September 1, 2006

  • 1 Timothy 2:11-12

    (Exegesis by Dr. Dora Wang, seminarian from Westminster Seminary.  Notes here taken by me from Bible study session last night.)

    “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.”

    WOMAN – What do we know about the woman who are being referred to in these verses?  To understand the background, we need to use Scripture to help us.  We can learn more about these women and the men of this time in Ephesus by looking at the rest of 1 Timothy.

    The WOMEN:
    1 Ti 2:9, “I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes.
    1 Ti 5:11, “As for younger widows…when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry…
    1 Ti 5:13, “Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house.  And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to.
    1 Ti 5:14-15, “So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander.  Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan
    2 Ti 3:6-7, “They (they = false teachers) are the kind who worm their way into the homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth.”

    OBSERVATIONS:  From these verses, we can make observations that the women were rich (expensive clothes), they cared about their looks, they were not really decent or proper (that is why Paul needs to exhort them to be decent).  Some of them were young widows.  Most of them were idle and had nothing to do; they went from house to house to spread gossip, slander, and false teaching.  These women were ‘loaded down with sins’ ‘swayed by all kinds of evil desires.’  They had influence on others as they went from house to house spreading false teaching.

    FALSE TEACHERS:
    (The issue at hand is the false teaching; let’s take a look at more of Timothy.)
    1 Ti 1:3-4, “As I urged you when I went to Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies.
    1 Ti 1:6-7, “Some have…turned to meaningless talk.  They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
    1 Ti 4:1-3, “The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons… They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods.
    1 Ti 6:3-5, “If anyone teaches false doctrines…he is conceited and understands nothing.  He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words the result in envy, strife, malcicious talk…and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.
    2 Ti 3:6,8, “They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women…these men oppose the truth — men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned are rejected.”

    OBSERVATIONS:  These false teachers influenced both men and women.  BOTH men and women.  However, it was those of the women who were weak-willed who were propogating and passing along the the false teaching.

    The MEN:
    (How do we know the men were also influenced?)
    1 Ti 2:8, “I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing
    1 Ti 6:20-21, “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care.  Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is false called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.
    2 Ti 4:3, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.”

    OBSERVATIONS:  The men were every bit as influenced and swayed by false teaching as the women were.  They were ‘angry’ and engaged in a lot of heated debating and disputing, and godless chatter about the false knowledge that had come to them.  Some wandered from the faith already.

    FALSE TEACHING:
    (Just what exactly was the false teaching about?  We need to look at the historical context by studying more about how Ephesus is described at that time in the book of Acts.)
    Acts 19:23-32, “About that time there arose a great disturbance about the Way. A silversmith named Demetrius, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought in no little business for the craftsmen. He called them together, along with the workmen in related trades, and said: ‘Men, you know we receive a good income from this business.  …see and hear how this fellow Paul has convinced and led astray large numbers of people here in Ephesus and in practically the whole province of Asia…There is danger…that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will be discredited and the goddess herself, who is worshiped throughout the province of Asia and the world, will be robbed of her divine majesty.’   When they heard this, they were furious and began shouting:  ‘Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!’”  Soon the whole city was in an uproar.   The people seized…Paul’s traveling companions…and rushed…into the theater…. The assembly was in confusion…”

    OBSERVATIONS:  The city of Ephesus was known for its worship of the goddess Artemis.  From these verses, we know that the people did not want this new teaching about the Christ.  The mob who rejected Paul and his companions were spurred on by Demetrius and other businessmen who feared losing their businesses in making shrines of Artemis.  These verses depicting the angry mob, the fury, the uproar, and the chaos demonstrate how much so the worship of Artemis was saturated and interwoven into the culture and prosperity of Ephesus.  The false teaching of the time was, therefore, most likely influenced by beliefs about Artemis.  A Jewish scholar, Philo, said, “Without Eve, Adam would’ve never attained knowledge.  She was the originator of life and light.”  This distortion of the truth, influenced by ideas of Artemis, may be a good summary of the false teaching that the Christian men & women of Ephesus were being misled to believe at that time.

    This is the background to which Paul wrote,
    “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.”

    LEARN - a woman should learn.  He wants them to learn; they are not learned.  They did not know or understand the correct biblical teachings and doctrine.  In the context of the day, these women were not allowed to learn in the synagogues; it was a privilege to learn, and Paul is saying “a woman should learn.”  This is the only command in these verses (1 Ti 2:11-12).  (“I do not permit” is not a command.)

    QUIETNESS – in the original Greek text, the word for ‘quietness’ in verse 11 is the same word used for ‘silent’ in verse 12.  We know that Paul does not mean that women ought to be silent and ‘shut up completely’ because in 1 Cor 11, Paul gives instructions to women for appropriate attire for prophesying (prophesying = speaking/teaching in worship in public).  Paul would not contradict himself.  The word ‘quietness’ here refers to respect and not challenging doctrines.  The verse can be read, “Learn with respect to the teachers, do not challenge the doctrines.”  This exhortation is mainly due to fact that these women were not learned.

    I DO NOT PERMIT - (not a command from Paul)  This phrase would be better translated, “I’m not permitting.”  or “I’m not permitting at this time.”  It is circumstantial and not meant to be for long-term.  It is the same word used in Mt 19:8, “Jesus replied, ‘Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard.  But it was not this way from the beginning.’”  When the situation changed, it could change.  The situation at Moses’ time was ‘hardened hearts’.  The situation during Paul’s time was women who were uneducated.  Change of time = change of permission.  Divorce was not meant to be the rule for all time, nor was it for women to not teach.

    TEACH OR TO HAVE AUTHORITY – The word “or” here in the original Greek is not indicative of one-OR-the-other but rather it links the two words closely together, so it is more like “teach and have authority” – a conjunction.

    AUTHORITY - The Greek word that Paul used here is a different type of “authority” than the one he had been using over and over again in his epistles.  The word for authority here which has been translated to “authority” in the English is only used once in the entire Bible, and that one time is here in this verse.  In other words, the Greek word here was never used anywhere else in the Bible.  It does not mean ‘authority’ in the way that we would normally think.  In that day, in that culture, in that time, this word was used to mean “instigating crime/sin” “instigator of evil” and even “instigating of murder.” 

    So I have now re-phrased 1 Ti 2:11-12 in accordance with the exegesis of these verses, ”A woman should learn (I want women to learn) with respect and not challenging the correct teachings and doctrines.  I’m not permitting a woman to teach at this time (because she is not learned/does not have the right understanding of biblical and scriptural matters) or instigate evil or crime over men (by spreading false doctrine).”

    1 Timothy 2:13-15
    “For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.  But women will be saved through childbearing…”

    FORMED – Since Adam was formed first, he had more time and experience relating with God and heard at least one more time (if not half a dozen more times) God’s command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  Therefore, he had the advantage in being the one who was more taught/educated, so he was not as easily deceived.  Eve, on the other hand, came second, so she had a little less ‘education’.  The serpent, therefore, preyed on her first, she got deceived and she passed on the deception to Adam, (who, by the way, was there during the deception but didn’t stop her! Gen 3:6)  The situation in Ephesus was similar.  The women were less educated, so the false teachers preyed on the women, and used them to pass on the deception and propagate their lies.  (Read:  Women did not come up with the false teaching.  They only spread them.)  This is what Paul was talking about here.

    Challenges:  This verse in conjuction with Gen 2:16-17 is often used to argue about the hierarchy of man over women based upon the order of creation (i.e. Adam was formed first). 
    The argument goes as follows:  ”God formed man first, then He spoke directly to man to command him not to eat of the tree, but it appears that he did not speak directly or tell the woman, and so therefore, ‘we’ are led to believe that man was to tell/teach woman God’s ways.”
    The truth goes as follows:  In Gen 3:2-3 after the serpent challenges Eve about what God did or did not say, she quotes what she heard God say, “You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.”  In the original Hebrew language, the “You” is “You plural.”  In other words, she is quoting God as saying, “You guys” or ”Y’all” or “You all” or “You both” or ”Ustedes” — the plural has been lost in the English translation. 
    What is the implication?  This means that God spoke to the both of them and told both of them directly what his commands and rules are.  
    Therefore, though man may have been formed before woman, God had direct relationship with both man and woman.  He taught both directly.  The argument that man needs to teach woman is null or that he is above her in hierarchy is also null.

    SAVED – the word for ‘saved’ here in the original Greek was also used in 2 Tim 4:18 in reference to ‘rescue’ from evil attack.  The word here is used similarly to mean rescue and deliverance from false teaching and evil attack.  In other words, Paul is saying that if the women live productive lives (by childrearing in their case – because childrearing at that time is equivalent to ‘have a successful job’, because that was ‘living a productive life’), then they will not be idle and will not go from house to house to spread false teaching.  They will be saved and delivered from evil attack (from the false teachers).

    Challenges:  There are three possible arguments for Paul’s meaning in this verse about being saved through childbearing.
    1.  Argument:  Safety through childbirth.
         Unlikely because many godly women have hard labor.
    2.  Argument:  Saved (as in salvation) through Christ’s birth.
         Unlikely because the women addressed are already believers.  Why would he tell them they could be saved through Christ’s birth if they continue in faith, love, etc.? 
    3.  Argument:  Saved through accepting role of mom.
         Yes, likely — if we mean ‘saved’ as in saved from sin and evil.  Childbearing and childrearing takes up all your time.  Surely, this will rescue these women from being idle and from propagating evil and false teaching. 

    FINAL CONCLUSION and SUMMARY of 1 Ti 2:11-15
    These verses are not a command from Paul that women must be silent in the churches and not-teach.  It does not validate arguments that women cannot teach-and-have-authority over a man.  Women were not permitted to teach at that time because they did not have the knowledge of correct doctrine.  Paul wanted them to learn it first — and then later, when they have learned, they could teach.  Women can teach-and-have-authority over men through teaching because when Paul did not permit teaching-and-authority, his use of the word meant “do not be an instigator of evil”, not “do not exhort men to follow the Scriptures”.  He did not mean that women cannot preach and have authority over men. 

    Both women and men were created, in the beginning, to be equal (remember, it was  after the woman was created, then God said, “It was very good.”).  God spoke to and related and taught and loved both of them equally.  There was no hierarchy until after the fall of man to sin. 

    Women were encouraged to live productive lives and cease the propagation of evil, false teaching.   Paul suggested that the way they could be saved and delivered from the evil of idleness and propagation of lies was through childbirth and childrearing. 

Comments (15)

  • hmmmm…very, very interesting.

  • thanks for posting this mary ann. very thorough and can be easily retraced in personal study.

    i first encountered this when i read this paper: http://www.intervarsity.org/mx/item/4175/?PHPSESSID=96a969ad51b986354c3d8489a6c4d782

  • amen sister!

  • very nicely done! i don’t think we need the video!! we have you…cliffnotes version!

  • mmm.. i’m glad you posted this too!!  i really would have loved to go =T but this is good! =D

  • great notes!!!
    but i’m a little unsure how dr. wang came to the conclusion that “authority” in 1 ti2:12 meant “instigating crime/sin”. that word is usually meant “to assume a stance of independent authority, to give orders to, to dictate to.” to me it would seem that if the woman acts on her own behalf then she is acting on her own authority. my belief is that in marriage, both the husband and wife should talk over things and they shouldn’t really act independently of each other. but there is in some sense that the husband is the “head” as stated in eph 5:23. if something wrong happens, it’s the leadership’s fault. haha.

  • Hi Enraptured Spirit, I appreciate your questions.  I guess I need to clarify a bit better –

    The word that Bible translators have translated as “authority” in this verse is “authentein” or “authenteo” in the Greek (and this is the only place in the NT that it occurs).  In classical Greek an “authentes” was an autocrat, a person who ruled even to the point of committing murder.  (Like a tyrant who beats his slave to death.)  And that’s where we have the definition “instigating crime/sin.”  According to some Bible scholars, “authority” in this instance is a very poor translation.  So don’t think about the English definition of “authority.” 

    Your other comments about marriage, headship and women acting on their own authority merit a whole ‘nother discussion and study of Eph 5 as well as 1 Cor 11.  :)

  • thanks for posting this out. I’m still amazed that anyone can process such notes from a single night. thanks for taking the time to share this and spur on some really good thoughts and conversations. Often single sermons on this topic lead to church splits over what they see as “fundamental differences”.

    enrapturedspirit put up a good follow up thought though: “how does this new understanding of the role of women in the church relate to the understanding of roles in marriage? Should these two be related?”

  • Thanks, Mary Ann!! This has always been a tough passage for me, being a student and teacher of the Bible.

  • Great note taking Mary Ann, thanks for sharing! I was really sad that I couldn’t make it, but maybe there will be more opportunities to hear and have some q & a or something.

  • yeah a breakdown of eph 5 would be great/1 cor 11 would be great :)

  • I appreciate the thoroughness of this summary – I’ve read through it a few times and have more thoughts than I’m going to post here.  It troubles me to read this, however, because I see some flaws in the exegesis of these passages and the resulting application of the interpretation.  I have to say that I speak from a layman’s position, so perhaps it would be better to hear from a seminarian or pastor.  I also acknowledge that this position has been heatedly debated for decades, and the discussion of male/female roles has been profoundly affected by men misinterpreting and suppressing women in an unbiblical fashion.  That being said…here are some of my thoughts.

    With regards to 1 Timothy 2:13-15, your interpretation of this passage referring to the hierarchy of man over woman and therefore requiring that man teach woman because he was with God longer – I personally haven’t heard this interpretation before.  However, I find myself having to do some pretty serious mental gymnastics and add in quite a bit of conjecture to arrive at this conclusion.  In Paul going back to creation to support his example, I don’t think he’s referencing the passage to support his ideas on teaching, but moreso on the concepts of headship and authority.  When Eve usurped Adam’s authority in the garden and become the primary decision-maker of the two, sin entered the world.  This is not to say that Eve is the evil one – Adam sinned and is listed as the responsible party in Romans 5 – but it draws attention to the fact that roles were reversed. 

    I’m also greatly troubled by the use of the word “hierarchy”, because God never says any one of us is any better than anyone else.  Everyone is an equal heir to God’s promises, as stated in Galatians 3:28.  Nevertheless, this doesn’t eliminate the possibility of differentiation of roles-the very fact that we are male and female already demonstrates that we are different, yet still equal in God’s eyes.

    I realize my thoughts here are incomplete – perhaps because I’m still siphering through what you’ve written here.  However, the reason I’m commenting is because, as mentioned before, I’m concerned with both the interpretation presented here and even moreso the application of the interpretation.  From my observation, men these days, including myself, are more passive than ever.  Giving us license to be even more passive than we already are is a dangerous proposition that can have devastating ramifications on the church.  I believe men need to be taught how to lead, not dominate.  Perhaps I’m starting to venture into another topic entirely, but what woman would not want to be led by a man who is confident in his direction, completely submitted to God, and wants desperately (in a good way, of course) to take care of the woman (if he’s married) or the women (if he’s a pastor, etc.) in his life and push them towards Christ?

    My thoughts for now…not comprehensive, but this captures some of what’s going through my mind.

  • The argument that you are referring to, yftoad, is also one that searchingfortreasures is saying is a bad argument. Your tone sounds like you’re disagreeing with her, but what you’re saying is the same thing as her. She doesn’t believe this argument, and shows how it is not in line with the truth.

    In this same paragraph you assume that Adam had authority over Eve before this happened. That is never stated anywhere in the passage. The first time man is mentioned as ruling over women is AFTER the fall. And sin entered by Eve disobeying God, not by Eve usurping Adam’s ‘authority’.

    I think looking at the whole book of 1 Timothy, context points us toward understanding what was really going on in Ephesus at the time, and how Paul was responding to that current situation of false teachers using the women to propagate their nasty cultish beliefs, and that they shouldn’t be allowed to perpetuate those in the church setting. But the command is that they women should learn so that they will know what is good doctrine.

  • Hi Yee, I just wanted to respond to two of the things you posted here which have not yet been responded to in other places –

    First:  You said that you speak from a layman’s point of view and that we ought to consult a seminarian or pastor.  I submit to you that this exegesis was done by Pastor Dora Wang, who received a doctorate at Westminster seminary, which I’m sure you know is a very reformed, conservative, calvanist seminary.  She learned hermeneutics and how to do a proper exegesis from these reformed scholars.   For her thesis, she chose this topic and, for six years, studied the Scriptures and other scholars and did her exegesis on all related passages.  Her labor was for the Truth, not for any personal agendas.  She shared with us that many of her professors praised her for her excellent exegesis of the Scripture (of these passages) — even though (because of their already formed reformed theologically stances) they did not agree with her conclusions.  One professor said, “I would agree with you — if I had a daughter (who felt called to teach).”  (Meaning that he was almost convinced and if he had a daughter, he’d want her to be able to teach, but since he doesn’t, he will stick to his stance.)  If all these credentials were attached to a man named Dr. Donald Wang instead, I’m sure you would accept “him” as an authority on this matter, eh?   

    Second:  Your argument about “giving men license to be passive” was interesting.  To believe that the Scripture says that women are permitted to teach is NOT to say that “and men are not”.  It’s not mutually exclusive.  God calls some men to be preachers and some to not.  God calls some women to be preachers and some to not.  For either of them to shirk their responsibility is wicked.  They will be held accountable to God alone. 

    I believe that both men and women ought to lead — to lead others closer and closer to Jesus.  And neither ought to dominate.

Post a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *