1 Timothy 2.12
Years ago I taught the bible classes at a Christian junior high. It was overseen by an Assemblies of God church, and if you know the denomination, you’ll know we have women pastors. Haven’t always, but have way longer than most denominations.
I should also mention the school accepted students, and hired teachers, from just about any denomination. Frequently half my students were
Anyway, one morning one of my kids informed me, “Mrs. Gopinatha” (name randomly picked; actual name withheld to protect the guilty) “says women can’t be pastors.”
This came as no surprise to me. Mrs. Gopinatha was a member of one of those independent Baptist churches. You know the sort. Most of the reason they’re independent is ’cause they figure everybody else is wrong.
“Oh does she,” I said.
“Because she says the bible says women can’t be pastors.”
Well,
“She’s got that part wrong,” I said; “it says women can’t be teachers. Show her 1 Timothy 2.12 the next time she tries to teach you anything biblical.” Here’s that verse, by the way:
1 Timothy 2.12 KJV - But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Sexists love this verse. Love love love. Quote it every time a woman dares try to correct ’em—whether it’s an unrelated woman in their church, up to and including the pastor’s wife; whether it’s a relative, like a mother, aunt, or sister; but especially when it’s a relative they think they’re in charge of, like a wife or daughter. Absolutely no woman is qualified to teach, rebuke, or correct them. And if they dare try, it’s usurping his divinely-granted
What’re the chances they’re quoting it out of context? Hundred percent.
What’re the chances they don’t care, so long that their misquotation keeps them in power? Hundred percent.
Women teachers in the bible.
The bible has many examples of women prophets. The judge Deborah, obviously.
Paul, who wrote 1 Timothy, wasn’t unfamiliar with women teachers. He lived with one of them: Prisca of Pontus—“Priscilla” to her friends. She had to leave Italy with her husband Aquila, and Paul met ’em in Corinth.
So if Paul knew women teachers, worked with them, and even approved of them, how was he then turning round and banning them from teaching?
The context.
Okay. If all we have is the grammatical context, if we don’t know any of the historical backstory, I admit Paul comes across sexist. He wants the women to be rid of their fancy outfits and keep their mouths shut; he’s worried they’ll stumble like that silly Eve; he wants ’em to stay home and make babies; he wants them to know their place and stay in it. Sounds like a patriarchal paradise.
1 Timothy 2.8-15 KWL - 8 So I want the men to pray everywhere, lifting clean hands—
- without anger or debate. 9 Women the same.
- In ordinary clothing, with modesty and moderation: No fancy braids, gold, pearls, expensive dress.
- 10 Instead, whatever’s appropriate for women who claim to worship God through good deeds.
- 11 Women: Learn silently. In obedience to everything.
- 12 (I don’t allow women to teach, nor shout over a man; she’s to be silent.)
- 13 For Adam was formed first. Then Eve.
- 14 Adam wasn’t deceived. The woman, deceived, overstepped.
- 15 Eve will be saved, by the Child descended from her.
- Women too, if they stay in faith, love, and holiness with moderation.
Why isn’t this the right way to interpret this passage? ’Cause it’s ignorant of historical context.
First-century churches were based on first-century synagogue church service. The
Here’s the problem. Synagogues were for men. The men were the students. They were the spiritual leaders of their families, the heads of their households, the patriarchs. They were expected to learn
Women, on the other hand, weren’t students. They were spectators. Yes, they should learn this stuff too, ’cause if they became mothers they’d have to raise good Pharisee children. Not all Pharisees agreed on women’s education, but most synagogues did create a women’s section in the back. Men would be up front, reading the scriptures, teaching the lesson, leading the music, and otherwise participating. Women would tend the minor children, and listen—not participate.
So when Paul wrote about women
The classroom would be noisy enough, but now people were shouting. Which completely went against the sort of order and decorum Paul felt we oughta see in church services. God doesn’t do confusion; he does peace!
Likewise if a woman wanted to teach, she’d have to go into the men’s section—and that’d also disrupt things. Especially since women would therefore feel even more free to shout questions from the back.
So you see the problem. But the real source of the problem wasn’t shouty women. It was the fact the synagogue setup was sexist. And Christians had adopted it—without adapting it to the new realities of the New Covenant.
Women and men, equal under Christ.
We see this new reality in the Mary and Martha story in Luke.
Luke 10.38-42 KWL - 38 In their travels, Jesus came to a certain town.
- A woman named Martha welcomed him into her house.
- 39 This woman had a sister named Mary,
- who sat at the Master’s feet, listening to his lesson.
- 40 Martha was busy with a lot of service. Standing there, she said,
- “Master, my sister left me to serve alone; doesn’t it bother you? So tell her she should help me.”
- 41 In reply the Master told her, “Martha, Martha, you worry and fret over much.
- 42 There’s one necessary thing—and Mary made a good choice. It won’t be taken from her.”
In synagogue, Mary would never get to sit at the rabbi’s feet. Never ever ever. Never get the chance to ask him questions. Never get the chance to be heard. She’d have to sit in the back, frustrated. She’d have to pass her questions along through her dad or brother or husband—if he remembered to ask them. Or if he didn’t ignore the fact she wanted the rabbi’s ruling, and try answering those questions himself, and figure his own answers were adequate, and authoritative enough. (And perhaps a little self-serving, if the question challenged him in any way. You know how know-it-alls can get.)
But on this day, Mary had full access to the Master, and wasn’t throwing away her opportunity. And, as Jesus told her sister, good for her.
This is how
As wrote the very same apostle who stated women ought not disrupt the services. Well of course they shouldn’t. And no men should disrupt ’em either. But this means we need to give women full access to our services, church resources, the Christian teachers, and the apostles and prophets who lead our churches. Women should have the ability to raise valid questions—same as any and every man.
The first-century synagogue layout was wholly inappropriate for Christian congregations. Over time Christians stopped using it. Sad to say, not because they realized it was sexist. It took a long time for them to realize this—and many of us still haven’t.
Y’see by the second century, Christian services had moved away from the synagogue’s interactive question/answer format. They became more of a lecture format: Homilies and sermons where the people don’t interrupt with questions. Meaning everybody was to be silent in church—women and men alike. Churches were still segregated (and many churches still are), but at least the women got to be on the left, instead of in the back.
Since Christians no longer have personal experiences of why women oughta be silent in the churches, we’ve lost sight of the historical context. So sexists invented a new one: Women need to shut up because they’re women.
Sexists, keeping women under their thumbs.
You remember that bit Paul included at the end of chapter 2, about Adam and Eve? Thought I was gonna skim past it, didja? Even though sexists claim it gives ’em really good fodder for why they’re totally right.
Starting at verse 11—’cause that’s the context.
1 Timothy 2.11-15 KWL - 11 Women: Learn silently. In obedience to everything.
- 12 (I don’t allow women to teach over, nor shout over a man; she’s to be silent.)
- 13 For Adam was formed first. Then Eve.
- 14 Adam wasn’t deceived. The woman, deceived, overstepped.
- 15 Eve will be saved, by the Child descended from her.
- Women too, if they stay in faith, love, and holiness with moderation.
Sexists say verse 12 is the context: “Women are to be silent, because Eve was so easily tricked.” But really it’s verse 11: “Women, learn in obedience—because Eve was so easily tricked.” Women, you need to learn your bibles. You need to learn who Jesus is and what he teaches. For yourself. Don’t depend on your husband to learn it for you!
The sexist’s description of a woman’s relationship with God: Rather than Jesus being that middle umbrella, all God’s blessings must come through her husband. (Although since an umbrella blocks things like sunlight and rain, I have no idea why they’re so bloody insistent upon this umbrella metaphor. Leave it to the devil to keep us blind to blatantly stupid things in our beliefs.)
You know why Eve was deceived? Because Adam hadn’t adequately instructed her. When God told the first man the Tree of Knowledge led to death,
Women, never assume your husband’s spiritual leadership makes up for your own lack of study and knowledge. It didn’t for Eve. Adam wasn’t tricked, but Eve was. And she pulled down her husband with her. Elsewhere, Paul pointed out all can be led astray like she was
A wife’s duty to her husband is to keep up with him spiritually. And even challenge him sometimes, because iron’s meant to sharpen iron.
Another curse upon Eve was the pain she’d suffer in childbirth
Thankfully, Eve’s childbirth produced us—and for that matter the very person who saved her, Christ Jesus. And all women will likewise be saved by him—but they need to trust him to do that, follow him, get to know him, and produce good fruit. Not expect their husbands to produce that fruit for them. We’re individually responsible for our individual relationships with God. Regardless of what sexists teach.
