Women as Teachers of Scripture

by Steve Atkerson
What are we in the house church movement to make of Paul's harsh words that "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" (1 Tm 2:11-12)? The essence of my first article was that 1 Tm 2:11-12 is a timeless truth, transcending all cultures and times.

But how can this be so, considering the cultural nature of the paragraph preceding 1 Tm 2:11-15 (1 Tm 2:9-10)? It states that women are "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." Does this mean it is wrong (indeed, sinful) for today's Christian woman to braid her hair, or wear gold, or don a pearl necklace? If 2:9-10 does not apply today, then does 2:11-15?

It must be remembered that every NT epistle is an "occasional" document, written in response to some specific first century occasion (usually a problem situation). Only the context in which various injunctions occur can indicate whether they were intended to be temporary and limited (as with 2 Tm 4:13) or applied to every church at every time.

Feminism was almost as rampant in Roman society as it is in ours today. One way that Roman women expressed either independence from their husbands or sexual promiscuity was with elaborately braided hair (intertwined with gold and costly jewels) and ostentatious clothing. Accordingly, Paul directed Christian women to avoid all such appearances of evil and to concentrate on that which is true adornment--good deeds appropriate for women who profess to worship God. Thus, while the particulars were in a sense "cultural," the principal behind it obviously still holds true. Believing women are still to concentrate on modest dress and emphasize inner beauty over external adornment.

Paragraph 2:11-15 thus logically follows paragraph 2:9-10 as further examples of activities that do and do not constitute "good deeds" (2:10) for women. The context of Paul's reasoning for prohibiting a Christian woman from either teaching or exercising authority over a man is clearly weighted toward something intended to be applied to every church at every time. Why else would Paul dredge up Adam's priority in creation (2:13)? By citing creation as the basis for the prohibitions rather than some local cultural problem, it is obvious that although the local situation prompted the letter, that local situation was not the ultimate basis for the injunctions. These prohibitions are applicable as long as the reasoning of 2:13 remains true.

But didn't Christ's death on the cross redeem us from the curse and reverse the effects of the transgression in Eden? Certainly redemption will eventually phase out all the effects of the fall. However, Adam's priority in creation preceded the fall. It is independent of the fall. God easily could have created Adam and Eve simultaneously, but He did not choose to do so. This shows that "the head of the woman is man . . . for man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man" (1 Co 11:3-9). This inherent position of submission is, according to 1 Tm 2:11-15, violated when a woman teaches Scripture or exercises authority over a man.

As relates to Eve's deception (2:14), are we to conclude that all women are at all times similarly deceived? Absolutely not; to conclude such would be to read into the text something that is not there. Women certainly do not have a corner on the market of spiritual deception. An examination of the world's false religions will reveal as many (if not more) male founders as female!

So what does Eve's deception have to do with the prohibitions of 2:12? Eve's deception (2:14) is the second reason cited as to why women are neither to teach nor have authority over men. What may be implied is that all women, like Eve, are more liable to deception than are men (though obviously men are liable to deception as well). Notice that Eve's deception occurred prior to the fall, while Eve was still in a state of perfection. Thus, this weakness to deception may be an inherent characteristic of the sex; it is not a result of the curse but rather a design of creation. Men and women were created to be different not only physically but also in the roles they assume in the church.

An alternative explanation is that Paul is here stating the judicial consequences placed upon womankind because of Eve's actions. Just as men were sentenced to "toil all the days of [their] life" because of Adam's sin (Gen 3:17), so also women must refrain from teaching because of Eve's deception.

It is important to point out that the reasoning behind not permitting women either to teach or to have authority over men has nothing to do with a woman's intelligence, spirituality, or public speaking ability. The female mind is equal and often superior to the male intellect. Scripture is full of examples of wise, godly women (some of whom were married to ungodly husbands). As in Pilate's case (Mt 27:19), many men would do well to accept the wise counsel of their wives! Both male and female are equal in Christ (Ga 3:28), but this equality does not obliterate God-created gender distinctions. Each has different divinely assigned roles to fulfill in the family and in the church.

Finally, what are we to make of Paul's statement that "women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety"? Taken in its immediate context, it simply refers to the sphere in which women can find their greatest ministry potential--the home.

The word "saved" here confuses many evangelicals who are used to seeing it only in the context of eternal salvation from damnation. We know that eternal salvation is by grace through faith (and not by works, Ep 2:8-9), so the salvation in 2:15 must be from something other than damnation (since it is accomplished by works). Specifically, Christian women will be "saved" (2:15) from violating God's order in creation (2:13) by concentrating on being godly mothers (cp. Tit 2:3-5). Having stated which "deeds" (2:10) were not appropriate for Christian women (2:12), Paul ended by stating which deeds were appropriate (2:15). Just as Paul told the Philippians to "work out your salvation," he here directed the women to that area in which they could work out their salvation.

So how is all of this to be applied in the house-church? Obviously, women should not take on the role of authoritative instructors of doctrine, nor should they take on roles that would put them in positions of authority over men in the church (e.g., the position of elder). None of this, of course, applies outside the household of God. In the world, women may be corporate C.E.O.'s, political leaders, or military officers. As teachers of secular material, women may indeed instruct men in mathematics, English, or whatever.

Even within the church, that a woman is not to teach a man does not mean that men have nothing to learn from women. The prophecies given by God to women illustrate this (Acts 2:17 1 Co 11:3-16). Many times my wife Sandra has shared with me her insights into Scripture--insights I had never before seen and that helped me in my understanding of a text. Although people do "learn" from prophecy, (1 Co 14:31), "prophets" are not fundamentally "teachers" (1 Co 12:28-29). Even singing can be a form of teaching (Co 3:16) if we learn from the lyrics, but a singer is not fundamentally seen as a teacher. However, the informal sharing of insights and thoughts does not place either person in the official role of "teacher." While not permitting women to teach or have authority over a man, we must be careful not to limit other ministries that are completely open to women. The church would be severely crippled without their input!