point I hope, I'm trying to get one of you lot to do it. ;-)

Not at this point, I'm trying to get one of you lot to do it ah, but one of the greatest services a teacher can do it to get the student to ask the right questions. ;-)

Ok then, here's what I really want to know - what are women not allowed to do in the Church that men are allowed to do in the Church? :-? Are there any exceptions? :-o

Hi NasherI'm not going to give a definitive answer but here are some comments..Some years ago a UK preacher, David Pawson, wrote a book entitled 'Leadership is Male'. This book caused a fair bit of upset, especially among the missionary community. I have a lot of sympathy with Pawson's book but I would like to change the title; I would prefer 'Authority is Male'.I know sisters who have very great gifts and I am happy to tuck in behind them. We have sisters in our church who can 'lead' the whole church when they pray; they can set the theme and pattern and others will follow them. I believe this is acceptable from a scriptural point of view. I tend to see 'leadership' as an event rather than as an office.Authority and government is of another nature and I do not believe it is appropriate for a sister to hold continuing authority in the church. That 'in the church' is added very deliberately. I think it is 'in the church' that the pattern of headship and authority reveals that 'authority is male'. Here, in the UK, we have a queen and we used to have a female prime minister; I have no problems with these functions being in the hands of a woman. The church is to be a demonstation NOW, to principalities and powers in the heavenelies, of the manifold wisdom of God. Eph 3:10 In that sense the church gathered together, under its Head, has a different set of principles at work than the outside world (or even parachurch organisations). In my understanding it has nothing to do with superiority or spirituality but is part of the 'image' that is built into Christ and His church. I would love to hear what others have to say on this issue.

Well tackling your first question: Are women allowed to preach? and I would answer prophesy YES preach and teach NO.Now we really are going to have to define 'preaching'. ;-) One of the words translated 'preaching' in the KJV is 'euaggelizO' or evangelise. It is the word used in Acts 5:42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. I don't think this verse just means the apostles.If we stick to the letter of the scripture this would make the distinction between preaching and teaching very important, as the scriptures clearly do not allow a sister to 'teach', but is preaching the same as teaching?

I think they are different because the bible uses both words to express different things; I have singled out below a few sentences where they are both used in the same verses:Matthew 4:23And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease among the people.Here Jesus teaches in the synagogues, but was he also preaching there?Acts 28:31preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him.Here we have Paul preaching the kingdom of God, I have done a word search and the word for teach is not linked with the word 'gospel' or 'kingdom', the word preach is always used. I wonder what things Paul was teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ.Colossians 1:28Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.It seems as though preaching is connected to warning, and teaching is connected to wisdom.I think you have said something similar already, it seems as though preaching is more public, more heraldic, more 'lively'; whereas teaching seems to be more private, more instructional.Although I think preaching and teaching are different I do concede that someone teaching could flow into preaching, and someone preaching could flow into teaching.Where does this leave us in regards to women? :-?

Has anyone got any light to shed on this?

Where does this leave us in regards to women? :-? Hi NasherThey should be 'given their place' not 'put in it'. :-D By which I really mean that I would prefer to open up as much as possible as long as it is consistent with scriptural parameters.The reason I asked earlier about 'teachers' is that I wanted to provoke thought about the function of a teacher in the 1st century. For example, they would not be expounding Ephesians or the finer points of the Revelation as these writings simply didn't exist at that time. So what were they doing? I think they would be systemising 'revelation' and because this is is inevitably linked to authority I think that is the area which is forbidden to 'woman'.There is a persistent link between teaching and authority in the scripture and I think this is where the prohibitions count. I don't think preaching in the sense of 'evangelise' or 'proclaim' is forbidden to 'woman'. Prayer and prophesy are specifically sanctioned as long as the woman is covered. (Now this could get another thread going! I suggest it be called 'why is 'man' not allowed to cover his head?' For those like myself who no longer have much natural covering that is the major issue. ;-) ) The particular prohibition is 'teaching' which is why I wanted to explore that area and, if possible, to distinguish things that differ.The spectrum of Christian interpretation is very wide. At one extremity women have been constrained to absolute silence so that they are not even handed a hymn book at the beginning of the meeting. The opposite extremity is to say that these were merely cultural constraints and can be safely abandoned so that a woman may now be the 'senior elder' or 'ruling minister'.

Hi Philologos, I'm not familiar with 'systemising revelation', what is/was that?

Hi NasherThat's a good question. I think what I am searching for is a process as distinct from a crisis. The secret things belong to God but the things that are revealed are ours forever. This was the testimony of Israel after God had given them the law. This foundational revelation became the responsibility of the priests; For the priest‘s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts. Malachi 2:7 The priests 'held' the revelation but were not the original agents of the revelation. The foundational 'revelation' was added to through the testimony of the prophets and became part of the 'book' for which the priests held responsibility.In Jewish history the greatest man after Moses is Ezra who taught the people in the company of the Levites; And Nehemiah, which is the Tirshatha, and Ezra the priest the scribe, and the Levites that taught the people, said unto all the people, This day is holy unto the LORD your God; mourn not, nor weep. For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law. Nehemiah 8:9 Moses is the prophet, Ezra is the Teacher.The priest (teachers of the law) seemed to consolidate the revelation. This seems to have been a pattern in church history too with a second man often 'systemising' the revelation of the first. e.g. Luther and Melanchthon, Fox and Barclay, Wesley and Clarke, Booth and Brengle.I recognise that this is a hypothesis, but I see a pattern in the order of the gifts expressed in Ephesians 4 ie And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers. The pastor/teacher function coming at the end of the list. The apostle is foundational, the prophet is directional, the evangelist is expansionist, the pastor/teacher is conservationist. I think Timothy and Titus were almost certainly pastor/teachers. Note that these were not residential roles but itinerant functions. Timothy and Titus would have remained in situ for longer or shorter periods according to need.When I write these things I am trying to feel the shape of the NT functions. Added to these itinerants were the local residential giftings which functioned within the local church.

Thanks Ron, would there be any difference where a person was teaching in regards to authority?i.e. in a church building as opposed to a field.

Excellent points and "sticky wickets" all around!So,perhaps I can muddy the water some more by asking this question:"What can an Apostle do in the church?" Romans 16:7(AV), " Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsman, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the APOSTLES, who were also in Christ before me". 1.Paul said, to salute theses two apostles; 2.which were not ONLY apostles, but NOTEWORTHY apostles.hmmmm.I took the name Junia to my Thayer's Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, and to my chagrin discovered that the name Junia in the Greek is a woman's name. This could only mean one of two things:1. There was a Jewish boy in prison with Paul, who was also an apostle,and who had a female name. OR! 2.Junia was, as Porky would say: "a Fu Fee uh, a Fu Fee uh,......GIRL!"Be all that as it may, my PERSONAL opinion on the difference between preaching and teaching is that: Preaching IS teaching with the desired outcome being ; that the hearer make a decision, and act on it. Teaching is an impartation of knowledge with the desired outcome being;that of wisdom. ;-) Clutch :-P

Hi Clutch'Sticky wickets' I'm trying so hard to keep away from UK idioms here! your quote: Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsman, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the APOSTLES, who were also in Christ before me..1. Tozer is 'of note among many English Christians' i.e. many English Christians value him highly. Your reference could legitimately be interpreted this way. The word 'among' is that notorious preposition 'en' which usually means 'within' but can sometimes mean 'by'.2. Robertson's Word Pictures says that Junia can be either masculine or feminine.3. It is not certain that 'apostles' is being used in its technical sense here. The word really means someone authorised to accomplish something. 'apostellO' means 'I send'. e.g. here are a few references for 'apostellO' a. Matthew 2:16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.but the soldiers were not 'apostles'b. Matthew 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity.neither are angels 'apostles'c. Matthew 21:3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.these two donkeys were not apostles, although I have known some donkeys who thought they were.:-D :-D Here are a couple of instances of 'apostle' being translated as 'messengers'2 Corinthians 8:23 Whether any do enquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellowhelper concerning you: or our brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ.Philippians 2:25 Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants.

Hi Nasheryour quote: would there be any difference where a person was teaching in regards to authority?i.e. in a church building as opposed to a field.I don't feel the scriptures prohibit women teaching outside the church. BUT my use of 'church' has nothing to do with buildings. If 'the church' is gathered in a field I think a woman teaching is not in accordance with the scripture. I think if another kind of meeting takes place in the 'meeting hall' that is not 'the church' a woman teaching might be appropriate.Bet you're wishing you never started this! ;-)

O.....K.....Philologos, :-D It COULD mean more than only two things. :-oI was stationed at RAF Alconbury 1970-72. Is Georgie Best still living? And do they still say Tah Luv at the market? ;-)Clutch

your quote: Its intresting that Peter is stating that there were 'false prophets' before, but now the problem is 'false teachers.' Why the emphasis on teaching rather than prophecy? does this have part in this discussion thread? hmmI think this is a sign of 'development' of the order of "I planted, Apollos watered". There is another interesting development in the rebukes to the churches in Revelation. Revelation 2:6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.Revelation 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hatedeeds would be individual acts but doctrine/teaching speaks of a settled policy and is a further deteroration. It is much easier to correct individual deeds than to correct teachingThese are the kinds of scriptures that give me a sense that preaching and prophecy are often related to the push forward, whereas teaching is related to consolidation. I think the proclamation precedes the explanation.

If 'the church' is gathered in a field I think a woman teaching is not in accordance with the scripture. I think if another kind of meeting takes place in the 'meeting hall' that is not 'the church' a woman teaching might be appropriate.I suppose now we have to define when a meeting becomes a 'church' meeting. :-o

your quote: I suppose now we have to define when a meeting becomes a 'church' meeting. You're getting the hang of this aren't you? ;-) Actually I think we may have to define when a meeting becomes a church! :-P I think this is what we have to do with bible study all the time. We must break through the prejudices and preconceptions and see what it actually says. Then, what it meant to the people who first read it, then what it means in my context. I'll put an ancient quote of Wycliffe's on the Great Quotes thread. :-P

I think Greg is right when he says that "where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" defines what is a church meeting.I think the important thing here is the 'in my name', if two brothers / sisters in Christ go out to play ten pin bowling then this is not a church meeting.But if they are doing a bible study together then this is a church meeting.The question is, what activities define when a meeting of brothers / sisters in Christ become a church meeting?Prayer?Bible Study?Praise?All forms of worship?

I had in mind this reference to the 'whole church' in I Cor 14:23. Is Paul speaking hypothetically here or is he implying that there could be gatherings of the church which were not the 'whole church'?I feel the man/woman instructions in 1 Corinthians have primary reference to a 'public gathering of the whole church'. In this context the man represents Christ and the woman represents the Church. In the symbolism of this it is important to show that the Man (Christ) is the authority rather than the Woman (Church). In this public demonstration of of Christ and His Church the symbolism is important, apparently angels are watching [1Cor 11:10)Where the Church is on display the 'sign language' is important. When Paul was speaking in a public hall in the school of Tyrannus would the sisters have covered their heads? It was not custom for Greek women to do so. But 'in the Church' Paul seems to be indicating that they should and that the men should remain uncovered. In doing so he would have offended almost everybody; the Greeks whose men and women remained uncovered, the Romans whose men covered their heads but whose women remained uncovered, and the Jews whose men and women covered their heads. The fascinating oddity here is that Jewish men in the church, whose law for centuries had specified that men in proximity to God must cover their heads, were now being told that they must no longer do so.I think we have some powerful 'sign language'at work here and I suspect that the prohibitions to teaching for the woman are part of the same 'sign language'. It has nothing to do with the womans acceptance in Christ, nor of her being fully functional in the body, nor her technical ability but is 'sign language'. WKIP

It has nothing to do with the womans acceptance in Christ, nor of her being fully functional in the body, nor her technical ability but is 'sign language'. WKIPIn 1 timothy 2 where it is speaking about women not being permitted to teach, Paul qualifies what he has said with this:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.Why does Paul use this example?

Nasher's quote: 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.Why does Paul use this example?Did we touch on this in the Original Sin thread? Adam was the head of the race and uniquely responsible for its destiny. Eve sinned first but her sin did not impact the rest of the world; Adam sinned and everything tumbled down with him. This is authority again.Adam and Eve are a thrilling picture of Christ and His Bride. While he slept, God brought out of his death-sleep that which would become his companion and bride. Now,again, was that last sentance a reference to Adam and Eve or to Christ and the church?When Paul speaks of man and wife in Ephesians he comments this is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church In one sense whenever God speaks of man and wife He speaks concerning Christ and the church.I think the same imagery is still in the mind of God in your 1Timothy 2 reference. The creation sets forth the unchanging symbols of Christ and the church. In this context of authority it would be inappropriate for the woman to set the future patterns. Was this last statement a reference to Adam and Eve or to Christ and the church? Whatever the local context God is always speaking concerning Christ and the churchWhat do you think?

Greg's quote of my quote! In this context of authority it would be inappropriate for the woman to set the future patterns. Was this last statement a reference to Adam and Eve or to Christ and the church?Greg's quote: So Ron to your question: "reference to Adam and Eve or to Christ and the church?" I believe its both, but the weight is always on the spiritual side.Hi Greg, I chose my words very carefully with deliberate ambiguity to show that such a statement can and must refer to 'both' and that I think this is the reason that Paul refers to it in this context.(which was Nasher's original question. You see, sometimes preachers do answer questions. The problem is that preachers give you answers but teachers give you explanations!} :-P :-P

I agree that Paul is talking about authority in verse 13, but why does he talk about deception in verse 14?Was Eve/are women more/differently susceptible to deception than Adam/men?

I think there is a basic safety as we walk within God's stated parameters. When we move outside those parameters we become more vulnerable.