Women Teaching in Church (1 Timothy 2:12)

Let me just start off by saying that I have been what is referred to as a soft complimentarian my whole life. This means that I hold to the doctrine that the church polity has elders that are responsible for the shepherding (Pastor) of the church. In the case of most Southern Baptist Churches there is one elder (pastor). In this scenario there is no room for to have a woman pastor because it would break the doctrine of male eldership. However, in soft complimentarianism women can exercise their spiritual gifts within the church setting under the authority of the Pastor (elder) even the gift of teaching. I often would be puzzled by those that held to a strong complmentarian position mostly based on experience. I have sat under the teaching of very godly women, with tremendous biblical knowledge and been blessed by their teaching. To suggest that this was sinful compromise was not my experience. Given some of the issues that are being debated in the SBC about whether or not women who are ministers at churches can 1) hold the title pastor or 2) have a position of whether they can teach or not, I decided to do a deeper exploration of the passages related to this.

This article will focus on 1 Timothy 2:8-15. In my approach I follow a pattern that I have always used to interpret the meaning of the passage. First, the plain meaning of the text. Second, the context of the text (two levels immediate and historical). Third, identifying scriptural harmony. That is the Bible does not contradict itself. When there is an apparent contradiction it is the interpretation and not the passage that is in error. Fourth, Grammar of the text (Both sentence structure and word meanings in original languages). To accomplish this I have to rely heavily on tools in my Bible software since I have not studied Biblical languages. At times I will look outside the scripture to other ancient or historical texts and commentaries, but the role of these are meant to be supportive and clarifying not foundational. It is God’s word alone that is the best commentary on God’s word.

In addressing this passage we need to expand the the verses immediately before the passage we are looking at to understand the immediate context . We read that Paul was appointed by God to be herald (preacher), apostle (literally “sent out one”), and teacher to the Gentiles (1 Timothy 2:7). It is based on this appointment that Paul is offering wisdom to Timothy about some of the problems that have risen up in the church that Timothy was the pastor of. Timothy was a pastor of the church at Ephesus. One purpose of this letter was to address those that had fallen into false teaching and practices (1 Timothy 1:3, 4:1). This letter of encouragement to the young pastor Paul obviously had some knowledge of Timothy’s situation. In this passage we are looking at it seems clear that Paul is offering guidance to Timothy on what to do with particular problems that were occuring in the church body at Ephesus. So it is with the appointment as preacher to the Gentiles that Paul offers his advice to Timothy. Throughout, the next section Paul identifies the problem(s) and the wise solution(s).

The first problem is that men at the church were angry and arguing with each other (1 Timothy 2:8); Paul instructs them to pray. Next, there are women who are dressing in sexually provocative ways (1 Timothy 2:9); Paul instructs them to dress in appropriate clothes with awareness and moderation. He then expands this dress code to those that were wearing clothing (and hairstyles) that flaunted their wealth (1 Timothy 2:9-10); to them Paul instructs them to be clothed “with good works” and to be proper as they “profess to worship God.” After the passage in question Paul is addressing the leadership of Timothy’s church and how he is to go about appointing leaders (1 Timothy 3:1ff).

One more context that is connected to grammar. In these first three problems we note that Paul is addressing the problem with men (v 8) and women (v9-10). This is important because there is a very conspicuous change in verse 11 and carried through verse 15. Paul changes from plural to singular. That is from “women” to “woman”. This shift seems to be important. I believe there are no “letters or or strokes of letters” (Matthew 5:18) that are insignificant in God’s Word. There is a reason therefore for the change from women to woman. Most English translations add the indefinite article “a” in front of the word “woman”. The reason is that to the English speaking ear it would sound rough without the “a” in front of it. However there is no indefinite article in front of the the word woman. Why is this important? Well in English when you add the indefinite article “a” in front of a noun most often it turns that word in a class rather than a specific member of that class. For example if I said, “that bike was made for a woman.” It would be synonymous with the statement, “That bike was made for women.” The point I am making is that the at a granular level we do not know whether Paul was referring to a particular woman or women in general. Part of that confusion is connected to the indefinite article that does not exist in this passage in the original Greek.

Just one more point of confusion. The word gynē (Greek for word woman) can also be translated wife. So in this section Paul could be referring to the class woman (ie women), a particular woman (trouble maker at Timothy’s church), or a wife (causing trouble for her husband). Realistically a strong case can be made for all three interpretations. That fact alone makes it unwise to use this passage as a foundational support for a prohibition of women teaching.

One issue that needs to be taken into account is confirmation bias. It is known that we tend to search out, find, and interpret things that confirm what we already believe (or others who are within our “tribe” believe). This is a well established phenomenon. It is not something that can be turned off. However, if you are aware of confirmation bias then it is something that you can take into consideration. For example in my own experience with this passage I could not see anything other that a blanket prohibition of women in teaching. In fact for many years I had an uncomfortable tension whenever a woman was teaching a group of men or mixed group. The reality is if this is a blanket prohibition then really women teaching is not an option. If you interpret this passage that way then it is the only logically consistent position as far as I can tell. I have read the commentaries that try to thread the needle and they come up shallow. Over the most recent past I have changed my approach to reading scripture. As I mentioned above I use commentary from gifted teachers. The problem is doing this feeds into confirmation bias. So I have used commentaries as the last step rather than early on. That does not mean that commentaries are bad per sey, but commentaries can be found to support just about any position you want to take. Confirmation bias runs strong. Rarely does consulting commentaries ever lead to a change of mind. They tend to strengthen what you already believe. This is true by the way even when you read commentaries that oppose what you believe. You see you tend to have a more accepting disposition for writing that agrees with your belief, and a more critical view for things that oppose your belief.

The argument for a blanket prohibition makes sense. If the context of the section we are looking at is instructions for church life (which it is) and the next section is dealing with qualifications for elders (which it does), then we can see how this prohibition of women as teachers within the church is a logical conclusion. 1 Timothy 2:12 “I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; instead, she is to remain quiet.” Seems pretty clear and unequivocal. My struggle with this teaching was that almost no church follows it. Some will attempt to say that Paul is only referring to “authoritative teaching.” My reaction to that is all teaching is authoritative. When you teach you are making the claim that you know something that the learner either does not know or has not yet mastered. Your are the authority. Some will say teaching is OK, but not preaching on Sunday morning. Perhaps I will have a opportunity to do a deep dive into that at some point. In short this passage says nothing about where teaching takes place. So if it is a blanket prohibition then location does not matter in my estimation. Resolving your cognitive dissonance through mental gymnastics is not really good Bible interpretation. If this is a blanket prohibition I do believe that the hard complementarians have it correct.

This creates additional problems. The admonition is that “she is to remain quiet.” There are no churches that I am aware of the require women to not speak around men. I am sure there are somewhere in the world that this does happen. This is a huge red flag to me. First, is it possible that so many that follow Christ and have the Holy Spirit in them get this wrong? Second, at a basic human relationship level I would be suspect of any group that refused a woman to speak. Abuses that occur within those communities are many. Now part of that is my cultural values. But that makes this passage deeply cultural in my estimation. Third, neither Paul nor the early church follow this advice. Time an again Paul commends women for their prayer, prophecy, evangelism, teaching, missions, and ministry (See Acts 18:24–28; Acts 21:9; Rom 16:1–7; 1 Cor 11:2–11; Phil 4:2-3). The reality is none of these can be accomplished by a woman that is not allowed to speak. Finally our savior did not follow this. Jesus did the exact opposite. At the time of Christ women were physically separated in religious gatherings and could not speak or ask questions. Jesus on the other hand had many women disciples (See Mark 15:40-41; Luke 8:1-3). He even had women that would deliver messages to men (see Matthew 28:5-10; Luke 24:1-12). These to create a “Do as I say, not as I do” problem for the blanket prohibition position.

Next I would like to look at the interpretation that this is a wife/husband issue. In Young’s literal translation verse 12 reads:

1 Timothy 2:12 YLT

and a woman I do not suffer to teach, nor to rule a husband, but to be in quietness,

As I had mentioned before in the Greek language the same word is used both for woman and wife as well as man and husband. The marital interpretation is drawn from the context. In this context then the passage would mean something like. A wife is to learn quietly in full submission. She is not to teach or hold authority over a husband. In this interpretation the issue would seem to be a woman who was arguing with her husband and trying to prove him wrong.

We also learn that the specific word that his used to have authority (rule over) is a particular word that only occurs once in the New Testament. If we examine the word in other Ancient Greek literature we learn what this word approximates. This word “rule over” is connected to tyrants and other unauthorized forms of coercion. Further the root word is also connected to murder and suicide. Here are some of examples:

Aeschylus, Eumenides

Apollo But what about a wife who kills her husband?

Chorus That would not be murder of a relative by blood.

Cassius Dio Cocceianus, Historiae Romanae

He desired to die but was unable to kill himself, and both the poison and the sword failed him.

Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews

BUT now the punishment was transferred unto the original author, Antipater, and took its rise from the death of Pheroras; for certain of his freed-men came with a sad countenance to the king, and told him that his brother had been destroyed by poison, and that his wife had brought him somewhat that was prepared after an unusual manner, and that, upon his eating it, he presently fell into his distemper

Diodorus Siculus, Library

He similarly made away with the brothers of the new king, who were barely of age, in order that the young man might be isolated and tractable to his control. But the young king let it be known that he was offended at Bagoas's previous outrageous behaviour and was prepared to punish the author of these crimes, so Bagoas anticipated his intentions and killed Arses and his children also while he was still in the third year of his reign.

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2.8: St. Basil: Letters and Select Works (Letter LI)

Following others, or myself the author and originator of the deed? Alas for the impudence of men who make no difficulty at saying anything! Alas for their contempt of the judgment of God! Unless, indeed, they add this further to their fiction, that they make me out to have been once upon a time so far out of my mind as not to know what I was saying.

As you can see from these quotes, this type of authority is always from a place of hostility and illegitimacy. I believe that this lends credibility to the idea that Paul is talking about a particular woman or type of woman. It does not seem that Paul would permit men to exercise this type of authority either. We also see elsewhere where this kind of authority is rejected 1 Peter 5:2-3 “Shepherd God’s flock among you, not overseeing out of compulsion but willingly, as God would have you; not out of greed for money but eagerly; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.”

Paul then goes into Adam and Eve as an example pointing out that Adam was created first and was not deceived in original sin. Now the blanket prohibition looks at this as saying the prohibition is rooted in the order of creation and order of the fall. That is Adam was created first and the Eve being of weaker countenance was deceived. The marital interpretation looks at it as pointing out the brokenness of the first couple. This second interpretation is supported by what Paul says next. 1 Timothy 2:15

1 Timothy 2:15 CSB

But she will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with good sense.

If we are to follow the blanket prohibition interpretation then childbearing (motherhood) is a type of penitence for being deceived. This seems to run counter to most of the Bible’s teaching on children and bearing children. Having children was part of God’s pre-fall creation Genesis 1:28 “God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls on the earth.”” Children are a blessing Proverbs 17:6 “Grandchildren are the crown of the elderly, and the pride of children is their fathers.” Child bearing is not penitence, but a sign of God’s Blessing Psalm 113:9 “He gives the childless woman a household, making her the joyful mother of children. Hallelujah!” It does not follow that motherhood is a form penitence. It does follow that motherhood is what makes a woman whole according to the full Bible. So a woman that has murderous desire to rule her husband would do well to focus her attention on her role as a mother.

Verse 15 continues “… if they continue in faith, love, and holiness...” Who is the “they” that Paul is referring to? It could be “they” meaning “women”, but that seems unlikely since he has earlier in the sentence used singular “she.” It could be “they” meaning Eve and a woman, but that seems even more confusing. Or it could be “they” meaning husband and wife, this seems the most likely. So Paul is pointing this rebellious wife and her husband to work on their marriage as an expression of “faith, love, and holiness.” This seems a very wise and very redemptive focus in my estimation. The wife and husband need to view their marriage as a collaborative walk with God. Focusing on faith, love, and holiness together resolves the underlying aggressive attempts to control each other. Finally Paul describes having “good sense.” This means that there is a element of sober and self-controlled thought in the disposition of the woman believer. It is the same word the Paul uses in 1 Timothy 2:9.

It is interesting to note that this interpretation actually presents a more complete argument against feminism. It is the opposite of feminism. Modern feminism has a foundational principle that women ought to be free from motherhood at their choosing through the technology of abortion. Further women do not need to take a submissive role in the relationship and further do not necessarily need men. Paul holds up motherhood and marriage as sanctifying and redemptive roles for women. Often there is a emotional reaction to suggest that Paul is not meaning a universal prohibition as being a liberal interpretation. Ironically the reality is it may actually be more genuinely conservative from a cultural stand point. “Because the Bible says so” with no other in depth thoughtfulness about what this passage means, is a weak argument against progressive feminism in my estimation.

In summary then, this passage is hotly debated in strong complementarian and soft complementarian circles. Most Egalitarians tend to dismiss the passage out of hand as a cultural anomaly that lacks modern day application. However, I believe that a deeper look into the text on its own away from the debate of women in leadership presents a deeper and more full understanding of what Paul is saying to Timothy and beyond that what God is trying to say to us. Namely when confronted with a loud, insubordinate, power seeking woman be wise! Do not let her teach. Tell her she needs to be quiet. Point her back to being a good mother and to work on her marriage. Further charge her husband to work on their marriage as well in faith, love, and holiness. And of course all this is to be done in humble and sober thinking.