“I have struggled with 1 Tim 11-15 (especially vs 12) for years. Why would God not allow woman to teach men? Does this mean that if a woman is leading a Bible Study that only women can attend? What if a man would like to participate, is he not permitted to join the study?”
Hope Church, Port Perry
to know and to show the love of Jesus
-
Recent Comments
Oke Moses Ayodele on So why should we praise G… raacy4gemsv on So why should we praise G… Sukhjinder Singh on So why should we praise G… Gniskkdp on Sermon on Matthew 5:43-48 plz help me!!!! on Ask Your Questions Here!
May 22, 2007 at 2:02 pm |
I have also struggled with this passage. I will give no definitive answers here, but here are some observations:
(1) Paul is applying general principles to specific cultural situations, not mandating specific practices. v.8, it was customary for people to pray with raised hands, Paul is not mandating the practice but the attitude (without anger or disputing). vv.9-10, many women were more concerned with fashion than with modesty and holiness, Paul is not calling “braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes” unbiblical, just not the right focus (good deeds, not good clothes!) vv.11-12, in a culture where women were expected to be subservient, the gospel was not an occasion for denying cultural bounds, whether slaves or wives – “break your chains, burn your bras!” – but a opportunity to win over their masters/husbands through humility and holiness (see 1 Peter 2:13-21, 3:1-7).
(2) Paul’s words “I do not permit” may be similar to his words in 1 Corinthians 7:12,17,25, where he describes his practical church order, but not necessarily God’s commands, though based on biblical principles. Similarly in 1 Corinthians 11:16 where he describes the custom of the churches, again based on biblical principles.
(3) As I understand it, it is unclear in the Greek whether the word “woman” and “man” should be translated “wife” and husband” (same words in Greek). Understanding the nature of marriage and headship, it might be better to read “wife” and husband”, and this becomes Paul’s way of guarding marriage health. The problem then would not be a woman teaching a man, but a wife teaching a husband, where the “two-become-one” harmony of the couple is jeopardized.
(4) The critical piece is the cultural context. Think of a growing church in a Muslim country, how problematic it would be for women converts to defy cultural conventions and practically work out their new freedom in Christ. Paul would advise them to not burn their burkas but win over their neighbours/spouses through humility, modesty and holiness.
(5) The goal of Paul’s words is to (a) guard the gospel from misunderstanding and slander, and (b) guard marriages from division and disharmony. Paul’s advice in that specific situation, don’t make things worse, follow the path of “a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight” (1 Peter 3:4).
(6) If we take these words as literal commands, and not as general principles applied to specific situations, then we also need to have men LIFT up their hands in prayer, and DENOUNCE the braiding of hair, wearing gold or pearls or expensive clothes.
For what its worth… Pastor Norm
July 2, 2007 at 10:34 am |
Thats it , from now on ,I for one will no longer be braiding my hair……
July 14, 2007 at 6:35 pm |
The NIV Study Bible note for 1Tim 2:12 is as follows: “I do not permit a woman to teach. Some believe that Paul here prohibited teaching only by women not properly instructed, i.e., by the women at Ephesus. Such women tended to exercise authority over, i.e., to domineer, the men. Others maintain that Paul did not allow a woman to be an official teacher in the assembled church. This is indicated by the added restrictions concerning exercising “authority over a man” (a male), i.e., functioning as an overseer (see note on 3:1)” The NIV title for chapter 2 is “Instructions on Worship”. If taken in this context, is Paul commanding us to apply all of Chapter 2 to worship only? Therefore, Norm, wouldn’t your example of a woman leading a bible study be appropriate in this context?
October 28, 2007 at 7:31 pm |
The part I struggle about what I see in christian ministry is the question of who presently are allowing themselves to be taught? Who are the ones who more often gather together in bible study? Who are the ones who want to get together and pray publically? My experience has seen that more women are a part of these groups then men.
My point is – if the women are growing in their personal faith with God – it seems logical to see them in roles of leadership.
A logical reasoning is not the point here. What had God intended? If men are not mentored to grow in their faith, I believe they will allow the women to fill those roles. I fully see that God can use the heart and mind of either man or woman – He created them both and will use those who turn their hearts to Him.
But again, I would emphasize that God had appointed this role initially to the man. I think the larger question is this – Why are the men turning down God’s appointing?
October 29, 2007 at 10:31 am |
I affirm your observations about men and women, and have long struggled with this. I once heard of author describe this as the “silence (or absence) of Adam”, i.e. where was Adam when Eve was being tempted. Actually, he was right there, but he said and did nothing to help his wife (Genesis 3:6).
I struggle with the idea that the man was originally given the responsibility to lead. As I read Genesis 1 and 2, it was “not good” for Adam to be alone, he needed an equal helper to rule with him. Both Adam and Eve rule together, they complement each other, they function best when they lead side by side. Only men doing it is as “not good” as only women doing it. I see Paul’s warning’s to the churches as addressing a “women over men” mindset, and Paul is attempting to balance it, but is understood to be advocating a “men over women” mindset. Actually I hear Paul saying they should learn, serve, lead together, as teams (or as “one”, what God has joined together, let no one separate). Neither is independent of the other (1Cor 11:11-12).
The great need of the day is not to put men or women in their place, but to restore the harmony of couples serving as one, and singles working alongside of them. Both male chauvinism and women’s lib work contrary to God’s original design. As couples, each partner contributes gifts, each one has something to offer, and should exercise their gifts in harmony with their partner. I see Priscilla and Aquila as a great model of this (see Acts 18, Romans 16:3, where Paul even mentions Priscilla first).
But the original observation is worth asking again, why are many of the men silent or absent, while the women often provide greater leadership in the home, and in the church. Of single parent homes, is it not usually (not always, but usually) women who are responsible? There is no doubt, many men are neglecting their calling and responsibility in the home, in the church, in society, in the world.
Something to think about…
December 18, 2007 at 11:53 am |
I wonder if the localities of Christians where Paul specifically addresses women-in-ministry issues is not relevant. Both Corinth and Ephesus were sites of the veneration of major goddesses: Aphrodite and Artemis. Apollo was also venerated in Corinth, primarily by (oracular?) women. This was not the case in Philippi, a Roman colony where women enjoyed far more freedom than in the other 2 places. Did Paul’s missionary heart wish to avoid confusion, when unbelievers or neophytes might confuse prominent Christian women ministers with pagan priestesses? Within a middle-class western perspective Paul’s anti-women utterances may look strange – in Africa (where I come from) and in ASia’s polytheistic cultures, they make much practical (if local) sense.
December 18, 2007 at 1:28 pm |
Thanks for your insights, Mathew. I do sense that the specifics of each community did (and do) have a bearing on how we apply the biblical principles. I find the thought re. priestesses intriguing, also to your own application in Africa. The issues of gospel, culture and contextualization are huge. In the west, having understood our culture as “christian”, we have failed to see how our own cultural baggage has twisted and shaped our interpretation of the message of Jesus. What is the enduring message of freedom in Christ, and how does it apply to male/female relations, headship and authority and submission, etc. Tough questions, with lots of opinions. Thankfully, God is more gracious than we often are with each other when we disagree. I remain open to learning and correction here…
November 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
I’m very confused about this topic. I have been asked to teach once a month to group that includes men. I love teaching the Bible but feel that it is breaking God’s word to teach to men. I mean, it takes such elaborate explainations to explain Paul’s words away. Why don’t we as Christians just obey the Bible? If we explain away these passages, what’s to stop immoral people (gay churches) from explaining away the scriptures they don’t want to obey. And that’s exactly what’s going on in our culture today, and in many so called ‘churches’. People don’t like a scripture, they explain it away. “Poof! It’s gone, but I’m still a Christian!’” This seems like treading on dangerous territory to me. Paul says that women can teach women. Why isn’t that good enough? If a man wants to listen he can, but the women should not be teaching them because the way God created us as women we were the ones who were deceived. Adam sinned too but by choice to follow his wife. He knew exactly what he was doing. God did not put those scriptures about women not teaching men in the Bible by accident. God is smarter than us and we need to just accept His word. It bothers me that so many use many words to explain away God’s holy word. I am glad I am writing this. It is helping me to make up my mind to decline this teaching position I have been offered. I want to teach the Bible, but only to women and children. The thing that makes it tricky though is that my church and my pastors believe that women can teach men.