The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum 1 Timothy 2 issue

My church has chosen to take the view of allowing women to take on leadership (including eldership and teaching anyone) roles. Here is a quote from a statement I found from my church -

"We believe that the passages of Scripture in which Paul commands that women be silent, not hold any authority over a man, or that elders must be the husband of one wife are not universal commands but rather responses based upon the first century culture of Corinth and the Middle East. With any command given in Scirpture that is not universally applied, a determination must be made as to whether it is a universal command or a cultural and situational one. We believe this to be a situational command."

Of course the biblical passages this quote is referring to are 1 Cor. 14:33-35, 1 Timothy 2:11-12, 1 Tim 3:2, etc. What is your response to this statement?? I think my church has come to the wrong conclusion - but I don't really have all the details as to why. How can I know that this conclusion of the commands being based on the culture is not correct??

janean,

Here are a couple of articles which you will doubtless find helpful:

Women as Office Bearers

Hermeneutics of Women in Ordained Office

Your church's position is easily refuted by the text. In his argument against women teaching in I Tim. 2, Paul cites the creation story, not culture.

Have a look around www.cbmw.org you will find plenty of resources here on these verses. The 50 questions are a good place to start.

James.

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/ranton.gif" alt="" /> Or they could have written, "We believe that the Bible is the literal 'Word of God' unless we find a culturally biased reason for disagreeing with it . . . . . " <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rantoff.gif" alt="" />

Frankly, this sort of thing causes me to sway from sad to mad and back to sad. Why can't we simply accept God's Word and the Truth that it is and then seek to adapt our lives accordingly?!?

This article may add some fuel to the debate;

SHOULD A WOMAN TEACH IN CHURCH?

by Ray C. Stedman



The social movements of every age seem to be used by God to force Christians to re-examine (and clarify) their understanding of what the Scriptures teach. Painful as they may be, every such re-examination results ultimately in stronger and clearer statements on the subjects in question than the Church has ever had before. This is certainly the case in the matter of the woman's role in the Church. The secular Women's Liberation movement is forcing church leaders everywhere to distinguish carefully between attitudes toward women derived from customs and traditions of the past (often strongly macho-dominated) and what the Bible actually teaches and what the early Church actually did.

In the scope of this brief article it is not possible to answer all the questions which are being raised today. But we would like to examine the specific question being asked by many Christians today: Should a woman teach the Scriptures, and especially, should she teach men or when men are present?

We can say at once that the New Testament clearly indicates that both men and women receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit without distinction in regard to sex. Included among these is the gift of teaching, and other related gifts, such as prophesying (basically, preaching), exhortation, and the word of wisdom and of knowledge. Women prophets are referred to both in the Old and New Testaments and older women are instructed by the apostle Paul to teach the younger women. A somewhat oblique reference in 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 suggests that both men and women were free to pray or prophesy in the open meeting of the Church, though the woman must do it in such a way as to indicate that she recognizes the headship role of her husband. If she does so, there seems to be no objection to the fact that men would be present in the congregation, or any limitation placed on her for that reason. From the viewpoint of spiritual gifts it seems clear that "in Christ there is neither male nor female" and God expects every woman to have a ministry as much as he expects every male to have one.

Though the ministry of women in the New Testament churches is not prominent in the record, nevertheless there are certain references which indicate they were frequently and widely used in various capacities. Almost all commentators agree that Priscilla and her husband Aquila were side-by-side companions of the apostle Paul in his work both in Corinth and in Ephesus, and that of the two, Priscilla was the more gifted and capable teacher, since her name is most often listed first. They were, together, the instructors of the mighty Apollos in his early preaching efforts. Here is a clear-cut case of a knowledgeable woman being used in the teaching of a man with no hint of an objection from Paul. Further, in Paul's letter to the church in Philippi he urges an unnamed fellow-worker (probably Epaphroditus) to "help these women who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel." In the letter to the Romans he mentions other women who labored with him "in the Lord."

Perhaps no question would ever have arisen about the propriety of women's ministry were it not for two passages from Paul's hand which seem to lay severe restriction upon them. In 1 Corinthians 14 he says, "As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." Again, in 1 Timothy 2 he says, "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." Taken by themselves, apart from their contexts, these two passages do seem to prohibit any kind of teaching ministry for women, especially in any public way within the church.

But let us look at some guidelines of interpretation which will help us in understanding just what the apostle means.

1. Nothing in the above quoted passages can be taken in such a way as to contradict what the apostle himself permitted or referred to with approval in the practice of the church. He surely did not teach one thing and practice another. If, in 1 Corinthians 11 he speaks with approval of a woman praying or prophesying in public, as he does, then surely, in 1 Corinthians 14 he does not contradict himself by forbidding women even to open their mouths in any circumstance in the public meeting of the church. We must, therefore, read the prohibition of chapter 14 as applying to something other than the ministry of women permitted in chapter 11.

2. We must note that the immediate context of both passages quoted above has to do with the problem of disorder and even some degree of defiance in the actions of the women involved. In both passages, though widely separated as to recipients and locality, the word submission appears. In Corinth the problem was one of so conducting the meeting that edification of all present would be central. Therefore tongues were to be controlled and limited, and so was the exercise of prophesying.

Furthermore, they were to remember that "God is not a God of disorder but of peace," and then follows the warning against women speaking in the church. It is clear from this that the apostle was not concerned about women who properly exercised their gifts in prophesying or in praying, but was greatly concerned about women who disrupted the meetings with questions and comments, and perhaps even challenged the teaching of apostolic doctrine with contrary views. This is what he prohibited, as verse 27 makes crystal clear: "If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command." He then closes the whole section with the admonition, "But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way."

The word to Timothy (who was probably living at Ephesus) is similar in character. The general context in which these words about women appear is concerned with regulating the behavior of Christians at meetings, as 3:14 makes clear: "Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." In line with this purpose, Paul tells the men how to pray (without anger or disputing) and the women how to adorn themselves (not with fine clothing but with good works) and from this he moves to the words of prohibition against a woman teaching or having authority over a man. These words cannot be taken as an absolute (no woman should ever teach a man) for if that were true Paul should have rebuked Priscilla for having a part in instructing Apollos. The words "have authority over" provide us the key to understanding this passage. Women should not be permitted the role of authoritative definers of doctrine within the church. They must not be permitted to do this, even though they may mean well, for the role of authoritative interpreters is given by the Holy Spirit to the apostles and elders, who, in the New Testament, were invariably men. This is supported by Paul's references to Adam and Eve which follows.

From this we are warranted in drawing certain conclusions to guide our conduct today.

1. Women certainly can teach. They are given the gift of teaching as freely as it is given to men, and they must exercise those gifts.

2. Women can teach within the context of church meetings. They are certainly free to teach children and other women without question, but are free to teach men as well if what they are teaching is not a challenge to the understanding of doctrine held by the elders of the church. Many godly and instructed women know far more about the Scriptures then many men and it would be both absurd and unscriptural to forbid such men to learn from such women.

3. Even the elders should recognize the often unique and godly insights of gifted women teachers and should seek their input in arriving at an understanding of the Scriptures. It is, however, the duty of elders to make the final decision of what is to be taught. No woman may participate in this.

It is my hope that this brief survey will help many in understanding the difficulties involved in answering the question with which we began. I, personally, thank God for the gifted woman teachers,among us at PBC and rejoice that we have little or no problem with the question of proper authority in this matter.

Related Paper: The Role of Women in Worship in the Old Testament, by Dr. Bruce Waltke

A interesting twist on translation of 1Tim. 2:11;

Q. Paul says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man; she must be silent" (1 Tim.2:11, NIV). Evangelical churches obey this commandment. Why doesn't yours?

Certainly, the New Covenant Church does not obey the commandment in the version of the scriptures that you have quoted (the New International Version) because the translation, which is heavily influenced by preconceived evangelical Protestant doctrine, is not correct. The correct translation should be:

"I do not permit a woman to teach continuously or usurp the authority of her husband; she must hold her peace" (author's translation).


The word for "teach" in this passage is, in the Greek, didaskein, in the present tense which means "to teach continuously". Paul is therefore saying: "I don't want a woman to constantly teach because this will undermine her husband's position, giving the impression that she is the head of the husband, which is contrary to God's ordained order between husband and wife." Thus a wife should place limitations on her own liberty in Christ in both her dress, adornment and her speech. Paul does not want women to be drab or mute, but to be careful lest they go beyond the boundaries that God has established. "I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God" (1 Tim.2:9-10, NIV).
The fact that God has placed husband over the wife in authority does not mean that a man is better, more intelligent, or more worthy than a woman. This is simply the order established by God. And why? Because where there are two or more personalities consitituting one Body -- whether a marriage or a Church -- one Body can only have one head. This is intrinsic in God's creation.

Nowhere does the New Testament teach that woman is inferior to man or that women should be in subjection to men generally. She is the recipient of the same graces in Christ as is the man (Gal.3:28; 1 Pet.3:7). However, the New Testament does teach that a wife should be in submission to her husband and respect his authority, for this is the created order, "for Adam was formed first, then Eve" (1 Tim.2:13, NIV).

Does this mean that the husband has an advantage over his wife? Not at all, for he is in the same female position to Christ and to his leaders in the Church as she is to him. Moreover, Paul teaches that Christians generally must be self-limiting for the sake of those weaker in the faith. Submissiveness is a requirement both of men and women in the faith.

New Covenant Christians find the teaching that women should not be allowed to teach in Church quite absurd in the light of Scripture, not to mention common sense. Women, because of their natural, empathic nature, can, and do, make excellent teachers. However, the New Covenant also ensures that this in no way compromises a husband's authority over his wife, and at home a believing husband is expected to instruct his wife and his family in such a way that his children can clearly see that he has the overall authority, as God ordained. Similarly, a congregation is always presided over by a married man, who understands God's created order (1 Tim.3:1ff).

The challenge, therefore, is for evangelical protestants to submit their congregational life in harmony with the plain teaching of the New Testament and not to rely overly on one Bible translation but to check everything thoroughly.

I'm not sure whose translation this is, but it is hardly an accurate translation of the Greek text. Even a first year student of Greek can discern that much. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> No further comment is really necessary, actually as to the errors offered in this.

Now, I would appreciate knowing whose comments are included in your post? Are these YOURS? an author's? and if the latter, then you really should include the name of the author and the source from which you got the quote.

Lastly, what is YOUR position on this topic and have you read the two articles linked in my previous reply in this thread? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,

Sorry, I didn’t realize I had not included the author’s name, it is Christopher C. Warren. Yes, I did read the first one and skimmed the second article you posted. As with just about everything, there always seems to be two sides, even amongst those who claim to know the original languages.
I pretty much take the position of both the articles I submitted. I do not believe that women are to hold positions of leadership, such as Pastor, Elder, Deacon and etc.
My wife, who is much smarter than I, would be a good example of someone who is female, that I have learned a great deal from in the realm of Spiritual truth. I believe common sense tells me I would be a fool not to listen to her, for a number of reasons, one of which would be where I am sleeping tonight. I am reminded of Paul’s words in Gal.3:28, “There is neither Jew or Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male or female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus”. These are strange words from a man who had such a problem with women in the churches.
I totally respect Dr Grudem and have read his book on “Systematic Theology”. He is a good example of a theologian who knows the original languages, yet, probably would disagree with you and others on this forum in respect to the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Which helps substantiate different interpretations from Greek professors over words of Scripture, amongst themselves.
George

George

George,

Thanks for providing the author's name that belongs to that quote. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

Yes indeed, there can be found those who disagree on any and every subject. However, what we are discussing here is what GOD has revealed and HIS truth concerning the role of women in the Church. Thus, despite the fact that there are those who disagree, the fact remains that only one of them is correct. The other is in violation of what God has decreed.

Personally, having read extensively on this subject of women being ordained into the place of an officebearer in Christ's Church. And, it seems clear to me that those who would have women in office depart from sound reasoning and from the proper biblical hermeneutic. Such things as "cultural boundness", "pragmatism", etc., etc., ad nauseam are always used in their argumentation. And, if one were to accept such devices to interpret all of the Scriptures, Christianity as it was designed and which has existed for over 2000 years would be totally dismantled and reshaped into something unrecognizable. If, however, one desires to limit the use such approaches in interpreting the Bible to personal selected topics, e.g., women in office, then at best, that individual is guilty of gross inconsistency and embracing a low view of Scripture.

History reveals that those individuals and/or churches who promote and use such arguments as "cultural boundness" eventually apply them universally. And the results have been apostasy from the faith. For example such truths, the historicity of Adam, the virgin birth of Christ, the physical resurrection of Christ, the abomination of homosexuality, etc., are either questioned and/or denied. However, all these unbiblical views, based upon the aforementioned approaches have been soundly refuted and shown to be spurious. That there are going to be and are today those who will not listen to those who have argued effectively for the inspired truth does not weaken it one iota, but rather such things are consistent with what Paul wrote here:

<blockquote>
1 Corinthians 11:19 (KJV) "For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."<br>
</blockquote>

In His Grace,

Pilgrim,
I was gearing my response more to 1Tim.2:11-12 on woman teaching men and not over the issue of leadership in the Church. We are in agreement over leadership and what Scripture undeniably says in this regard. Where we may disagree, is the area of women teaching men. The original post spoke to both.
George

I was unaware that the context of Galatians 3:28 was ecclesiastical polity.......I thought it was soteriological. Could you show how this passage supports your context?


God bless,

william

geo,

The problem here is three-fold: 1) The author's personal translation of the text, which I say again, is fallacious. There is no warrant to translate aner as "her husband". Although this word can also mean "husband", if one chooses to opt for it over "man", then it would be "a husband" and not "her husband". However, the context doesn't lend itself to "husband", but more so to "man". 2) The immediate context of this passage is dealing with the corporate gathering of the saints in worship and not the teaching of a Sunday School class or any other such situation. Paul's concern is with the place of those who are qualified for OFFICE, i.e., an official, ordained position of authority over the congregation. And, 3) given this context, the qualifications later enumerated by Paul in 1Tim 3:1-13, which are first seen as grounded in the creation order, the translator's eisogesis of inserting "her husband" is automatically contradicted and shown to be spurious, since these officebearers must be the "husband of one wife". (3:2, 12).

Here is an excellent exposition of these two verses (11, 12) as found in William Hendriksen's Commentary:

11, 12. Next, the apostle gives a few directions with respect to the relation of women to
gathering and imparting knowledge (learning and teaching), again with special reference to public worship. He writes,

Let a woman learn in silence with complete submissiveness. But to teach I do not permit a woman, nor to exercise authority over a man, but to remain silent.

Though these words and their parallel in I Cor. 14:33-35 may sound a trifle unfriendly, in reality they are the very opposite. In fact, they are expressive of a feeling of tender sympathy and basic understanding. They mean: let a woman not enter a sphere of activity for which by dint of her very creation she is not suited. Let not a bird try to dwell under water. Let not a fish try to live on land. Let not a woman yearn to exercise authority over a man by lecturing him in public worship. For the sake both of herself and of the spiritual welfare of the church such unholy tampering with divine authority is forbidden.

In the service of the Word on the day of the Lord a woman should learn, not teach. She should be silent, remain calm (see N.T.C. on I Thess. 4:11 and on II Thess. 3:12). She should not cause her voice to be heard. Moreover, this learning in silence should not be with a rebellious attitude of heart but “with complete submissiveness” (cf. II Cor. 9:13; Gal. 2:5; I Tim. 3:4). She should cheerfully range herself under God’s law for her life. Her full spiritual equality with men as a sharer in all the blessings of salvation (Gal. 3:28: “there can be no male and female”) does not imply any basic change in her nature as woman or in the corresponding task which she as a woman is called upon to perform. Let a woman remain a woman! Anything else Paul cannot permit. Paul cannot permit it because God’s holy law does not permit it (I Cor. 14:34). That holy law is his will as expressed in the Pentateuch, particularly in the story of woman’s creation and of her. fall (see especially Gen. 2:18-25; 3:16). Hence, to teach, that is, to preach in an official manner, and thus by means of the proclamation of the Word in public worship to exercise authority over a man, to dominate him, is wrong for a woman. She must not assume the role of a master.

In His Grace,

The passage certainly has to with salvation, but also the qualities of Christ (vs 27) we all have. Thus because of grace, there is no DIFFERENCE between, Jew or Gentile, slave or free man, man or woman. If there was such a vast difference between a woman and a man in the areas of silence and teaching within the Church, why only two verses speaking to the need for woman to be silent and not to teach a man? Unless of course, there was a problem at the Corinthian church (like yelling across to the men’s side of the church, by vocal women, disrupting the proceedings) and woman (wives?) challenging the teachings of the man (husbands?) in 1 Timothy. Why would Paul contradict 1 Cor. 11:4-5, which suggest that both men and women were free to pray and prophesy in Church? Why would Priscilla be allowed to instruct Apollos? Why was Deborah allowed to judge men? And a question which has always been a bit of a mystery to me, is, why does Paul say woman will be saved in the act of child bearing, which implies marriage, yet, in 1Cor 7, he states a woman is better off not getting married, if we are going to stick to the letter of the law in verses 11 and 12 of 1 Timothy chapter 2? What if the word for man “aner” and the word for woman “gune” should have been translated “husband” and “wife” in 1Timothy 2:11-12? These two words for man and woman were used in this way over 40 times in the sum of the 150 times they were used in the New Testament? Could man’s tradition, have created a bias?
George

Oh......I was simply pointing out your misuse of that specific text in your effort. On another note, could you offer somebody from the early church who held your beliefs?


God bless,

william