Women should not teach men what? 1 Timothy 2 in context

7/13/2017

People often ask, "Why do some churches let women preach when 1 Timothy 2:12 prohibits it?" My Socratic response is: "Why do all churches let women braid their hair when 1 Timothy 2:9 condemns it?"

No one takes the Bible at face value. First, because no one grows up speaking Koine Greek and ancient Hebrew at home (so they can't read its "face value"), but second because English translations tell even the most novice reader that certain commands are culturally irrelevant. When you read Paul's repeated command to "Greet one another with a holy kiss" (Romans 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; 1 Thess 5:26), no one gets convicted and starts puckering up for church. Those commands were clearly intended for a different cultural context, and we recognize it. We know to distinguish the temporary cultural expression from its enduring principle.

The same cultural sensitivity must be applied to 1 Timothy 2. In first-century Ephesus where Timothy pastored churches, braided hair and female teachers were a bad idea. Why? The first one is easy. Braided hair, gold jewelry, and expensive clothing flaunted wealth. And Paul wanted "those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited" (1 Timothy 6:17). The injunction against female teachers and Paul's prescription for females to learn quietly in church gatherings are much more culturally nuanced.

Interpreting 1 Timothy 2:11-15 Correctly

I have taught biblical hermeneutics (i.e., how to interpret the meaning of Bible passages correctly) for 15 years because many churches have neglected to teach people how to handle the Bible after encouraging them to read it everyday. Primarily, Bible readers do not learn how to connect a passage they are studying to its literary and historical context. That's why we get extended discussions about 1 Timothy 2:11-15 that don't connect its meaning to 1 Timothy 2:8 or 2:4 or 1:7 or 6:20 and the religious context in Ephesus.

In the shortest possible commentary I want to explain the historical and literary features affecting the meaning of 1 Timothy 2:11-15 to show which particular interpretation fits best into the overall context. It's going to get technical, but you need to see the evidence that undermines the long-standing and mistaken use of this passage against female pastors. (For a fuller culturally informed study of what the Bible teaches about women, buy William Webb's Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis.)

Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis

Here are the top ten facts affecting what Paul meant when he wrote what is commonly mistranslated: "I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man."

1. 1 Timothy 2:11-12 instructs women to take on a posture of learning humbly rather than talking when they don't know what they're talking about.

Twice Paul instructs women to learn in quietness. The Greek word hesuchia (“quiet” or “humbly”) is the typical posture of a wise person who is ready to learn rather than a fool who espouses a mix of truth and error. Philo uses the word to contrast the respectable man and the “vulgar man, who spends his days meddling, running around in public, in theaters, tribunals, councils, and assemblies, meetings and consultations of all sorts; he prattles on without moderation, fruitlessly, to no end; he confuses and stirs up everything, mingling truth with falsehood, the spoken with the unspoken, the private with the public, the sacred with the profane, the serious with the ridiculous, not having learned to remain quiet (hēsychian), which is the ideal when the situation calls for it; and he pricks up his ears in an excess of bustling busyness” (Philo, Abraham 20). Josephus (War 2.130) praises the benefits of monastic spirituality for all the same qualities Paul commends in 1 Timothy 2:11-12: “If you see a monk walking along alone, with a demeanor that bespeaks humility, modesty, quietude, and tranquility--tapeinon kai praon kai hēsychion kai ēremon—envy the happiness of that man.” Paul instructs women to exercise each one of these same virtues because apparently women in Ephesus were not doing so.

2. Paul's instructions imply women in the church at Ephesus did not have adequate "knowledge of the truth,” and therefore needed to learn first rather than teach crazy stuff.

False teachers were convincing women of bad doctrine according to 1 Timothy 3:6 and teaching things like “forbidding marriage and prohibiting food consumption” (1 Timothy 4:3). So Paul's concern is about women propagating bad theology not just the idea of women teaching. Paul is putting a stop to "what" they were teaching not creating a universal rule for "who" can teach whom.

3. Paul's language in 1 Timothy 2:12 pinpoints his concern is not generally with women teachers but a specific situation with women in Ephesus.

Paul’s expression “I do not permit” employs the Greek verb epitrepō . The use of epitrepō in the New Testament, in every case, is “related to a specific and limited set of circumstances” (A.C. Perriman, “What Eve Did, What Women Shouldn’t Do: The Meaning of Authenteō in 1 Timothy 2:12″, Tyndale Bulletin 44.1 [1993] 130). So Paul's prohibition of women teaching is only meant for that time and place.

4. The Greek verb authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12 anachronistically translated “to exercise authority over” is the only use of that unusual verb in the whole NT with a range of meaning that changed over time.

The rare usages of authentein prior to, during, and after the NT period create a Semantic range with 4 basic meanings: to murder, originate, act independently, or dominate as a superior

Murder. Classical Greek, or Attic Greek, sources (Thucydides, Herodotus, Euripides, and Aeschylus) use the verb for homicide and suicide, especially found in legal briefs for murder cases. However, Philo and Josephus use it the same way in first-century Koine Greek writings. Jewish historian Josephus speaks of Antipater as the real murderer (authentein) of Pheroras whom he poisoned (Jewish War 1.582; 2.240).

Originate. Grammarian Aristonicus Alexandrinus comments on a section of Homer’s Iliad in On the Signs of the Iliad I.694 (9.694) (circa 27 BC) where authenteō occurs as an articular participle in the phrase, ho authentōn tou logou: “the author of the speech.” Egyptian magic and gnostic-papyri use the terms authentes, authentikos, and authentia to describe the original or primal source.
Act independently. The verb authenteō was typically used in non-literary, or colloquial, Koine Greek. First Timothy was a letter written in non-literary Koine Greek. If you consult the Moeris Atticista Lexicon Atticum (‘Moeris the Atticist’s Attic Dictionary’), Aelius Moeris, a second century lexicographer, lists Attic words with their Hellenistic (or Koine) equivalent. Next to the word autodikēn (same as autodikein), Moeris has the word authentēn (same as authentein, the form found in 1 Timothy 2:12). The shared meaning is “self-determination” or doing your own thing.
Dominate as a superior or master. Three Astrological Texts from first–third centuries AD use the verb authenteō to refer to either “the rulership of one planet over another, or to the superior social position enjoyed by those born under favorable astrological conditions.” These texts are (1) Methodus Mystica (first century AD), (2) Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos (second century AD), and (3) Papyrus Tebtunis 276 (line 28) (second or third century AD). For example, Ptolemy writes, “Therefore, Saturn when he alone takes control of the soul and has gained dominance/mastery [authentēsas] of Mercury and the moon.” (Tetrabiblos 3.14.10). After the first-century, this notion of dominance or control became the common definition in all the Greek lexicons. Most English Bibles therefore select the phrase “have authority” to translate authentein. But does that translation capture the full meaning of authentein in the context of 1Timothy?

5. The context of 1 Timothy suggests the best translation of the verb authentein in 2:12 is: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to act superior to a man.”

The question at hand in 1 Timothy is "who" brings divine knowledge of the truth and salvation to people. The Ephesians were buying into a pagan belief that women were special mediators of that truth and salvation to men. Paul is correcting the false teaching that women had some sacred connection to divine knowledge that made them superior to men and more fit to teach about spiritual things. That is why Paul tells men in 1 Timothy 2:8 to go directly to God in prayer.

The translation of authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12 as "to act superior" primarily employs the fourth definition above. However it incorporates the second definition, originator or primal source, because female claims of superiority were rooted in the false teaching that they gave life to man without the help of any man. The heresy that women were mediators of divine knowledge and spiritual life to men is what Paul corrects in 1 Timothy 2:13-14.

6. 1 Timothy 2:13-14 corrects a Proto-Gnostic heresy that Eve gave Adam divine knowledge and spiritual life. The heresy combined Ancient Greek belief in the female origins of all life with a revised version of the Jewish story of creation in the Garden of Eden. The heresy twists the biblical story so that Eve gives Adam the gift of spiritual life and knowledge of God rather than just sinning by eating of the tree of knowledge.

Paul tells us in 1 Timothy 1:7 that certain people were pretending to be "teachers of the Law" (the section of Scripture containing the story of Adam and Eve) when they did not know what they were talking about. Ancient sources describing elements of this distorted version of Adam and Eve’s story appeared in later generations after the heresy had developed into full-blown Gnosticism:

In the Apocalypse of Adam (50-150 CE) Adam says Eve “taught me a word of knowledge of the eternal God.”
The Hypostasis of the Archons (200-300 CE) is an esoteric interpretation of Genesis chapters 1-6 in which Adam acknowledges Eve gave him life: The rulers took counsel with one another and said, “Come, let us cause a deep sleep to fall upon Adam.” And he slept. – Now the deep sleep that they “caused to fall upon him, and he slept” is Ignorance. – They opened his side like a living woman. And they built up his side with some flesh in place of her, and Adam came to be endowed only with soul. And the spirit-endowed woman came to him and spoke with him, saying, “Arise, Adam.” And when he saw her, he said, “It is you who have given me life; you will be called ‘mother of the living’. For it is she who is my mother. It is she who is the physician, and the woman, and she who has given birth.
A later Gnostic text, The Origin of the World (270-330) continues to celebrate female superiority as the originator of life: Now, Eve is the first virgin, the one who without a husband bore her first offspring. It is she who served as her own midwife. For this reason she is held to have said: It is I who am the part of my mother; and it is I who am the mother. It is I who am the wife; it is I who am the virgin. It is I who pregnant; it is I who am the midwife. It is I who am the one that comforts pains of travail.

In Asia Minor an amulet was recovered that bears a scene of initiation (similar to the amulet shown to the left). The amulet shows Eve dispensing the knowledge (gnosis) of good and evil to Adam. E. R. Goodenough identifies the amulet as gnostic in view of the total lack of shame displayed – a marked contrast to Christian art. Beside the tree are the Hebrew letters heth and daleth, which Birger Pearson suggests stand for life and knowledge: “the two trees of Gen. 2:9 understood gnostically as a single tree portrayed on the amulet.” Life and knowledge are the two blessings which gnostic myth maintains Eve bestowed on Adam.

7. Paul's 2 comments in 1 Timothy 2:13-14 about (1) the order in which God created male and female and (2) Eve’s sinful decision to eat from the tree of knowledge in the Genesis story of Adam and Eve correspond to 2 specific misnomers in the Greek-inspired heresy about women’s original superiority to men. Paul does not want women teaching whatever they think is true just because they mistakenly believe they were the first living spirits before men and the ones to bring secret knowledge of God to men.

Paul reminds women that a male was created before a female not to say men are superior but to correct the false teaching that women were superior because they had spiritual life first. His reminder that Eve’s decision to eat of the tree of knowledge transgressed God’s command corrects the local heresy that the first woman blessed humanity with the knowledge of the Divine through that act. However, bringing up her mistake is not designed to say women are more easily deceived. Paul is making counterpoints to false claims not universal claims of female inferiority. We can verify this interpretation by seeing how Paul uses Eve's deception as a paradigm for how both men and women can believe bad teaching in 2 Corinthians 11:3.

8. 1 Timothy 2:15 assures God’s help during childbirth since Ephesian women believed Artemis kept them alive -- a role Eve took on in later Gnosticism.

Paul knew women would fear for their lives if they rejected their local religion and no longer honored Artemis. Women believed Artemis protected them as a divine midwife during labor. So 1 Timothy 2:15 says God will do what people believed Artemis was supposed to do.

The orator and poet Zonas, also known as Diodorus of Sardis, lived about fifty miles from Ephesus. He wrote the following first-century BC epigram about a mother who died in childbirth (available with eight other works attributed to him in The Greek Anthology III) because Artemis was too busy to save her: “One early dead in child-birth, since she perished in bearing a boy; And I weep to hold Athena, the comely daughter of Melo, who left grief to the women of Lesbos and her father Jason; but thou, O Artemis, wert busy with thy beast-slaying hounds.”

Strabo (63/64 BC–ca. AD 24), writing within the same century as Paul, describes the local Greek legend that explains why Artemis had special compassion for women during childbirth. In his Geography he refers to Ortygia (a grove adjacent to Ephesus) as both the name of a midwife and the name of the place where Leto gave birth to Artemis and then suffered on the brink of death giving birth to her twin brother after nine days of labor: “Then comes the harbor called Panormus, with a temple of the Ephesian Artemis; and then the city Ephesus. On the same coast, slightly above the sea, is also Ortygia, which is a magnificent grove of all kinds of trees, of the cypress most of all. It is traversed by the Cenchrius River, where Leto is said to have bathed herself after her travail. For here is the mythical scene of the birth, and of the nurse Ortygia, and of the holy place where the birth took place, and of the olive tree nearby, where the goddess is said first to have taken a rest after she was relieved from her travail. (Strabo, Geography, 14.20). As the legend goes, Artemis felt how great her mother's pain was in childbirth and decided to remain a virgin herself and compassionately care for women in labor as one of her divine duties.

9. The entire passage beginning with 1 Timothy 2:3-5 makes sense together when the local beliefs and heresy are understood.

Paul specifically claims that “God [is] our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ." In the proto-Gnostic heresy Paul corrects in 1 Timothy, men could learn hidden knowledge only from a woman. So Eve served as a mediator of truth. Paul wants his readers to know that Jesus is and does what they thought spiritually special women were and did. His specific emphasis that "the man Jesus Christ" is the mediator of knowledge and salvation was no general review of gospel truths but a pointed correction to a local problem.

10. The entire message of 1 Timothy makes sense when all of Paul’s comments about the Ephesian heresy are situated in the Greco-Jewish heresy of a virgin female originator of all life that gave women spiritual superiority to men.

I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking I Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence

"The opposing arguments of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’ ” (mentioned in 1 Timothy 6:20-21) involved the belief in female superiority over men because virgin women experienced special union with God and could share their spiritual power and insights with men. Hence Paul condemns people who forbid marriage in the Ephesian church for spiritual reasons (1 Tim. 4:3a). The virgin status of Artemis explains why virginity and celibacy were highly esteemed virtues among some Ephesians, but Paul saw such asceticism as dangerously entangled with local religion. Contrary to a theory popularized by Kroeger in I Suffer Not a Woman, no evidence exists that people in first-century Asia viewed Artemis as a fertility or sex goddess and therefore practiced temple prostitution (see Sondra Gahn, The Identity of Artemis in First-Century Ephesus). Artemis was actually praised as the divine tomboy who could save ("Artemis the Savior" was a common regional epithet) and protect people without any man’s help—a strength celebrated in her great hunting exploits.

Conclusion

When you put all the pieces above together, Paul is telling Timothy to prohibit women from teaching or practicing a local heresy. He wanted them to learn the truth of the Gospel rather than espouse a distorted mix of theology from Greek philosophy and local religion that misconstrued Genesis 1-3. Paul was specifically concerned that "what" women were teaching confused "who" the real mediator of spiritual life and divine knowledge is. Women were displacing "the man Jesus Christ" as they claimed spiritual superiority over men.

So 1 Timothy 2:12 does not issue a universal mandate against female preachers or pastors. Paul is simply giving sound advice to a local congregation that was allowing misinformed teachers to promote bad theology. It is a contextualized command for a specific time and place. If you read the first 7 verses in 1 Timothy, Paul explicitly targets particular legends and warped teaching about the Law in Ephesus. 1 Timothy 1:3-4a says, "I want you to stay in Ephesus, just as I urged you when I was on my way to Macedonia. Some people there are teaching false doctrines, and you must order them to stop. Tell them to give up those legends."

Once Paul gained confidence that Ephesian women had learned the truth and stopped teaching theological myths, we would assume they would be allowed to teach and lead the church just like Priscilla, Phoebe, Junia, and many women were doing at other churches Paul oversaw. The enduring principle is to prevent uneducated folks from teaching some errant insight from God they have devised by distorting Scripture with cultural beliefs or local religious ideas. We have to watch out for both men and women who do that before they have received adequate instruction in the faith.

142 Comments

Paul Koshy link

7/14/2017 03:09:26 pm

Loved this post. Thank you, Paul. All the best with the book.

Paul

7/14/2017 03:59:02 pm

Paul K - Thanks for the positive feedback. The research in the article above is the product of years of hard work parsing Greek inscriptions, texts, and artifacts from a number of centuries. I'm sure it will have too much technical jargon for some, and not enough critical assessment of other scholarly views for others.

Paul K link

7/19/2017 03:52:33 pm

Hi Paul, just wanted to let you know that I shared this post on Facebook and several people - men and women - appreciated reading what you wrote. Thank you so much. Keep up the great work.

Also, I very much value seeing your example of handling people's criticism - often personal - in a gracious manner, that seeks to address their concerns.

Richard

5/18/2020 11:55:01 am

You have some very interesting work about the responses of Paul to gnostic thought and other heresy. But you were very unconvincing when it came to things like 1 Timothy 4:3. You made a huge leap implying it was for women. I simply do not see this. The translation of "acting superior" is also unconvincing. You ask why women braid their hair in church. Why should they? As you know, the House of God is a fashion show these days. It is also a place where women show off what they have. It is really disturbing. Let them dress plainly in the church according to the mandates of Paul. There are no female pastors and no female bishops in the New Testament. This is because they were not allowed to teach Christian men the scriptures in the church in accordance with 1 Tim. 2:12. The plain meaning of the text still stands. But, again, some of your ideas about responding to heretical ideas is very interesting.

Jeff Roman

7/18/2017 02:01:35 pm

http://cbmw.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/4.2_-Smith-WebbsRedemptiveHermeneutic.pdf

Jason

7/14/2017 05:08:57 pm

And an explanation of pastors and deacons being the Husband of one wife is left out of the conversation? Years of research would have probably included an explanation of that as well....

Paul

7/14/2017 06:11:38 pm

Jason - the Greek expressions for family requirements and character that overseers were given in 1 Timothy 3 can be mined for some important insights. I do purposely limit the scope of my comments in this post to make an already long blog readable.

David Shields

1/12/2018 03:13:36 pm

Prof Pennley you still are teaching me after all these years I remember having this discussion with you years ago, glad to see you are still teaching.

Alex

7/15/2017 02:59:41 pm

Hmmm - by this argument, Jesus' teaching on when divorce is allowable (Mt 5:32 and Luke 16:18) only applies to men. And the rewards He promises to those who sacrifice to follow Him are also only for those men who 'leave' a wife, not women who have a husband (Mt 19:29). And Paul's claim that he has the right to bring a believing wife with him as he travels in ministry (1 Cor 9:5) only applies to male leaders. And, most directly, only male deacons need be faithful to their spouse (1 Tim 3:12 - the word there for deacon being more usually translated 'servant' throughout the rest of NT, and clearly applied to both sexes, e.g. Mk 9:35 or Jn 12:26).

Larry

7/16/2017 06:55:48 pm

Alex,
Your argument is ridiculous by implying that by not using gender neutral verbiage, the author's exhortation is therefore gender specific. Pahleeze

Jerome

7/18/2017 10:13:59 am

Exactly. He ignores many passages that outside of this issue clearly establish the husband as the "head of the wife" as a theological statement and neglecting the divine purposes in making them different. ( sanctified through child bearing etc.)

This article is readily believed if you are ignorant of the whole of scripture and are looking for reasons to doubt the clear meaning of the passage. This is a dangerous twisting of scripture.

Kevin

7/18/2017 12:12:39 pm

Jerome,
Speaking of ignorance of the whole of scripture:

In Acts 2:17, Peter references Joel 2:28 saying, "And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons AND YOUR DAUGHTERS shall prophesy...."

Clearly, according to this passage, there is at least some context where it is appropriate for a woman to prophesy (which is a form of teaching). And considering "prophecy" doesn't usually happen in front of carefully segregated groups, we can assume that this included women teaching men.

So when Paul says, "I do not permit a woman to teach a man," we're left with a quandary. If Paul's mandate is to be taken as a unilateral rule for all places and times, he is in direct contradiction with both Peter and the prophet Joel. Or, Paul's instruction is meant for a certain context.

If you want to talk about "the whole of scripture" you also have to consider things like Acts 2 and the prophetess Deborah. When you look at these, unilateral prohibition of women teachers/leaders just doesn't make sense.

Jake

7/18/2017 12:58:50 pm

Kevin,

The gift of teaching is not the same gift as the gift of prophecy. There is a clear distinction made between prophesying and teaching throughout the Bible.

"How many prophets served as priests in the Old Testament? And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?" 1 Corinthians 12:28-29

Paul does not consider the prophet and the teacher as the same role. So it would be wise of us not to make the assumption that they are the same. Whether you view prophesy as a form of teaching or not is irrelevant. Scripture does not consider the teacher and the prophet as the same.

Jake

7/18/2017 01:01:59 pm

Kevin,

I do apologize. The phrase, "How many prophets served as a priest in the Old Tesament?" is not part of the passage I shared. I made the error due to copying and pasting the passage I shared.

Rachel

7/18/2017 08:15:58 am

"Husband of one wife" does not prohibit females or single men; it prohibits polygamous men. Paul spoke to Timothy, his son in the faith. Practically speaking it makes sense for a man to write a letter to another man, a male pastor, and speak to him in masculine terms, i.e. being a husband.

Ralph Jameson

9/15/2018 09:55:41 am

Thank you Rachel, so many people in the church twist this. Another area is with divorced people. People argue divorced men cannot be deacons as they aren't the "Husband of one wife" which is foolish when you read Scripture is clearly speaking about polygamy.

Jake

7/18/2017 02:11:01 pm

"For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man." - 1 Corinthians 11:7

I am confident that Paul does not permit women to speak due to the amazing design of our God. Mans authority over women is seen through the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments. Aaron's SONS were chosen to be priests. Jesus Himself came as a man. Jesus chose 12 MALE Apostles. The 12 tribes of Israel were named after 12 MEN. We can go further and view Joseph's 2 sons as 2 tribes but again, these were 2 MEN. Paul instructs MEN not to have their heads covered and instructs women to cover their heads as a symbol of authority. Paul also says that woman was made for MAN. Even Peter refers to the woman as the weaker vessel. And lastly, with the verse I shared, clearly the Bible states that women are the glory of man. The Bible does not say that men are the glory of women but rather the image and glory of God. If you can't see the authority of men in the Bible, you may have conformed to worldly ways.

Paul K link

7/19/2017 01:03:45 am

Very good pulling together of Scriptures. Would you add the following to your list for consideration since you are deeply committed to Scripture:
a) God's original, pre-fall, creation mandate to both men and women to rule together found in Genesis 1.
b) The repeated affirmation of the Bible that both men and women are made in the image of God - Genesis 1, Genesis 5 and James 3:9 (in which the word translated "men" is from the Greek word anthropos for mankind.) come to mind.
c) The restorative and redemptive work of Christ that means that there is now neither male nor female in Christ (Gal 3:28).

Marjorie

7/21/2017 12:00:27 pm

You have missed out all the women in your summing up. They are there, but you haven't noticed them.

Silje

8/11/2017 03:17:23 am

When I married my husband, I was beyond relieved that HE be the MAN in our marriage, wheras I was the woman. I am told to love, cherish, honor, submit to a man WHOM I LOVE with all my heart. As rebellious as l might be, I don't find that very difficult for most of the time. He on the other hand, is told to LAY DOWN HIS LIFE in loving me, in other words DIE for me, "just as Christ loves his church and laid down His life for her".

I can live fine with that. He's the stronger part in the marriage, therefore also carrying more responsibility.

I wasn't planning on saying that the last away from his dying scene and the first witnesses after his resurrection were women, and Jesus all theoughout his life continued to change the culture around him, treating women as equals when nobody else did. But I said it anyway. You're welcome.

It's nice to know that if our imaginary ship sank, my good husband would be Jack and I'd be Rose. Like any good, Godfearing, Bible true (and not even bragging about it), Holy Spirit guided, sincere man would do. I'd carry his heart with me till my deathbed, and he'd know that he saved the love of his life. He's saving me every day by praying for me and fighting for me in the trials I meet, and I'm doing the same for him because I am his helper, as I am called to be ever since the beginning of time.

Pierre

10/26/2017 08:34:19 am

Paul K
You mentioned Gen 1, but conveniently forget Gen 2, this is the chapter Paul is referring to when he says in 1Tim 2:13 "For Adam was formed, first, then Eve" Clearly pointing to Adam's authority and Eve's submission, furthermore Eve was introduced as Adam's helper, not leader.

All I can say is: Your commitment to scripture seems to kneed improvement.

Jon

8/3/2018 08:58:21 am

Pierre
Paul literally addresses the issue of the man being created first in dealing with the Protocol-Gnostic ideals of the time period. Paul’s acknowledgement of Adam’s primacy in creation would serve to combat the idea of women being superior to them and holding a secret “gnosis.” Also, since you seem to be committed to Scritpure how to you handle “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28) The answer to these seeming contradictions lies in knowledge of the context of the text itself. Failure to acknowledge this in interpretation can lead to bad theology that hurts the very people we want to help. I don’t think the importance on women laced throughout Jesus’ very own actions and teachings allow for a sexist viewpoint of their place in the church elsewhere in Scripture.

Michael Robinson

10/20/2018 09:15:40 am

You are now dealing with sinful man.

All of what you speak of is after the fall.

Gen 1:26 clearly states,he gave them equal authority.

Tim Smith

2/1/2019 04:50:07 am

Jake,

You are right on every single point! Greek and Hebrew Interpetation is great, however you just proved by simple application, and observation that Truth can be discerned exactly through the process you used point by point.

Secondly, yes, researching culture as the author has provides great insight and understanding. However, this process too, can be subject to a false premise as well as a untrue conclusion.

Did God not know that cultures would change drastically over time. Did God not know that there would be attacks against His word by men who use culture as a reason why we cannot conclude the things this author has by basically concluding through his many years of searching the scriptures leaving all layman in the dust without any discourse to disagree to educational lack.

Did God not know, that most would not have scholarly degrees when He authored His word?

Jake, well done, and this short discourse provided more than adequate explanation exactly why women should not teach or preach and be subject to the nurturing of the family which is of no less value but a role that compliments the whole human race and God order!!

Again, Well Done!!

John

5/31/2019 12:02:31 am

Just because someone or something is made for someone, or if said entity glorifies that something or someone, does not infact make the glorified weaker vessel or object theirs.. its not theirs at all. It is certainly not theirs to hold authority over any damn thing with which they glorify. .I take from those lines, that men need women, and can make women need them by using the one thing she dosent have (comparable physical strength) to protect her, usually and rather what I see as rather anticlimactic; protection from the one thing with which she needs the most protection from: the one whom her gloifies her very existence MEN..since it was stated it was not good for man to alone, notice he didnt say the same about women, nor are any other female species of any genome the glory of the males of their species..nope they were all made BEFORE man and in Male/female pairs in their own right, from the dust of earth..except eve, quite unique she is..just because something could be ideally suited for you dosent make it yours...fact is that I read that as; woman dont need a helpmate to get through life, just to create it ( a very small donation to the process)because she is sufficient already, but man cannot bare to be alone, so needed justification for females to rely men for protection from other men for her and HER offspring... in exchange, men gain far more relevancy in paternity and child raising..stop acting like women owe you anything, especially their respect or submission to your (perceived) God annoited greatness...stop stomping your feet in tantrum, acting as if your interpretation is absolute..tell you what prove it, outside of badly interpreted versions of a bunch of books put together in a sequence to afford males every advantage..women have brains just like you and it is CERTAINLY NOT PHYSICAL STRENGTH AND SIZE that has allowed humans to become the powerful dominant species of this beautiful planet..adaptability and thirst for knowledge and learning have propelled us foward, stop trying to take us back..odd that "eve's sin" was eating of the tree of KNOWLEDGE, but of course it was, since knowledge and learning, and loving seem to be the glory of women..her glory certainly isnt man with the way we've acted..

Alex

7/15/2017 03:01:43 pm

Awesome article Paul - truly appreciate your scholarship and study. Thank you for sharing this so generously!

Nathan

7/16/2017 05:51:14 am

Good stuff, brother. I look forward to reading more of your posts. Still wish we'd been able to see you guys during this last Home Assignment... Blessings!

Nathanael Small link

7/17/2017 11:04:04 pm

When I shared this post, my brother (an atheist), quickly posted the following:

"The problem for this reading is that because Paul makes no overt reference within the letter, it requires Timothy understands Paul's intention that these particular verses are to be applied only at a specific time and place in response to a particular problem. You'd expect references within the letter to the specificity of this situation, but there aren't any. You'd expect more, "they're doing this thing, but they should be doing this other thing" or "watch out for this problem". You'd expect Ephesus to be named in conjunction with the problems that are specific to it, but it isn't. There's simply no indication within the letter that the disputed verses are to be treated in any way different from the other rules. If Timothy understands this without it being needed to be mentioned, you might at least expect it to be referenced like, "as we previously discussed", but it isn't. The verses simply exist within other verses which appear no different to it.

Rather, Timothy reads like a set of instructions given to a person who is seeing them for the first time. This is further reinforced by the length of the instructions. Paul covers so many situations of what to do and in such detail that it's impossible to think that these are all problems specific to Ephesus. There's no case to be made why, without any direct evidence from what Paul has written, to single out the verses from the rest, and imagine that these are anything other than general instructions on a wide variety of matter, for what Timothy is to do."

What would you say to that?

Steve G

7/18/2017 07:00:36 am

Paul wrote as a mentor. This letter wasn't part of a planned New Testament to all the churches. He wrote it to Timothy in his context for his eyes only. I don't think Paul wrote his letters thinking "This will be Scripture some day". It wasn't written to a "city church" like so many others, but to his spiritual son, in his context.

Jake

7/18/2017 11:33:24 am

How far are you willing to go with this? The letter wasn't written as planned to make its way into the New Testament? Seeing that the letter is in the New Testament, I think that's a testimony that indeed God planned for this letter to be into the New Testament. What is even more compelling is that this instruction of not allowing women to teach or practice spiritual authority over man is not just found in letters to Timothy.

Pierre

10/26/2017 08:43:41 am

Steve G
Anybody that study the Bible, how the NT got to be the NT, would know that Paul had no illusions about his letters, there was no expectation of privacy, they were going to be shared. Paul wrote this at the end of his ministry, his reputation made his writings popular in the early Church. When asked, "Where did you get this command?" Timothy would say, "I got a letter form Paul"...

Stanley Eisom

12/6/2019 07:14:06 pm

Every scripture in the bible is for christians today there is no personal letters in the bible also the church today is under the new testament the same doctrine that the early church followed is for us today if that was the case Good would have provided us with a book for our time. Paul didn't write that letter for Timothy alone but for churches of all ages

Paul Penley

7/18/2017 07:56:55 am

If you read the first 7 verses in 1 Timothy, you quickly see Paul is writing about specific legends and warped teaching about the Law in Ephesus. Verses 3-4a say, "3 I want you to stay in Ephesus, just as I urged you when I was on my way to Macedonia. Some people there are teaching false doctrines, and you must order them to stop. 4 Tell them to give up those legends." 1 Timothy, like all of Paul's epistles, are letters written to address specific situations. Paul gives many specific instructions in his epistles that had particular relevance to his time, and we should look for the enduring purpose behind them. His instructions grow out of ongoing conversation and relationship. And just like we would not expect someone to describe all the details discussed in previous emails when they send us a new email in an ongoing conversation, we do not expect epistles to have a consistent level of specificity about what was "previously discussed."

Marg Mowczko link

7/17/2017 11:52:35 pm

Love this article, Paul.

I'm delighted to find someone on pretty much the same page as myself regarding 1 Timothy 2:12.

http://margmowczko.com/category/equality-and-gender-issues/1-timothy-212/

Paul

7/18/2017 07:44:44 am

Thanks, Marg

PATRICK SIMASIKU

8/21/2018 01:04:07 am

I love this article may God richly bless you for the good research.

Matt Busby Andrews

7/17/2017 11:57:20 pm

I still think we should take Paul's teaching seriously and greet one another with a kiss.

Would probably do wonders for church growth too.

Phil

7/18/2017 02:48:09 am

"When you put all the pieces above together, Paul is telling Timothy to prohibit women from teaching or practicing a local heresy". But what happens if you don't put those pieces of the puzzle together? What happens if you just put the other more obvious pieces of the puzzle together- that it was a patriarchal society, all Jewish priests were male, Jesus chose 12 male disciples, and Paul was just following suit, reacting especially against some women who were obviously especially out of control.

Steve G

7/18/2017 07:04:00 am

If you don't put all the pieces together you highlight the separation where there is no separation anymore (Galatians 3:28).

7/18/2017 09:29:58 am

Gal 3:28 is about salvation.

Paul Penley

7/18/2017 10:57:44 am

The danger in painting only a patriarchal backdrop for the stage of 1 Timothy is you lose the purpose and particular meaning of so many parts of the epistle. If you read the first 7 verses in 1 Timothy, you quickly see Paul is writing about specific legends and warped teaching about the Law in Ephesus. Verses 3-4a say, "3 I want you to stay in Ephesus, just as I urged you when I was on my way to Macedonia. Some people there are teaching false doctrines, and you must order them to stop. 4 Tell them to give up those legends." Paul's corrections to that false teaching throughout the epistle to Timothy (such as Jesus is the only true mediator of knowledge & salvation) aren't defending or challenging patriarchal social structures in the church but focused on stopping spiritually confused teaching and practice.

Jiminy

8/26/2020 10:21:50 pm

What a horrible, weakly argued case yet condescending. Your proud knowledge of a few Greek words make me puke. I speak 3 languages and I never try to put the meaning of a paragraph on the head of a word. Language doesn’t work like math where your explanation of one word changes an entire philosophy. That’s just infantile reasoning. I’m sorry! Yes, there was heretical teaching in Ephesus. We got it! It is poor logic to exclude the probability that Paul's admonition on women went beyond the local problem of heresy. If we're talking linguistics you should consider Paul's generous explanatory stile, when he was trying to explain something rather difficult to grasp he'd go on an on with similes and restating of the same idea in various ways. Not in this though. Why? "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says." 1 Corinthians 14:34. If there was the tiniest possibility of people misunderstanding that he was somehow only referring to the Ephesian women who alone were prone to being deceived and whose braids were out of control, Paul would have made that clarification as he always did with other points. His referencing The Law, and the order of creation makes it abundantly clear that he is not talking about an isolated group of women. It's very simple and you don't need a long article: you don't like what the Bible says because you are still rebellious and the word of God is not precious to you as Psalm 119 says, you have a problem with it. So you take us on a long winded, twisted journey on how the Greek word and the verb and Josephus and so on, to arrive at the conclusion that I can not trust what I read in the Bible. Like I need you to tell me what parakalo means. I’ve read volumes of foreign authors and I do trust I understood exactly what they meant. That's it. We get it. Woman wants to dominate man, it's in Genesis 3:16 which also clearly states that man will rule over woman. And so the tricks will never stop from the rebellious, trying to convince society to support ideas that are neither God ordained nor natural. How do you get equality from Genesis 1:26-28? Humans are to subdue the earth. Does that mean all humans have the same position and function? Government is to rule a country. Does that make a minister equal to the prime minister? Wow. Equality is as flawed a concept as communism. A drop of sense cannot but make one perceive that nothing is equal in the universe. Oil will always be above water, and you can drop a petition of protest on that, - you might as well. Would you like a soldier that defends your life to have the sensitivity of a feeble natured but mentally brilliant scientist? Yes, your senseless equalitarian philosophy will send the weak on the front and put the awkward talentless on the performing stage to prove your theory and lust for dominance. All the Church fathers supported Paul's admonition. It wasn't just Paul and he didn't say it because he was a chauvinist either, as some spoiled undiscerning critics have accused him of being. The Church fathers said it for the good of the entire humanity. I've seen continuous evidence of suffering and decadence proportionately following each growing step in the so called emancipation of women, a most aberrant concept. As if Lord Jesus’s provision for women to be loved as He loved the Church is not enough. What God provides is abundantly sufficient for the believer. For the non-believer however, what place one occupies on the ladder is more important (Mathew 20:26). The number of lonely, desperate and miserable women today is bigger than ever. Children lack proper upbringing because of dysfunctionality in the family leading to ever heightened levels of corruption of human society. You have your agenda and you have to be in churches to deceive to keep destroying the world. We also have a duty to reject your attempt to twist the good and true Word of God.

Cathy

7/18/2017 07:03:16 am

I do agree with this arcticle, but I have always had issues with married women pastors. First of all, know that I have taught Bible in church for more than twenty-five years. I love it. However, my husband posed this question one time that I have always pondered. As far as women who are married being pastors, "If her husband is the head of her house, than how can she be the head of him as head of the church?"

Marg link

7/18/2017 07:09:50 am

The Bible doesn't actually say the husband is the head of the *house* in either the Old or New Testaments.

Also, the range of meanings for the Greek word "head" in Paul's day is not the same as the range of meanings for the Enlish word "head in our day.

Sean

7/18/2017 01:48:12 pm

There is the scripture that says a wife should be submitted to her husband in all things...Eph 5:22 - 24 so I have always wondered about how this would be possible also we read as Christ is the head of the church so the husband is the head of his wife. This would put the Husband out of order if he is to submit to his wife as the head of the church...

Virginia

7/19/2017 12:28:52 am

Christ is the Head of the Church, not any man--or any woman.

Woman is not trying to be head of man, but to employ the gifts God has put into her heart and her hands. God promised to pour out His Spirit on men *and* women!--and what will that Spirit gifting look like?

We're told in Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12, and Ephesians 4. The gifts of the Spirit are not gender specific.

Lordship or "headship" is not appropriate in the fellowship of the church. But service, but love. But ministry.

Kristina

9/1/2018 08:32:44 pm

I think that the authority of pastor is part of the misunderstanding. Pastors are not the “authority” in the church as I understand it. Jesus our Chief Shepherd is, and He is also the Word. Pastors are a function of the elder position. They are simply shepherds who care for and feed the flock. There is a plurality of “leadership” in the NT church and the authority of pastor only goes so far as the authority of the Word of God they teach. So I don’t think there is an authority conflict between the two because the the authority is the Word, Jesus, and pastors themselves be they male or female must submit to that authority. So a woman submitting to Christ, the Head of the church as a pastor/ teacher would also be submitting to her husband in a like manner. This is my understanding of it, but be a Berean, and search the Scriptures for yourself.

Pierre

8/31/2020 05:39:53 am

You have hit it on the nail, your husband is the leader of the household, "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church;..." Eph 5:23
"But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." 1Cor 11:3

You can't have it both ways. Either the man is the leader or the woman. Since God made it clear from creation (1Tim 2:13) that the man is the leader. And from the fall we can observe the consequences of the reversal of roles (1Tim 2:14)

In fact, female leadership in Church has been around long enough for an evaluation of its impact on the Church.

History is now formal, female leadership, "eventually" leads to immorality being tolerated...

Ivy

7/18/2017 07:54:52 am

I want to thank you for the indepth study of these scriptures which help me understands the truth behind them. For as long as I am Christian, I dislike Paul for how he spoke about how people should follow his examples, implied the benefits for monks & nuns to live celebrated lives which to me is against human nature. Sadly early churches adopted that to be the golden rule to fatten their organization for growth to this date. Hence, centuries of secret sexual misconducts, abortions etc. in church histories. I hope your article will help to open up the doors for more devoted women to be recognized & value in churches around the world that are so culturally & legalistically blinded by rules created by men & for their benefits alone.

Ambrose

7/18/2017 09:56:00 am

As Christians, we are to follow all of the Bible. I would earnestly ask you to reconsider 'disliking' parts of the Bible to the point of ignoring them in a similar way to how I'd discourage people from ignoring the part where Paul says that if you can't control your passions, you should marry.

David

7/24/2017 07:43:29 am

As Christians we're to follow Jesus, the Bible is a tool for this end.

Ambrose Liu

7/25/2017 09:54:34 pm

David, for some reason, I cannot reply to you on this blog. I'm not sure if you're post was to add on to my comment about following the Bible, or to speak against it, but if it is the latter (and it does seem that way (sorry if I'm wrong)), we are to follow the Bible as Christ commands us to follow God's Word. It's not just a tool, but rather is living and active. We, as Christians follow Jesus and the Bible. Too often now, people follow who they want Jesus to be and ignore the parts of the Bible they don't like. To do so is to not follow Jesus.

8/18/2018 07:12:33 pm

All of the bible?? So we should not eat pork or cut our hair?? We are not under old testement law.christ changed that.

Ambrose Liu

8/18/2018 11:03:51 pm

Yes, we are to obey all of the Bible. When one reads the whole Bible, we understand that the Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel then, not all Christians now. For example, on your pork comment, read Romans 14. You are correct that Christ changed the fact that we as gentile Christians are no longer (or were ever) under Old Testament law, but that's doesn't mean we are not to obey the whole Bible.

Ambrose

7/18/2017 09:28:41 am

I do not doubt you are a smart man, but I find it hard to believe one exegetically looks at the whole of the Bible and can still think that, because there is a possibility Paul was talking to Timothy about a specific problem and not generally, even though it seems he is talking generally, it's okay to permit it. How many people have used a similar argument for so-called gay marriage?

I, like you, understand that we do need to take context into account, but that is not an excuse to make the Bible say what we want it to say just because culture nowadays is different. The whole of the Bible shows that men and women have different roles in a way that would disagree with your view.

Also, to clarify, this does not mean women cannot serve in ministry, but because of God's design, the apostle Paul does outline roles that are specifically for men.

Chris

7/18/2017 10:58:18 am

Thank you, Ambrose, I totally agree. Scripture is never redefined just because culture changes. The very basis of scripture is Jesus Christ Himself (John 1:1-2) and scripture confirms in Hebrews 13:8 that Jesus Christ doesn't change. So, because Jesus Christ, who is our Word, doesn't change then scripture doesn't change. You can't just say that, "Well, we don't greet each other with a holy kiss so we can reinterpret the Church authority" in accordance with our culture today is ridiculous.

Stanley Eisom

12/6/2019 07:30:51 pm

You are 100 percent right. We must line up with the word, word for word some of the comments on this forum are mind blowing and dangerous, but if you let God's word be a lamp unto feet and a light unto your path you can't go wrong.

Paul Penley

7/18/2017 11:17:03 am

You are right to look out for contemporary cultural eisegesis. However, the interpretation above does not take "culture nowadays" and read it back into the text to change the meaning; rather the historical and philological research above allows us to read the text in its culture so we can grasp the meaning Paul intended.

Ambrose

7/21/2017 02:35:58 pm

I will agree that the interpretation above does not directly take "culture nowadays" and read it back to the text, but I do wonder why you have come to argue this if not for this. I do not see a time in your writing where the Bible permits women to teach or lead men in a church setting. You do make some large jumps to explaining that Paul did not mean what he seems he said, but even if this passage does not say women cannot lead or teach men in a church setting, that does not mean they are allowed to either, especially if you take into account the rest of the Bible.

Additionally, the reason why 1 Timothy 2:12 is taken to be a general command, and not something to be taken into cultural context as some of the previous passages are, is because of what follows in 1 Timothy 2:13-14, which is not, as you think just in response to a local heresy about women being superior, though I agree with you in that it does not mean that men are better either. It merely points to God's design for us when he made man, then woman as "a helper fit for him". Though these roles are primarily manifested in marriage, it does also carry over to the church.

Also, your conclusion that Priscilla, Phoebe, and Junia led and taught in the church are very concerning as one who claims to look to the Bible for truth and can lead me to understand how you can make some of the jumps in deduction that you do. The closest verse we have to supporting this as far as I know is found in Acts 18:26 where it says "He (Apollos) began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.", which is a situation where she is with a man, and explaining God's way privately, not in a large-group-church setting. Though they may have had prominent roles in the church, this is very different than being an elders or preachers to men.

To clarify, I do not look down upon you for this article as we are all messed up sinners, with a vastly inferior knowledge to our omniscient God, in seek of the truth and there are many things that I do not understand. But this is something I see as quite clear in the Word and I just wish for you, as a fellow believer, to see truth in the Word and to not deceive yourself and others.

Sean

7/18/2017 01:50:39 pm

I agree this is not the only scripture in the whole of the Bible that leads to this ideological/theological idea. From Genesis to Revelations you would then have to dismiss bit only this scripture but much of it in order to apply this type of logic.

Gsg

7/18/2017 10:07:52 am

Good article. Can we put this together with eph 5 with proper exegesis conclude that God did prescribe structure to the church as he did families and that women who are gifted teachers can teach but under the authority of the elders who are men. Eph 5 gives those roles in marriage and I have to think that is the comparison of church leadership that paul gives (eph 5:25-27)

Tozer

7/18/2017 11:29:43 am

That's a lot of speculation and hoops to jump through to get the text to say what you want it to, not to mention the plethora of other Biblical passages you'd have to ignore to arrive at this conclusion. Occam's razor alone cuts through a lot of this argument.

Paul Penley

7/18/2017 12:42:00 pm

I would encourage you to read all of 1 Timothy two times in a row in one sitting. You will notice that Paul's main message is to stop and correct false doctrines in Ephesus. So the reader knows Paul is not delivering general instructions to anyone but particular corrections to bad teaching in Ephesus. As 1 Timothy 1:3-4 say at the very beginning, "I want you to stay in Ephesus, just as I urged you when I was on my way to Macedonia. Some people there are teaching false doctrines, and you must order them to stop. Tell them to give up those legends." Understanding those false doctrines and legends does not "get the text to say what you want it to," but rather points you to what it really means and the purpose behind Paul's instructions.

FYI, Occam's razor is only helpful if both the simple and complex explanations for a matter are equally viable. If a more complex explanation accounts better for all available data (in the literary and historical context for our purposes), then the complex one is to be preferred above the simpler one that doesn't handle all the data well.

Jake

7/18/2017 11:36:54 am

"I have taught biblical hermeneutics (i.e., how to interpret the meaning of Bible passages correctly) for 15 years because churches have neglected to teach people how to handle the Bible after encouraging them to read it everyday."

This is what scares me the most in this article.

Tim Smith

2/1/2019 05:01:31 am

Jake again, I appreciate your biblical view , exegesis , hermanuetic understanding and application far superior to the author, which uses a high minded approach disarming the reader leaving them subject to no reply due to the over reaching use of the greek language which is good, however can be used to disarm any dialogue muchless logical disagreement.

Good job..

Jake

7/18/2017 12:38:19 pm

Honestly Paul, I have never seen someone so dependant on sources outside of the Bible to understand a verse within the Bible. This interpretation of yours can only be accepted if we utilize outside Biblical sources. Don't you see the danger in that? I almost want to encourage you to write an article on the sufficiency of Scripture but then I am afraid you will just deceive more people.

Paul Penley

7/18/2017 04:12:49 pm

I deeply appreciate your shared love for the Bible. It is important to remember that the English translations we use to study and preach were created by scholars who translated ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts using knowledge about word meanings and idioms from non-biblical sources. No one's understanding of Scripture is not filtered or independent of insights from non-canonical sources. I likewise use all available historical and literary evidence to grasp the meaning of Scripture because I value its message so greatly not because I'm trying to circumvent it.

Fatima

5/24/2018 08:40:19 am

I have been following your comments. You are accusing this gentleman of spreading confusion when you are the one doing so. You are very invested in the superiority of men over women and women that’s a demonic doctrine too. That is the thought process he’ll has put in men’s hearts and is the reason why there is domestic violence and sexual abuse in churches today.

Tim Smith

2/1/2019 05:05:07 am

Again, Jake you are the voice of scripture rightly applied and divided.

Paul is a misguided leader and is actually a voice of opposition to the clear teaching of the bible.

He appears to be high minded and void of seeking the voice of God doing exactly as you say, a danger to the sheep leading them to tainted pastures.

Paul , needs to stop teaching. He is a danger to the simple truth even the simple milk of Gods word!!

Jim

7/18/2017 01:13:48 pm

Paul,

You're in danger of being cut off for leading the children that Christ died for astray. If the wrath of God will be poured out on those who did not accept Him, how much more those who led them into sin? Take it up with the Judge, my hands will not be guilty of your blood (Ezekiel 3:18). You've been warned and are now accountable. To whom much has been given much more will be demanded of them. You're 15 years of Bible study has proven that you are led by human wisdom and not the wisdom from the Spirit.

Jim

7/18/2017 01:38:28 pm

The reason I say you lead people away from God is because this doctrine has clearly led to the break up of and corruption of the family unit not to mention what it has done to the church. Feminism is a lie from hell and we ought not abide by satans so called "deep secrets" but rather adhere to the Word of God alone. If one were led by the Spirit, they would see this for what it is. But when the blind lead the blind both fall into a pit.

Ambrose

7/21/2017 01:49:38 pm

Hi Jim,

Though I would agree with you in disagreeing with Paul Penley in this issue, I would not say that such teaching in and of itself would separate him from God's saving work in his life as long as he has come to true repentance and has put his faith in Christ. Romans 10:9 says that "because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." That alone is what saves us, not our works, and not our teaching (unless it's completely against the Gospel). That being said, elders (and one could say teachers of the Word) are held to higher accountability, and that is something he may be subjecting himself to.

And though many parts of feminism are against what the Bible teaches, I would be careful of saying the whole thing is a "lie from hell". Feminism fights for equality between men and women, and that is something Christians should be fighting for as well as we are both made in the image of God. The big issue is when feminism fights for sameness (and the right to murder their babies), which is not what the Bible (and science) teach us.

Ambrose

Flo

4/6/2018 06:22:23 am

Jim, wow... You start your message with a condemnation and then followed it up with an explanation of the condemnation.
Can't you see how very ungodly that is?

Then, you stated that "feminism is a lie from hell" which clearly showed that you have shallow knowledge about it? Do you know that feminism has many "waves", and its beginning was actually very "heavenly"? Or you would rather women remain unable to vote?

Then, you stated that we should "rather adhere to the word of God alone". Hmm... Isn't the author got these verses FROM the Bible? But when the Bible mentioned Paul wrote "As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine,"
don't you think we need to WHAT DIFFERENT DOCTRINE that he meant?

Since there's no explanation about it in the letter/Bible, how then do you propose we find out about it?

Jim, with much love, I strongly encourage you to notice and remove the beam in your eye first before trying to remove the speck in your brother's eye.

God bless you.

fatima

5/24/2018 08:47:07 am

You know what’s another lie from hell? That men are superior to women. This is why women suffer the inequality we have today. We didn’t ask for feminism, we asked for equality and respect. Not to be raped or sold or married off. To able to support our children when the “great” men run off. Jesus defended women, you were told to protect us as weaker vessel. You haven’t done your job, so we have to do it ourselves. Families are not broken Bc of feminism or women they are broken Bc of men not doing their jobs.

Lorena Wood

7/18/2017 08:12:39 pm

Fabulous background and even though I have read other works on this passage you brought out some deeper history of Artemis and even more details. Thank you for your hard work and sharing it with us. This will be a piece I keep and refer others too as well as return to myself. I get most of my helps from this blog http://margmowczko.com/goodbye-new-life/ and love the deep hermenutical accuracy and study.

Vee

7/19/2017 06:42:49 pm

Hi Dr. Paul T. Penley! Thank you for your article. I have found it to be very helpful and insightful and onto what I have always, personally believed! We have dozens of women who leads our churches here in Japan as Pastors, Teachers (some who are excellent teachers). Your article is a huge encouragement to them. Anyway, what an excellent exegesis! This needs to go out to more church folks around the world.

Paul Penley

7/19/2017 08:12:10 pm

Vee -
I really appreciate your feedback. The most meaningful moments in the past few days have been receiving personal notes from women who have struggled for years with a Bible that tells them not to speak in mixed gender church settings. It is an honor to see how a better understanding of first Timothy can bring renewed freedom and dignity two women around the world.

Dennis Gurr

7/20/2017 07:46:37 pm

Excellent article and 220 approx verses in the Bible are written by woman - 'all scripture is God breathed and useful for...teaching..'

Paul K link

7/21/2017 05:21:08 am

That's a fascinating insight. Can you provide more details, Dennis.

Ambrose Liu

7/21/2017 01:34:15 pm

As the authorship of some of the books of the Bible are unknown (especially Hebrews), some people make conjectures as to the authors. Some people have attributed authorship to women in some of these cases, though really, it's an educated guess and not fact as Dennis seems to be trying to communicate.

Eifion

7/21/2017 06:07:00 am

Thank you all for a sensible discussion- read the article carefully- currently a lot of discussion in Welsh on Facebook about this article! Don't agree with the conclusion but appreciate the tone of the discussion- always found this helpful to get a balanced view of the relevant texts and both sides of the debate... https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1581348061/ref=mp_s_a_1_1/132-8214051-2386822?ie=UTF8&qid=1500641936&sr=1-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&dpPl=1&dpID=51gV5M63PuL&ref=plSrch

Amy U

2/15/2019 09:50:29 pm

It seemed pretty antagonistic and prideful to me in some places, though not at all on the author's part.

steve simpson

7/23/2017 01:44:43 pm

Paul,
Your article (and especially the respectful back and forth dialogue in the comments) takes me back to the days of my formal theological training. I am most glad that you are willing to live dangerously in the evangelical world and help each or us from getting too stuck in the comfort of our own thoughts. Thank you for that. I do believe Christ enjoys it when we press in with our best thinking, for His glory.

Tim Smith

2/1/2019 05:10:39 am

Steve, my friend,

I disagree and He does not enjoy it when the bible declares and commands loudly, Let not all desire to be teachers for the standard is great, and for that reason judgment is much stricter.

A better reply to Paul would be to cease from teaching because your error as Steve states may help you improve, however, Steve failed to say you must improve at your own expense fully and never at anothers expense which you are doing writing your these articles without the leading of the Lord.

Wells without Water, Clouds without rain, speaking high minded things puffed up, and conceited in your own mind leading many astray!!

Its a rebuke , certainly never an accommodation or empty reward as Steve, who who has chosen to be a partaker of your astraying teachings.

Dani

5/6/2019 03:45:41 am

Pot calling the kettle black

Dan link

7/25/2017 08:50:19 pm

Great article Paul!
Ironically, I just preached on this text this past Sunday. I was not aware of your article until today but was happy to see we both took the same approach. Funny how those who insist that these verses require women to be silent during worship don't also insist that these verses require women NOT to wear braided hair, gold, pearls or expensive clothes during worship. Why is that?
I relied heavily on the 40 year ministry in the Middle East of Dr. Kenneth Bailey and his book "Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes". Are you familiar with it?

Ambrose Liu

7/25/2017 10:07:48 pm

I can help you with the "Why is that?" question.
1) "Should"/"want" is quite different from "I do not permit"/"I do not allow"
2) "For" verse 13
3) The rest of the Bible talks about the roles of men and women in a way that supports a more literal understanding of this passage. It does not speak in the same way of braided hair/gold /pearls/costly attire, though it does speak of modesty, humility, and storing up treasures in heaven rather than on earth.

Dan link

7/26/2017 05:53:57 am

Ambrose, thank you. That's a really helpful clarification. If I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that when the verb which the Greeks knew as "boúlomai" (usually translated as "I want" or "I desire") appears in a verse it means something along the lines of, "I want this to happen, but it's okay if it doesn't", or, "I desire this to happen, but this is just a suggestion on my part,", or, "I would like to see this happen but you can take it, or leave it"?

Ambrose Liu

7/26/2017 07:22:14 am

Hi Dan, for some reason, I can't reply directly to you on this site, so I'm 'replying to myself'.

I wouldn't put those other words in as Paul didn't say them, but boúlomai seems to mean I want or I desire. In 1 Timothy 2:8, Paul said he desires that men should pray... This is something that could be seen literally as almost a command or a desire. Then, in 1 Timothy 5:14, he says he wants younger widows to get married and have children..., which I don't see as being a command. Want or desire seems to mean similarly to the way we use it. It can be like saying to a child "I want you to behave." or "I want you to have a high paying job." The first could be seen as an indirect command whereas the second is more of a goal that one desires for them. Either way, literally, they are just wants. We need context to know whether they are seen more as a command or not.

Elisabeth Anggia link

10/13/2017 05:04:09 am

Hi Paul,

Thank you so much for making it crystal clear, i have been questioning about this for few day. I'm asking your permission to link back to this article, for i will use it, as a source in my article on Bahasa.

Rick

10/22/2017 05:23:59 am

God. Talk about missing the point. If scripture is the Word Of God, what does all of this conjecture mean? 2000 years later and y'all still arguing about this? LMAO - God isn't a very good communicator is he... let's not start on the Trinity.
All of this only makes sense if every "scripture" originates solely with men.

Nat

12/5/2017 03:54:13 pm

The bible is a trap for those who don't have the Holy Spirit (who witnesses for the Scripture). For those who have the Holy Spirit, it's very clear. The bible is a book for the living, not for the dead.

Dani

5/6/2019 03:49:16 am

That view only holds if you dismiss everyone (or denomination) who holds a different view to you as lacking the holy spirit

George

12/11/2017 04:06:56 pm

You did a very job good at this. I have written a book on this issue about women which also includes info about the four daughters of Philip who prophesied.

Joe

12/28/2017 10:12:46 am

The last paragraph does not sum up your argument well in fact it proves you wrong and the fact that you made your closing argument with a false summation we should disregard the body of it You stated: "we would assume they would be allowed to teach and lead the church just like Priscilla, Phoebe, Junia, and many women were doing at other churches Paul oversaw" there is ZERO records that those women taught MEN. furthermore, you threw in unnamed "many women" when the first 3 didn't teach men... they were under men not overseers themselves. And the other point you accidentally make as that those women were overseen by Paul. You did forget that they should be overseen by their husbands. In today's apostate churches led by women they don't have men overseeing them. They are the leaders. They may have a board of elders or whatever they want to call them but She is the leader. She is not being the "help mate" and in today's society we think that God changed and he didn't. There is a hierarchy. Each of us have an important role in the church of God and He chooses that role, not how important we think we are or our feelings or equality. We are NOT equal. And the next thing that people hang their hat on is that "a woman must lead when a man won't stand up" and that can be true, but today's church and society breeds weak Christian men. I don't buy that a man couldn't be found in today's church and if he one can't be found the church needs to be disbanded and join a church where men are taught to LEAD. and women are taught to be HELP MATES. We are to be equiping the Saints and today's churches are building membership in their building and building up their building funds not Equiping and Sending.... the weak Christian church wants entertainment and multi screens and ear tickling messages that just get us comfortable in our DEATH. I know how unpoliitically correct my words are. but i don't get to make stuff up and God wrote it down from the beginning and even though our society is being more and more deprived and ungodly it doesn't mean God changed. Order is important to God. That's why he made order. It's only us that for 1000s of years have been out of order and trying to get out of Gods will and do our will and this is where we are today. Sick a deprived trying to prove that the women today being so enlightened now can teach men and be overseers of the Church. It only proves how unenlightened we've become where culturanity overrides Gods order.

Paul Penley

1/13/2018 08:20:53 am

Joe - I appreciate your passion for truth and your concern that cultural pressure can distort our interpretation of Scripture. If you read the entire historical, literary, and linguistic analysis in the 10 points of the article above, you will see that I share your passion for understanding the Bible based on the evidence, and not preconceived opinions. The careful exegesis of 1 Timothy 2:12 and the ultimate conclusion about its meaning in context is not driven by an assumption that “women today being so enlightened now can teach men and be overseers of the Church.” It is an analysis of why the women in first-century Ephesus were told not to teach. Paul’s instructions to Timothy for women don’t reconcile with the church leadership roles women were playing at other churches. That’s why I mentioned the female apostle, Junia, associated with the church in Rome in my conclusion. Women at the church in Corinth were teaching the entire congregation, both men and women, with prophetic words from the Lord (see 1 Corinthians 11:5). It was rare in most churches due to the patriarchal culture of Paul’s time, but that’s why we must do our exegesis carefully to make ancient patriarchal culture and contemporary patriarchal Christian culture does not blind us from the point Paul makes in 1 Timothy. He wants people to teach the truth, and if they are teaching a lie, then he wants them to stop. That is the order God wants in the church.

Dan

7/26/2020 09:29:50 pm

This reply is false. Nowhere does the biblical texts say that Junia taught. The word apostle is taken out of context and it is not unambiguous as to whether Junia was male or female.

Dani

5/6/2019 03:54:58 am

Very funny. Rather than say, so cutely capitalised, we are not equal, why not say directly 'men are superior to women'? Or 'I am superior to any woman, and will not allow myself to learn anything from a creature with a vagina?'

George gates

12/28/2017 10:50:48 am

Joe I am curious as to hear what Paul’s response would be to your post

Ambrose

12/28/2017 03:53:24 pm

Me too, though I hope you don't mean that women and men are not equal in value. I'd agree that women and men are not the same and have different roles but Genesis 1:27 and Galatians 3:28 would show we are both equal before God. As redeemed men and women, are both created, sinners, saved, and called to serve, just not in the same way. We should never see our sisters as less valuable.

Sandy

3/6/2018 03:41:12 am

Thank you for this article. It makes so much sense. I believe God gifts women and men with gifts of leadership and teaching (as well as other gifts) and it makes no sense to relegate women to teaching only the most impressionable, (children), rather than men who could more easily discern truth from error.
Also, it is my understanding that where Paul talks about "head" the word used can be "source" as in 1Corinthians 11. In Ephesians men are not the head of the house, as is frequently taught but head of the wife. And aren't we to submit to one another? Should we also endorse slavery, from Ephesians 6? I think not. (And please don't say it refers to "employers and employees" )
Thank you, Paul, you have given Christian women a glimmer of hope.

Tony Fluerty link

4/26/2018 06:17:54 pm

"The question at hand in 1 Timothy is "who" brings divine knowledge of the truth and salvation to people. The Ephesians were buying into a pagan belief that women were special mediators of that truth and salvation to men."

I think it also might be useful to understand Ephesus was the home of the cult of Dianna in which the woman exercised authority over the men as priestesses.
It would not be unreasonable to think that possibly a number of woman who came out of that cult tried to keep that position of authority over the men and exercise that authority in the Church.
I think the question is one of ecclesiastical authority.
A woman can be a teacher if she does not teach that its ok to have authority over men, how ever as a pastor who has to have authority over both male and female is not a legitimate position for a woman.

taken to its extreme a mother cannot discipline her sons over 14, that would put alot of Christian house holds in danger when the only parent a boy has is his mother.

Sarah

6/1/2018 08:34:33 pm

Hi Paul,
I've recently been doing an extensive study on 1 Tim 2 due to my church repeatedly telling me that I cannot teach an Adult Sunday School, Teen Sunday School, or lead a Bible Study because of what Paul writes in this chapter. It's been a personal and spiritual struggle for me because I have so much that I want to share with the teens of my church but am shot down at every angle. After this last cycle of being told no of wanting to lead a single teen Sunday School, while the leaders are on vacation; it has urged me to return to my scholastic roots and write an exegesis. Yet I'm afraid that, this act might show them that I'm too proud of my knowledge, or trying to show 'authority' over them (as you mention in part 5).
I want to use Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 as encouragement that I'm being called to teach and to guide.
Overall great article, loved the information and even if I don't fully write my exegesis up, I'll tuck in the information away for a future date.

Paul

6/18/2018 04:10:51 pm

Sarah -
I’m so sorry that you personally have to be excluded and unable to use and develop your gifts for ministry. I spent years reading Ancient Greek texts, studying archaeological remains in Ephesus, and developing a contextually informed hermeneutic so that churches like yours could realize the difference between enduring principles and situational advice. I do hope your church leaders find a more precise understanding of the dynamics in Paul’s letters that address ancient issues so that you can be set free to teach what you may be gifted and prepared to share. Sound Exegesis matters so much!

Rick

6/1/2018 10:23:02 pm

Wow, this whole discussion is so sad and should serve to pique your cognitive dissonance and wake some of you believers up.
The Holy Spirit doesn’t exist - it’s all in your head. This is evidenced by the indisputable historical record that Christians cannot agree on the basic tenants of their faith such as the trinity etc, from denouncing each other as heretics all the way to conducting murderous wars. Disagreeing Christians today call each other wolves and goats and false prophets and deceived and lukewarm and blind... all part of God’s plan no doubt. When you point this out to Christians the sadly predictable response comes that the devil deceives some people as in the parable of the sower, and god always has a remnant of true believers. Amusingly, everyone thinks that their group is the remnant.
A person’s religious beliefs are almost wholly determined by which country they are born in and what their parents believe. Yet you think that you have come to believe in the one true religion because god almighty chose you. Lucky you. And out of all the doctrinal positions held by Christians over the centuries, you think the Holy Spirit has led you to the true version of Christianity. Spend a few minutes looking up logical fallacies and confirmation bias fallacies, please!
Another indisputable historical fact is that men have used religion to control weaker people for Millenia. And yet here, in 2018, we have a grown woman who can’t teach adults because the church says no on account of her gender, they cite an “inspired” Holy book, specifically a epistle that is widely agreed by NT scholars was not written by Paul, as their authority. (Conveniently cherry picking misogynistic texts is Churchman 101)
The unbelievable arrogance of these pathetic sociopaths who say they know the will of god, that they speak with the authority of the creator of all things, that their gender entitles them to a superior position of authority... it’s just disgusting. There is no make or female in Christ, except where they say there is.
To all you “true Christians” the elect, the remnant of god - (everyone wants to be special). Enjoy your live action role play, being god’s special agents and receiving direct and internal messages from the almighty but please - stop bullying others, especially women, with your grandiose delusional pronouncements on the will of god.

Ambrose

6/14/2018 11:29:09 am

Rick, I’m sorry you feel this way, but let’s go through some of your points.

You say the Holy Spirit cannot exist because Christians cannot agree on basic tenants of the faith. First of all, one must understand that not all who call themselves Christian are Christians. Those who do not believe “the basic tenants of the faith” are not Christian. Just to clarify, the topic in this post is not about one of “the basic tenants of the faith” but, though it is important, it is a secondary issue. If someone calls themselves a vegan but says it’s okay to eat meat, does one say vegans cannot agree on “the basic tenants of the faith”? No, people say that people who eat meat are not vegans, even if they call themselves that. Every basic tenant of the Christian faith is in the Bible, a book that true Christians hold to be authoritative. There are people who say they got a special revelation from God that goes against the Bible. These people call themselves Christians, critical outsiders see this and see disagreements on “the basic tenants of the faith”, Christians and others who see the whole picture see these people as false teachers.

A person’s religious beliefs are largely, but not wholly determined by their environment. Many raised by Christians don’t end up Christians and many raised by non-Christians end up Christian. There have been quite a few people in what some call “unreached” countries who have dreamed of Jesus and become Christians through that. This being said, the main way we are to expose others to Christianity is to go to other places to tell others about Christ, as this is a message that needs to be shared to everyone. There has been a lot of progress in this area, but we still haven’t covered the whole world yet. We don’t do this to brainwash others, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true way to heaven, and though we can’t force it on anyone, we can at least let everyone know about it and love them so the solution is there for people to take if and when they are ready for it. I’m sure there are lots of further questions from this and feel free to ask them, but one of the main clarifications is that God is so much wiser than we are. There are explanations for many things, but as with any religion and science, there are things we don’t understand because of our limited minds and the limited resources available to us. That being said, God has given us enough to work with. The fact is that there is absolute truth (you may disagree but that’s a fact). Either Christianity is true or it’s not, there’s no in between. I’ve looked at many religions (including atheism) and Christianity empirically by far makes the most sense to give truth.

I agree with you that people have used religions, including what they’d call Christianity, to manipulate others (whether the people who were abused by this are “weaker” or not is subjective). On the topic of this article, it all comes down to whether or not you believe all of Bible to speak truth or not (not “cherry picking” as you say). This is why the easiest way to find Christian truth is to look at the Bible so it’s not dependant on what others claim to be truth. It is objectively by far the most reliable ancient document we have. Either way, the topic of this article is secondary to knowing Christ and is not something that you should concern yourself about (it’s for Christians), the main thing to consider is whether you understand that God is God, that we are all sinners deserving of death and eternal separation from God, that Jesus lived a perfect life and came and died to take the punishment for our sin, that He rose again and offers this gift for free to everyone, and that we only need to turn away from our sins (though we’ll do so imperfectly) and believe in Him as Lord to turn away from a path of destruction to one of eternal joy. The only alternative is hell. This is not some scare tactic, it’s the truth. You may not believe it, but this is what the Bible teaches. This is not some light decision to be made and I am praying for you Rick.

Rick

2/1/2019 06:28:37 am

“This is why the easiest way to find Christian truth is to look at the Bible so it’s not dependant on what others claim to be truth.“
Precisely. I am content to debate Christian theists using the subject matter of the bible alone. I often say that ‘everything you need to know about Christianity can be understood by reading the bible.’
Look at Acts. It’s an amalgamation of ancient hero adventures. Shipwrecks, angels freeing them from prison, martyrdom, saints rising from the dead... look at Acts14. The naughty Jews stone Paul to death. Now either these Jews were especially stupid, or Paul was a very good actor. Because even after being dragged outside the city, a veritable corpse, the next day he is up and about walking miles and miles like there was nothing wrong!
The story of the bible is just that - a story. Talking donkeys and snakes. Patriarchal incest, angelic sodomy, god-commanded genocide, infanticide, magic and superstition. This is the creation of human minds.
Turning water into wine, walking on water, withering an olive tree... if Jesus had shown his disciples how to extract penicillin from fungi or said the earth orbits the sun or replies that washing your hands before eating is not just a tradition of men and there’s these things called germs... that may have been proof of the divine. But the tawdry unremarkable “miracles” he does like casting demons into pigs... why didn’t he try and explain that mental illness is a result of nurture and nature most commonly resulting from genetics and chemical imbalances in the brain.
Christians will argue that XYZ in the bible is allegorical. The line retreats further every year towards more allegorical and less literal. The logical conclusion is that christians will soon say, in mainstream belief, that the death and resurrection of Christ is allegorical.
When I grew up the thought of a homosexual couple being married in the church was completely anathema to everything Christianity believed. Now those same denominations openly encourage homosexuals to be ministers, reverends and priests. Because, of course, what the bible says about homosexuality was “in its cultural context... relative to its time and place.”
There is no absolute truth for Christianity. It adapts to the cultural milleu to survive. It always has and it always will.
Women can’t teach? Lol you need to read the scriptures in context my friend.
Thou shalt not kill? Lol abortion is ok friend you need to understand what god really meant.
Homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of god? Lol you need the Holy Spirit to enlighten you friend we are all god’s children.
Christianity stands for everything and for nothing.
There is no Holy Spiritthat is guiding the international child-abusing institution called the church.
The evidence is screaming at you.
Read the bible. That’s all you need to know.

Ron link

8/21/2019 03:09:00 am

Just saying.

9/13/2018 06:05:46 am

Paul,
Paul I Love the article. I will pass it on. Blessings be upon your life......Jo

Heidi

10/22/2018 12:35:35 am

I've been trying to find the correct interpretation of this scripture for a while now. Thank you very much Paul. Looking forward to reading more of your work.

Leah leah

4/21/2019 06:17:42 am

Hi! Can you explain this verses,

1.corinthians 11:7-9

A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

Are not women the glory of God?
AND,
why does Paul have to say here that the woman was created for man? Or man did not come from woman, but woman from man???

Pierre

4/21/2019 12:04:38 pm

Hi, Leah, I would like to attempt an answer to your two questions.

A) First we have to place those verses in context of what Paul is teaching, verse 3 is the basis needed to understand the rest of the passage found in 1Cor 11:4-16. "But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." 1Co 11:3.

One could ask
1) Where does Paul get this hierarchical structure thing
--- Answer: God is hierarchical. He created all thing, and He gave man one command
Gen 2:16-17 The LORD God commanded the man: "You may freely eat from every tree of the garden, but you are not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because you will certainly die during the day that you eat from it." This command demonstrates the hierarchical nature of God. Paul also mentions this in verse 1Cor 11:3 “the head of Christ is God”. In Rom 10:1b “For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Jesus also submits to the Father's authority, Paul mentions this in 1Co 15:27 1Co 15:27 for "God has put everything under his feet." Now when he says, "Everything has been put under him," this clearly excludes the one who put everything under him.

2) The Bible says “the head of the woman is the man”, Why is the woman subject to the man?
--- Answer: The verses you mentioned (8-9) are the answer. To understand we must look at what Paul is referring to: the second chapter of Genesis, that is - the creation of man.

Paul says “neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” in reference to Gen 2:18a “Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone;” His answer to the problem of man “I will make him a helper fit for him.” Gen 2:18b
Paul says “For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;” in reference to: Gen 2:21-22 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.

YOU SAY “Are not women the glory of God?”
Keeping in mind the divine hierarchical structure, there is a success/failure indicator to a successful hierarchical structure: to put it simply, man’s obedience to God, is God’s glory. A woman’s submission to her husband is a man’s Glory. Note that I used two different words “obedience” and “submission” It illustrates a different situation: God is perfect and man is not. God requires obedience, since his commands can’t be called to a higher purpose than Himself. But a man is not perfect, therefore blind obedience is not required, but a submissive attitude is.

I hope this helps you.
---------------------------------------------------
Note: To have a functional hierarchical structure it’s important that all elements of the structure be in submission to it’s authority. A further note: A functional hierarchical structure can be used for evil purposes. This does not make the hierarchical structure bad, it points to undeserving people using it. History points to many leaders that were good, benevolent and desiring prosperity for those they ruled over and others that were driven by power with no regard for those they ruled over.

Leah

4/21/2019 02:44:06 pm

My English isn't very good. therefore I apologize.

thank you for your answer.

what you say is consistent with the bible. But...

I don't understand why God created a hierarchy.

I don't understand why Paul constantly (again and again) writes the creation account. Because, when he made this account in every different verse, he sees women second grade.

Yes. I hate hierarchy, especially between the sexes. But unfortunately God confirms it.

women could swear by the intervention of their fathers and husbands in the old testament.

only the virginity of the woman was important.

While men received a lot of women, the woman had no such right.

concubines were sex slaves.

a lot more things...

I will never approve of this injustice.

God forgive!
Thank you.

Ambrose Liu

4/21/2019 03:16:33 pm

Leah, God created a hierarchy for the same reason God does everything, to glorify Himself. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the Church and wives are to submit to their husbands. Together, husbands and wives can illustrate Christ's relationship to the Church in a way that they could not if they had the same role. When a husband sacrificially loves his wife, he shows the world how Christ loves His Church. When a woman submits to her husband, she shows the Church's relationship with Christ.

WOMEN ARE NOT SECOND GRADE and Paul never said that. Too often, people think that because wives are to submit to husbands that they are inferior to him. Christ submitted to God the Father but that does not make Jesus inferior. Husbands and wives are equal but different.

With a proper understanding of the roles of husbands and wives, hopefully, you won't hate the 'hierarchy'. Husbands are to love their wives and be willing to die for them. Husbands are to provide, protect, and pastor their wives and families. That involves us men putting our wives first, something people forget when they think of wives being commanded to submit.

Regarding the rest of your comments, men with multiple sex partners sinned. That is never allowed in the Bible. Just because it happened in the Bible doesn't mean God condones it. Concubines as sex slaves is also terrible. It's good that you do not approve of this injustice and neither does the God of the Bible. The Bible is clear that men are to have one wife and to not commit adultery.

Pierre

4/23/2019 09:04:19 pm

Thank you for your response. I appreciate a good and respectful conversation, so I’m looking forward to our continued exchange.

It's obvious that you have a problem with hierarchy, and I understand you, hierarchy is difficult to understand (I meant, why can’t we just get along without a boss?), and at the extreme it can be threatening to the point of being deadly

But hierarchy is necessary for an orderly and functional world. And it would be reasonable to expect perfection from the people in position of authority, except for the fact that none of us are perfect and we all live in an imperfect world.

You said "I don't understand why God created a hierarchy", but I showed you that God's nature is hierarchical. It's not Christ that decided to save us, it's God that sent Christ to die on the cross for our sins. Christ obeyed God in all things, including dying like a villain even if he had not disobeyed God like we did. And the third person of the trinity was sent on the behest of both God the Father and God the son.

So you see, God DID NOT create hierarchy, because it exist in Himself.
God having created us in His image, it's therefore reasonable to think we are created as hierarchical beings.*

I assume you understand the concept of sin? As sin entered in the world, God’s hierarchical creation became centered on themselves. It got so bad that Bible says: "And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." (Gen 6:5-6)

This failure of the antediluvian world is proof that man can’t properly function outside of hierarchy. Please note: it had no laws, nor any government.

You may not like hierarchy, your not alone, but after looking on the alternative, one must rally to it, or at least to the type that seems to be the less harmful, I’m speaking here of government.

As far as the rest of your points, they are, as you point out, in the old testament. Christians don’t use the OT as a rule book for living a Christian life. In fact, the NT promotes marriage, and only to one woman. Reading ahead, I see that the Old Testament’s display of polygamy gives you pause. I understand, I also find it disturbing. But I’m reminded of Jesus when his disciple questioned him on divorce, I think His answer would also apply to the OT silence on polygamy. If you read Mat 19:7-9 you will see that Jesus speaks of the “hardness of your hearts” (v.8) This is were the work of salvation comes into focus. The Isrealites received the law, but did not have a renewed hart.

Mat 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

Yes, a woman is asked to submit to her husband,
But the husband’s love for his wife must be modeled after the love of Christ for his Church. In such that He gave his life for her.

I don’t know if your married but in any case I would pray for you to have such a husband.

There is a lot more to say, but I will stop here, and if you have more questions, please replay, I will trie to answer to the best of my abilities.

* God created us in His image and as He is hierarchical, we're also hierarchical, we are beings capable of functioning in hierarchy. But in the couple, this hierarchy is different then the one found in the world. A couple is a more profound unit then a company, a government or other hierarchical institutions. The couple is the only place where hierarchy and equality can coexist. In fact this is the basis for a harpy couple. To put it in simple terms, a husband receives his wife as his equal, but a woman receives her husband as her leader.

Leah

4/21/2019 04:26:47 pm

Can you show me a verse that God forbids polygamy? Or sexual Slaves?

And, can you explain this verses;

2.samuel 12:8
I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your bosom. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.

Ambrose Liu

4/21/2019 04:50:54 pm

First of all, in Eden, where everything is perfect and as God intended, there is one man with one woman. Genesis 2:24 talks of "a man" (singular) holding fast to "his wife" (singular). Mark 10:6-9 refers back to this and talk of how two (not more) become one. Secondly, Deuteronomy 17:17 says: "And he shall not acquire many wives for himself, lest his heart turn away". Thirdly, as you look through the New Testament, you'll see when talking of marriage or qualifications for elders, it's always mentioned one wife.

Regarding sexual slaves, the 10 Commandments telling us not to commit adultery is a pretty clear commandment against any sex outside marriage including sexual slaves.

Regarding 2 Samuel 12:8, it says God gave David Saul's house and his wives. It doesn't mean he delivered them over to be David's wives. We don't actually know what David did with Saul's wife and concubine. This passage is in fact a response to God's prophet admonishing David for murder for the sake of adultery despite already having access to so much.

Leah

4/22/2019 02:25:49 am

I disagree with you.
If polygamy had a sin, God would have said it openly. not indirect.

if polygamy was adultery, its punishment was certain. why did not this punishment be given to a polygamist?
Little example, The king Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
This man who is in constant communication with God, he was not banned. He was not punished for adultery. but when he worshiped another god, the angels came to warn him. if had sin, god could do so for adultery.

Abraham, the friend of god, sleeped with his concubine before he could wait for the promises. Gid never say him, 'You committed adultery sin.' no punishment.

I can give you dozens of examples.

the examples you give may be showing an ideal. But never say polygamy is a sin.

it was also only when adultery was slept with another's wife. There is no verse in which a man is punished when he sleeps with a single woman.
But If a woman did that, she was subjected to a virginity test.

God says again and again many sins, and punished people.You know that when God really sees something as a sin, he clearly explains it.

In the samuel verses, God says openly that he gave the wives to his bosom. you already know that david was polygamist. but he was not punished for it. Only, He was punished for killing a man and taking his wife. David was a man by the heart of God. in fact david made a lot of mistakes about women. Please read in detail. but he was not warned and punished.
And the bible says, David did not commit sin other than Uria.

I'm sorry. You are wrong.

Thank you.

Leah

4/22/2019 02:38:45 am

Also,
The example you provided includes only kings. also, how much is the number when he says a lot wives? he doesn't say a second wife. A lot of wives. according to what? And The reason he didn't want a lot of wives was not to move his heart away from God. (Like solomon)
it is never mentioned in adultery.

As I said, the verses you give may be showing an ideal, but never condemned.

Ambrose Liu

4/22/2019 05:58:15 am

It's not just an ideal, it's clear that when we are told two become one, that is God's plan and to go against God's plan is sin. God did not individually reprimand every person for every sin nor did He individually punish everyone for every sin. We cannot assume what God would do and make inferences about Him based on what we would do. (On a side note, I take the verse about David's sin to be a figure of speech as David committed other sins like mismanaging his own family). There is a reason why Christians are monogamous, because it's clear that it's God's will that we be.

Leah

4/22/2019 09:28:41 am

Thank you for answers.

Your defense only reflects your views. you contradict yourself.

I know the creation account.so I said only an ideal. In fact, I can object to that even.
For example, Even if a husband has 10 wives, they become one-body when he sleeps with his one wife. Then, when he and his second wife sleep together they become one. again. But I do not want to do this. I can't go too far.

I don't care what Christians think.
for me it is important what god thinks. there are Christians too who say polygamy is not a sin.Will I believe you or other Christians? whom do I will believe?
Of course, I take the views of my Christian brothers.I accept when it is consistent.I examine the holy book in detail with prayer.unfortunately, you have done superficial reading.

And,

Are you saying God doesn't judge every sin? Interesting...

you said adultery to polygamy. adulterers are killed in the bible.

why does god missed the polygamy punishment when he was punishment to david's sin ?
Or when god sent an angel for Solomon to worship other gods...

There are a lot of polygamy examples in the holy book. God missed all of them?

God even killed Uzzah who accidentally held the of the box covenant.
even if it is partially true that God cannot judge every sin,
we could see at least a few times that he was punished for such a great sin.

polygamy may not be the plan of God. But he never saw polygamy as a sin and he does not condemned.

Come with clearly bible verses to me. the rest is just your own opinion.

Ambrose Liu

4/22/2019 09:51:08 am

You are correct that the Bible never explicitly mentions polygamy as sin but the Bible has made it clear enough that monogamous relationship is God's plan. No I did not contradict myself, when a husband has more than one wife, then more than two become one. The Bible tells kings and elders to have one wife. The end of Ephesians 5 uses the singular for husband and wife. Just as we are able to understand the doctrine of the Trinity from the whole Bible, not everything in the Bible needs to be explicitly said to be clear. You keep bringing up times when God intervenes but there are many times in scripture that God does not intervene in sin but that does not mean He approves of it. On the other hand, there is no verse that shows God approves of polygamy.

Leah

4/22/2019 10:51:32 am

sin separates us from God.If God does not disclose what he thinks is sin, he cannot blame people. therefore we do not see any judgment about polygamy.

He must have clearly explain such a big and disgusting sin. God judged every sin necessarily in another section.

The verses you provide can be used singular. But, cannot condemn polygamy.

I'm already talking about the whole bible. When you look at the whole book, it supports me. Your give verses are open to interpretation.

I can offer you much more evidence but you will never give up.

if you read the holy book carefully, you will see that it often humiliates women. Of course in some places, it mentions well. But this does not ignore the verses that often humiliates.

it is not god who tells you not to marry polygamy. this only your mind.

you can take more than one woman and dominate them.
you can made they do a virginity test. (your wives and your girls)
She cannot swear to God without your permission.
When you of selfishness jealous , you can take wives and get they a test. (Numbers verses-jealousy law)
You can sell your daughters for money. (God gave all these commandments. Except polygamy)

You can be the head of their wives.
You can shut him up at the church.
You can ban him from teaching you. Etc. Etc.

after all, God created a hierarchy and cursed the women. "he will rule you"

You can do everything I say to you!
God didn't punish anybody for that. he won't give you either!

Leah

4/22/2019 02:33:34 pm

ALSO,

David took back her from new husband to preserve for only his authority.

Leah

4/22/2019 02:38:03 pm

ALSO,

You said, david did not take care of the his family. Yeah. he did not care even his daughter Tamar.

When David fell ill, they were told to sleeping with him concubines. Not wives...

But what matters is for me,
after david leaves with his first wife micah, micah was married to someone else.
When David returns again,David took back her from new husband to preserve for only his authority. new husband cried for Micah. David had already married Abigail.
Micah was one of many wives when David brought him back. He never cared for her.
(Read, Samuel book)

the daughter of a priest had to be burned when she had an sexual affair. we never see that for a son.

and, all the inheritance only men took.only one verse says that the girls receive.Of course only when there is no a son.
You know what, God arranged that's all. Maybe God gives less value to women.
women are just crushed.

God forgive me for being a woman!!!
And, God forgive me for the sins I do here or everywhere !!!!

Brooklyn

5/6/2019 11:13:36 pm

If the idea of a hierarchical order bothers you, do you believe God gives less value to men since men are created beings that God has authority over? And if you believe that God views men as less than him, how do you bring this to terms with the fact that this God thought man worthy enough to give his son for us so that we would have life? Also, how would you believe this God to allow man to bear his image, if he thought of man as a being much lesser than himself?

God is the Supreme being, but the fact that this being loves his creation is what makes his creation of value, not the other way around.

Hierarchical authority is not about those who are lower on the hierarchy being less important, but it's about structure and order. Complaining that Men are the head of the wife is like complaining that the foundation forms the base of the structure of a house - neither one is more important than the other, but for the sake of structural integrity the foundation must be laid at the base, and not the other way around.

Also, I will tackle what was a common practice among many tribes and cultures in that time period. Unlike today where we have the convenience and accuracy of DNA testing, groups in ancient times only had the assured security of their bloodlines to ensure that property was passed down to their offspring.

Virginity testing was a common practice because no one would risk sharing their family's wealth to a child that was not theirs. A woman's ability to remain chaste was important because it displayed that she had no previous lover that she would harbor desire for and have a baby with while married to her husband.

ESTEVES FRANCISCO

5/26/2019 09:33:10 am

CHRISTIANS DON'T LIKE TO HEAR THE TRUTH IT OFENEDS THEM .. WHEN YOU TELL THEM A WOMEN NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE AUTHORITY IN A CHURCH BEHIND THE PULPIT .. NOT THE ROLE OF A WOMEN.

Leah

5/28/2019 11:27:07 am

Brooklyn,

I'm sorry, but you're not talking about what I'm saying.you say different things.unresponsive things.

You just wrote your own logic.There's no point in what you say.

Leah

5/28/2019 11:55:00 am

AND,

There are people who are incapable of understanding what I write.
in fact, they have not any logical answers to my questions.

Little example,

Brooklyn Said,

" Virginity testing was a common practice because no one would risk sharing their family's wealth to a child that was not theirs. A woman's ability to remain chaste was important because it displayed that she had no previous lover that she would harbor desire for and have a baby with while married to her husband."

virginity test was not done to only pregnant women. And, If the chastity of the woman is important, does not matter a man chastity? not according to the holy book.and It doesn't matter in you too.

It is only one sample.I can count a lot more.but no need. you won't understand anyway.

some people don't even read the gospel properly. they only interpret according to their egos. they cannot empathize.

I don't talk to people who lack understanding.therefore do not waste your time to respond.

Leah

5/28/2019 12:19:17 pm

AND AND AND,

injustice against to women and the double standards given to men have nothing to do with the hierarchy.

The hierarchy is another issue that needs to be discussed.

It is very difficult to love a holy book and god, which discriminates against the male sex. But people like you can't understand it.

As I said, don't waste your time writing your answer. I can't have anything in common with those who think like you and with people who don't know properly anything!

Bob

6/28/2019 06:20:47 pm

Leah,
Consider that in John 8, evil men were abusing a woman caught in adultery. While the law said to stone her(and the man adulterer as well), Jesus shows great love and compassion toward her. Also, who was the first person to see Jesus raised from the dead - a woman! That is not an accident. Women have been treated badly by men over the ages, but God has created and elevated them up as equals in value and salvation, but not in roles. Those different roles do not diminish women in any way, but is part of God"s order. Allow me to caution you - from some responses it is clear that you have an axe to grind in that defensiveness and anger are present which clouds your thinking. Let go of that, and the scripture will be much sweeter to you. Blessings!

Emma

10/27/2019 11:48:59 am

Wow, thank you for making this more clear. You really explain it well. This has helped me in my faith.

Van Garrison

3/10/2020 07:37:12 pm

I still love the Bible I was given as a child because Jesus’s words were all printed in red ink. When I read those passages, they showed me what was really important and how I should strive to treat and help others. I had been taught that the OT was not as important to Christians as the NT because Jesus had brought a new law. The Bible was written and translated by human beings with human flaws. What mattered most were the words in red.
I was not surprised that most of the posts critical of Paul’s piece were from men, while posts thanking him were mostly from women. I’m a 65 year old woman who spent way too many years being told by men things I should and should not do, that I was had worth only as a wife. I was lectured about why I shouldn’t want anything out of life beyond being a good wife whose job was to be quiet and submit to my husband. (I never heard what men were supposed to do and or how they should treat their wives and other women.);I was told what I should and should not do or think, why I was less than a man and not deserving of the same opportunities and privileges as men. But I didn’t believe those things because my parents didn’t believe them.
My college had been all male for over a hundred years. Then it began admitting women, fewer than 100 that first year. I have never heard as cruel and unChristian words as those yelled from male dorm windows at young women who had dared to believe they could think as well as men and deserved the same education as men. I’d never known people who believed I was inferior to men just because I was a woman. Many male students hated coeducation. But not as much as they hated the young women whose presence had ruined everything for them.

Ambrose

3/11/2020 07:40:11 am

Van, I am so sorry you had to go through that. Undoubtedly, throughout history, there has been a trend of men asserting authority over, abusing, and putting down women. Thankfully, at least in North America, that seems to be decreasing. Unfortunately, it does seem to be going the other way, especially in churches. An overcorrection is not a correction.

True, I am a male, but my wife believed in complementarianism before we even started our courtship. Why? Because she takes God's Word as authority. Just as it was terrible that in the past, that men may have discredited what you say because you were a woman, one should be careful not discredit what we say because we are men (even though it's not only men that believe this). But even more importantly, one should not discredit the Bible.

Yes, Jesus said things and some Bibles put His words in red; and men wrote the rest. But who inspired those men? God. So the entire Bible is given to us by God, not just the words in red. It's all important. It is also true that the Old Testament represents the Old Convenant, and the New Testament represents the New Covenant, but that doesn't mean that the Old Testament is irrelevant. The Old Testament points us towards Christ and it's amazing how God was able to use all those years to prepare humankind for Christ's arrival. Either way, the verses in question are from the New Testament. The main point is that there is danger in picking and choosing what we believe from the Bible. That is how people end up abusing the Bible, possibly like men have abused you. They pick and choose what they want to believe and disregard the rest that would show the sin (and/or error) in their actions.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a lot of the hurt caused to you has been because of men lying about what the Bible says regarding gender roles. God does give men and women different roles, however, there are some things it does not give. People have misinterpreted or lied about what the Bible says about gender roles, but the response should not be to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The first thing to clear up is that the Bible does not give men authority over every woman. Authority applies to fathers (and mothers) over children, husbands over wives, and elders over their church (and maybe rulers over their people). So other men in your congregation or in your college (or in your life in general) do not have that authority over you.

Secondly, authority does not mean we can boss our wives around. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church. Christ has authority over the church. However, Christ served the church, did not 'boss' his disciples around (as we would often consider bossy), spoke with authority from His Father, and sacrificed His life for us. In a similar way, I as a husband try my best (though often fail) to serve my wife (and child). I do not boss her around, but instead try to split up tasks based on our strengths, and in fact she makes many of the decisions (to the point where she sometimes gets frustrated and asks me to chose). That being said, ultimately, I know that I am responsible so I do need to take responsibility for any decisions that either of us make and need to make sure our lives are reflective of what God's Word commands. And I know that I must put her first (though again, often fail) and must sacrifice of myself for her. Having authority over my wife is made quite simple as I have a very wise and Godly wife who regularly reads the Bible and prays so as we both aim to pursue God and His will (though of course often fall short), our wills more often than not align. There are men that just look at the word "authority" and assume that means total control. Many of them miss that fact that the relationship between husband and wife is to show the relationship between the Christ and the Church. Regarding an elder's authority over the church, they have that authority over the church whether they are male or female. Similarly, parents have authority over children whether they are male or female.

Thirdly, what we've said about authority and teaching is not the same as the lies you have been told. Men in general should not be telling you what to and not to do (though rebuking sin regardless of whether it's from men or women is different). You do not only have worth as a wife. We are all unworthy of anything but have found our worth in Christ. Men and women are equal (though different). If the teaching in your church was that women were to be nothing but quiet and submissive wives, that husbands needed no teaching, that women were not to think for themselves (not including what God says), was not deserving as the same opportunities and privileges as men, then you probably should have left that church as they were teaching falsehoods. The Bible also does not say women should not be educated and that men can say whatever they want to women. The Bible should be read exegetically (finding mean from

Paul Penley

3/15/2020 11:28:04 am

When power and privilege is threatened, people’s real character comes out. I can’t imagine how degrading and painful your college experience must have been like. Thanks for speaking up.

Pierre

3/15/2020 06:37:32 pm

Red ink and what's important? As if one could separate the Bible into one part the word of God, and the other the word of men. In fact writing what you wrote is the devils work. You are doing the same thing the devil did in Genesis 3.

Brian

8/6/2020 03:45:48 am

Hello, Everyone in Christ..

I'm DEAF, from Philippines
Everyone.. please, Help me to Correct or wrong?
Because I'm STILL confused... which it is right or wrong? If woman can be a Pastors or Not? Let me know please! Pls, comment with me now

Pierre

8/31/2020 04:38:17 am

The word of God is true, and anyone contradicting God's word is from the evil one. So no, a woman can't pastor a Church, since the word of God says she should "learn in silence with all subjection" (1Tim 2.11)
Paul repeats this admonition in the next verse "I do not allow a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence." v12
And in the next two verses Paul explains why: "For Adam was first formed, then Eve." v13 Adam being created first he then is in authority, not Eve
"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." v14 You see Brian, Eve was the one to be deceived by the serpent. She was targeted by the enemy and if we follow Paul's inference we understand that God created things with order but the enemy perverted this order when he seduced Eve.

In conclusion Paul's command was given less we fall again in the same trap at the time of the fall of man.

Victor

8/29/2020 10:43:36 pm

It's rather surprising to me that the writer of this blog article gives a long list of reasons why he thinks Paul prohibited women from teaching or exercising authority in the church, but he ignores Paul's own stated reason in the passage (1 Timothy 2). Thankfully, Paul himself (the author of 1 Timothy) stated the reason for his prohibition of women. There is no need to look elsewhere for the reasons for this prohibition when the author of the passage has clearly stated the reason. Why ignore the actual reason given by the author and then come up with your own list of reasons? That doesn't sound to me like good exegesis. The reason given by Paul for the prohibition of women from exercising leadership authority in the church is clear: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression" (1 Timothy 2:13-14). The reason is clearly stated in this passage of Scripture. There is nothing difficult to understand here. The only problem is that some of us have decided to reject it and to devise ways of explaining it away.

Egalitarians will often claim that the primary purpose of Paul's letter in 1 Timothy is to "advise Timothy how to overcome false teaching". In particular, Egalitarians claim that the main issue going on in Ephesus was female heretics who were primarily influencing females. However, there is a lack of textual evidence for female heretics. Every named false teacher is male in 1 Timothy. There is no evidence in the pastoral epistles that the women were teaching these false doctrines. Paul says little concerning the content of the false teaching. However, from mirror reading, the evidence seems to point to a sort of ascetic proto-Gnosticism which downplayed the importance of family life. The false teachers were forbidding marriage (1 Tim.4:3). Some were presumably not providing for their families (1 Tim. 5:8). Young widows were encouraged to marry, bear children, manage their households and give the adversary no occasion for slander (1 Tim. 5:14). While combating false teaching is certainly a prominent theme of 1 Timothy, it is not the only theme or purpose. Paul also writes so that Timothy will "know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). Paul is writing to prepare the church for his departure. It seems egalitarian exegetes highlight the false teaching and downplay the proper ordering of the church because the latter clearly has ongoing ramifications for church life.

Sometimes, egalitarian scholars insist that the instruction in 1 Tim. 2:12 is a marriage verse rather than a local church verse. Of course, the Greek word translated "woman" in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 can mean wife or woman depending on the context, but the context of 1 Timothy 2 lends towards women in general. The context of 1 Timothy is public worship in church settings (see 1 Tim. 3:15). If Paul were referring to wives, one would expect a definite article or a possessive pronoun with the word "man". The immediate context of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 heavily lends towards women in general (in the church), not wives.

A woman is to "learn quietly with all submissiveness". The word 'quietly' here does not mean absolute silence. "Quietly" refers to submissive learning through instruction. Women's quietness in the church is an expression of their submission. The Greek word for "submit" refers to "subjection, subordination, or submission". The word and related forms is often used for wives in relation to their husbands (Eph. 5:21-22; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:1; 1 Peter 5:5). It refers to voluntary and willing compliance. Marriage texts are relevant since Paul says an overseer must manage his own household (1 Tim. 3:4) and compares the church to God's house (1 Tim. 3:15). As with wives to their husbands, women in church are to be in submission to men in authority in the local church. Women's learning should not become an occasion to overturn their role in relation to the authority role that men are to exercise in the church.

1 Corinthians 14:33b-35 is a helpful parallel passage, even though the terminology used is different. There, Paul writes, "As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission . . ." Though a different term is used here, the conceptual argument is the same. Paul does not mean absolute silence since in 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, Paul commends women praying and prophesying in the corporate gathering. This call to silence appears to indicate that women are not permitted to authoritatively judge the content of prophecy.

I think all believers must agree that understanding this topic of women exercising authoritative leadership in the church and its ramifications are very important. The context of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 is public worship (cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). If one studies worship throughou

Victor

8/29/2020 10:47:31 pm

COMMENT cont'd.

I think all believers must agree that understanding this topic of women exercising authoritative leadership in the church and its ramifications are very important. The context of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 is public worship (cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). If one studies worship throughout Scripture, one can clearly see how meticulous God is about worship offered to Him. He gave detailed instructions to the priests and the Levites about how to offer acceptable sacrifices and festivals to Him. We see several people killed or disciplined in the Old Testament because they did not follow God's instructions for worship. In John 4:23, Jesus told the woman at the well that God desires worshipers who worship in SPIRIT and TRUTH. Spirit refers to the heart of the worship while truth refers to alignment of worship with scriptural truths. God doesn't accept all worship. He rejected Cain's offering because it did not come with a right heart (Gen. 4). He rejected King Uzziah's offering because he usurped the role of the priest—his worship didn't align with truth (2 Chronicles 26). Understanding the role of church women in worship is important because God desires worshipers who worship in SPIRIT and in TRUTH. To have a right heart (spirit) in worship is not enough; our worship must align with scriptural regulations.

Why must women practice submission in public worship? According to Scripture -- and based on the order of creation -- God has ordained for males to lead both in the home and in the church. Paul teaches this throughout his letters. In Ephesians 5, he calls for the wives to submit to their husbands as unto Christ. In 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Paul commands for church overseers to be males (i.e. the bishop/pastor/elder must be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband). He will also teach the same in Titus 1:6-9. These instructions do not explicitly apply to secular life; they are focused on church worship.

Some people have looked at Paul's writing in 1 Timothy 2 and called him a chauvinist. Others declare that this text is cultural or specific to the church in Ephesus and, therefore, has no bearing on church worship today. However, if we believe Scripture is inspired, then we must accept that the text in 1 Timothy 2 is not Paul's opinion (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16-17). It is Divine. And as for saying this text only applies to the church at Ephesus, the problem with such a view is that Paul says similar things to the church at Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:34) and to the church at Crete (Titus 1:5-9). What Paul teaches here cannot be easily dismissed!

Paul is not commanding women to never teach. In Titus 2:3, older women are called to teach younger women; in 2 Timothy 1:5, we see that Timothy's mother and grandmother were his primary Bible teachers (cf. 2 Tim. 3:14-15). Women are called to instruct children. They may also instruct men in certain environments -- Priscilla and Aquila instructed Apollos in Acts 18:26, but this was done by Priscilla (along with her husband) in a private home setting, not in an authoritative leadership position in a church setting. In addition, Scripture never says that God doesn't give women teaching gifts. The question is: where/how should women use these gifts? They must be used in the appropriate environment and, according to Paul, that is not in the public worship service in an authoritative leadership position. In fact, Paul specifically forbids the role of women pastor or elder in the church.

We ought to take Paul's words at face value rather than trying to find ways to explain these passages away. The Scripture clearly teaches a difference in roles between men and women. But our modern culture insists there is no difference in roles. Each of us must therefore decide where the truth lies -- in the Bible or in our modern culture.

A difference in role or function does not imply that women are inferior to men. The Son (Jesus Christ) will submit to the Father (1 Cor. 15:28), and yet He is equal to the Father in essence, dignity, and personhood. It is a modern, democratic, Western notion that diverse functions suggest distinctions in worth between men and women. Paul believed that men and women were equal in personhood, dignity, and value but he also taught that women had a distinct role from men. There is a distinction between a call to the ministry and a call to be a bishop/pastor/overseer/ elder. Some women have misinterpreted their call to ministry in terms of being called to be a pastor/overseer/elder.

Without doubt, women played important supportive roles in the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ as well as in Paul's ministry, for example. But I am not aware that any of these women exercised an authoritative leadership and teaching role in a church gathering. In 1 Timothy 3:2, Paul lists the qualifications for the position of a bishop/pastor; one of these qualifications is that a bishop must be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband. This suggests that Paul did not en

Victor

8/29/2020 10:51:28 pm

COMMENT Cont'd. Part #3.

In 1 Timothy 3:2, Paul lists the qualifications for the position of a bishop/pastor; one of these qualifications is that a bishop must be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband. This suggests that Paul did not envisage a situation where a woman would be the bishop of a church.

What Paul says in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is contrary to the thinking of the modern world. We are confronted here with a countercultural word from the Scriptures. This countercultural word should modify and correct both our thinking and our behavior.

Pierre

8/31/2020 05:12:00 am

So true: "We are confronted here with a countercultural word from the Scriptures. This countercultural word should modify and correct both our thinking and our behavior."

Women should not teach men what? 1 Timothy 2 in context

Leave a Reply.

BUY the BOOK

Author

Top 5 Blogs

Categories

Archives