Throughout my life I have run into many different Christians who have a differing view on one specific passage—1 Timothy 2:12. It is, without a doubt, a highly controversial verse in God’s Word that has caused many an uproar, conflict, and hard feeling; it has even facilitated church division. But it is not as though God has been unclear. It is that we (those who are supposed to be approved workmen of His Word) don’t look at it in the context of its immediate surroundings and instead we have mindlessly embraced a bad (terrible actually) translation of the Greek words (but I’m getting ahead of myself).
1 Timothy 2:12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
(In the red corner) On one side of the argument you have those who say that they take the passage at “face value” and conclude that women are not to teach men. They sometimes will back up their belief with cross references to other portions of Scripture or bring up “big name” preachers who believe the same as they do (or, more truthfully, the person they got their belief from). Strangely, almost all of these people will have a “work around” for this rule if they want to have a woman teach in some way or another.
(In the blue corner) On the other side you have those who completely disregard 1 Timothy 2:12 all together. They many times have very weak arguments, stating that the word for “exercise authority” is only used once in the Bible so we don’t know what it means. Other points will include that it was the apostle Paul’s personal feelings and not God’s law, or that it was just for that time frame. They will even go as far as to say that Paul was talking about a specific woman that was causing trouble in the Ephesian church at that time.
So what do you believe? And what do I believe? Or does it even matter what either one of us believes? What matters is what God says… right? So that is what we need to find out through diligent study and sound reasoning.
Should we take this passage at “face value”? We could. But what about the places in the Bible where righteous women pray, teach, instruct, prophesy, and lead in the Name of the Lord? There was Deborah and Jael (Judges 4-5) who led, prophesied, and judged. There was Huldah, the prophetess, who prophesied to and instructed King Josiah as to what he was to do (2 Kings 22:14-20). Even the prophet Isaiah’s wife was a prophetess (Isaiah 8:3).
One might say that those are all Old Testament examples, and we are dealing in the New Testament—and that is true. But two things must go along with that. First, the New Covenant (that which separates the Old and New Testament) was a Covenant of much more liberality in things relating to customs and regulations. Those underneath the New Covenant were still to keep from sinning (lying, stealing, adultery, etc.), but ceremonially, they did not have to keep the appointed feast or food laws (i.e. you could eat pork and you didn’t have to celebrate Passover). More importantly they could associate with Gentiles (non Jews) especially if they were believers. In fact, if those Gentiles were brethren, the Jews were to treat them the same as any other Jew (that is, an heir to the promises of God). Galatians 3:28 says that in the Body of Christ “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ”. If God brought equality to Jew and Greek/Gentile in the New Covenant, why would He bring inequality to male and female when this passage puts them into the same category? So we would have to ponder: if women can’t teach men—then “Since there is a large difference between male and female, maybe there is one between Jew and Greek?” (This is definitely not true, but if we want to follow the “women can’t teach men” crowd keep in mind that this verse surely tips an apple cart somewhere.)
Secondly, there are numerous mentions of women in the New Testament leading, teaching, and prophesying. In Acts, the evangelist Phillip had four prophetess daughters. Paul, in his epistles, continuously mentions Priscilla and Aquila (and many other women too numerous to name) as teaching and leading (some even believe Priscilla wrote the book of Hebrews). Even in 1 Corinthians 11 Paul talks about women praying and prophesying in the church (he just gives some rules about the length of their hair, but affirms they are to pray and prophesy).
Even with all these thoughts on hand, I still do not have a solid doctrine contradicting what is taken as a mandate in 1 Timothy 2:12. Instead I have many events and stray verses that don’t line up well with that one verse at “face value”. If women aren’t supposed to teach men then these women in the Bible (and many more I did not mention) were sinners—but the Bible seems to indicate that they were righteous (even in the teaching and leading). So if they were not sinners, we are tempted to come up with some sort of “caveat”, which many people do.
Another thought to throw out there is this: How are women to participate in the Body of Christ (the Church) if they aren’t allowed to say anything? All Christians are commanded to teach, preach, exhort, admonish, rebuke, and reprove one another. Are women exempt, being allowed to laze around and let “the men” take care of everything (just stay in the kitchen, right)? And what about spiritual gifts (no matter your views on them)? How is a woman to use her gifting and ministry in the church if she can’t say anything about the Bible in front of a man for fear of “teaching” him?
I’ve heard many notions of how to fix the dilemma: Women can teach women and male children as long at they’re not too old (however, you must come up with your own age). Women can teach men if the woman is a co-teacher with a man. Women can write books or teach on audio/television to women, and then men can choose to read or listen if they wish. But… all of these ideas are men’s own thoughts. And if God wanted us to follow a “mandate” He laid out, don’t you think He would have given us (at least some) guidelines?
On the other hand, those who throw this passage out the window, do very little to build a case that shows how a woman can teach a man (or lead for that matter), or if there are any situations where it would not be appropriate. Instead they merely try to dismiss the verse in question.
Now, if you take a quick look online at this verse and the questions it poses, you’ll find a host of people on both sides of the argument, both gently and harshly, promoting their own belief and bashing the other side. But none (at least that I saw) address one very simple part of the solution which is found in the rest of the 2nd chapter of 1 Timothy and explains what Paul meant in verse 12. It comes both from context and something I have addressed in a previous blog, Translation Tribulation—that is, word studies—word studies specifically on the words “woman” and “man” in verse 12.
The word for “woman” in this passage is the Greek word gune. It means woman or wife. In fact, every place in the New Testament which is translated woman or wife comes from this Greek word. In Greek there is no other word for wife or woman to differentiate between the two—instead, one has to use context (and a few other Greek grammar rules) to determine whether gune should be translated wife or woman.
In like manner, the same is true for the Greek word for “man”—there is no separate word for husband. Context and Greek grammar must define its meaning. That Greek word is aner. (Though here in 1 Timothy 2:12 it is more specifically andros which comes from aner. In the Greek, they have word endings just like we do in English. In this case andros means “of a man/husband”.)
A man by the name of Dr. Spiros Zodhiates (who was a Greek language scholar and authored many written works and labored over lexical aids, most notably his Key Word Study Bible) wrote that the word for man (andros) in 1 Timothy 2:12 should have been translated husband. He also states that, because of the obvious connection, the word for woman (going back to verse 11) should have been translated wife. Since andros is husband, it cements the translation of gune as wife in the connecting sentences.
Now Dr. Zodhiates’ works are by no means an end all. I (and hopefully you as well) want to get the answer from the context directly, because context overrides word studies. But it should raise a very viable answer to this dilemma which we should at least consider if we haven’t before.
So, let’s look at the context of at least chapter 2 here in 1 Timothy. In the first 7 verses of chapter 2, Paul tells Timothy to instruct all believers in Ephesus to pray for their leaders. (P.S. Not for the leader to have a happy day, but that the leaders would lead in a way that would be beneficial to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.)
Then in verse 8 Paul gives instruction for the men in “every place”—that is, all of the different house churches that were in Ephesus. But notice that Paul says “men” not “each man”. Paul is giving blanket instructions for all men (The Greek word for “men” is plural.)
In verses 9-10 Paul continues on to the women with instructions for their dress conduct and modesty. Once again, this is “women” not “each woman”. It is something that each individual woman is supposed to do, but the message is said to them as a whole group. This was likewise true for the men in the previous verse. It is men and women (the Greek word is plural here, as well) not a man and a woman (singular).
As we get to the sticky part, we need to consider that verse 11 might be starting a new “group”. Paul has dealt with the entire group (both men and women) in verses 1-7, with men (plural) in verse 8, and with women (plural) in verses 9-10. The final section, verses 11-15, are indubitably connected to each other. It says “a woman” and “a man” (both Greek words are singular). The “woman” and the “man” are connected to each other, which infers that this is a new segment and a new group.
This train of thought, (even if you’re not sure yet that this is referring to a husband and wife), is a reasonable conclusion when considering the context of the entire Word of God. God has not given any rules in the Bible about all men being over all women. He has, however, repeatedly and clearly talked about the proper relationship of a husband and wife. From Genesis 1-3, to the Law found in Pentateuch, to the Prophets of old, to the Epistles in the New Testament, God over and over again addresses the importance of the marriage covenant and the roles both husband and wife are to play. It is important to God because it gives a picture of God’s covenant with us—God is ever and always concerned with His Glory!
Let’s look at 1 Timothy 2:11. “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.”
There are a few things here—I’ll touch on two of them. First is the word “quietly”—it does not mean total silence, but rather peacefulness and tranquility. Therefore when a woman (*throat clear* wife) is being taught (*another throat clear* by her husband) she is to receive it with a humble non-contentious spirit.
Secondly (and more emphatically) is the word submissiveness. This is really important. The concept of women being submissive is not uncommon in the Bible. But it is only common and righteous when referring to a married couple. Just look at a couple of these cross references starting with Genesis (when God instituted marriage) and finishing in the Epistles (where we are at with 1 Timothy).
Genesis 3:16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you will bring forth children; yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”
Note that the word for “desire” here in the Hebrew is not a passionate or romantic desire, but rather a desire to overcome and rule over her husband. God set up the husband to be the head of the household and family; he was going to rule over her (husband over wife… not men over women). Is it any wonder why, in the New Testament, God repeatedly told wives to be submissive to their husbands?
1 Peter 3:1-6 In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. Your adornment must not be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands; just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.
Note that these instructions are practically identical to the ones in our passage in 1 Timothy, and here it is very clear that it is the wives who are to be submissive to their husbands (not to other men). And remember these are the same Greek words, gune and aner, for woman/wife and man/husband.
Ephesians 5:21-33 …and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.
Note that I included verse 21 to show that we are to be subject to one another, because this goes for the gander just as well as the goose. In verse 21 there is no difference between male and female (in other words male members of the body are to be subject to everyone, including the females), and yet starting in verse 22 we see there is an additional subjectiveness for a wife to give to her husband. This section of Scripture also shows just how important the marriage covenant is. We should by no means malign it by making multiple women extra submissive to just any man. Nor should any man feel he has authority over any woman other than his own wife.
It would be quite strange (very improper, I would argue) for any ol’ woman to be submissive to any ol’ man. That would distort God’s covenant picture of marriage by creating pictures of immoral relationships. Just think of a few of the possible scenarios: a single woman being submissive to a married man (yuck), or a married woman being submissive to a single man (double yuck). Actually all of the possibilities are immoral in nature (evoking images of unfaithfulness, harlotry, and even polygamy). All, that is, except this one… one wife being submissive to her one husband.
Let’s go on to verse 12. The words to look at here are “teach”, “exercise authority”, and “remain quiet”. Teaching, according to the Greek, is a military style of teaching (we even get our word “didactic” from the Greek word for “teaching” in this verse).
Exercising authority is to domineer over someone. (Sounds like what’s in Genesis 3:16 to me. That the woman’s desire would be for her husband—to have authority over him, or to run the family and call the shots if you will.) Can you see that this is a dead ringer for the commands God has given to wives in regards to their husbands?
Once again, (though it is a different Greek word than used in verse 11) to remain quiet does not mean to be mute or to shut up; it means to be sober and peaceable.
So again, we see that a wife is to let (and help) her husband lead the household and not “desire to overtake him” as is talked about in Genesis 3:16.
But perhaps the most obvious reason verses 11-12 should be translated as husband and wife is found in the connecting three verses. Verse 13 starts out with the word “for”… for what? It is undeniably connecting the thoughts of verses 11-12 with verses 13-15. What does it talk about? Adam and Eve, the first husband and wife, a divinely married couple, not just any ol’ individual man and woman.
1 Timothy 2:13-15 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.
Verses 13-15 are not saying women are easily deceived or that they are stupid and therefore men should lead. No… it is saying that when Eve led, she led them into sin (contrary to the established order God had placed in their relationship). And Adam, (leading from behind, if you will) by not truly leading, but following Eve, led them into sin (once again, contrary to God’s plan of leadership). Therefore, the admonition for all married couples everywhere (and down through the ages) was for the husband to lead just as God designed holy matrimony to work.
Finally, in verse 15, Paul states that… “women?”… shall be preserved through the bearing of children? I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make any sense at all. Women cannot bear children without a man, and Paul would never encourage a woman to get impregnated outside of marriage (no duh). Sooooo… it once again has to be a wife. (Though I did have a conversation one time with someone who said that unmarried women would be preserved through other married women’s childbearing… to which I might have rolled my eyes… Seriously? Give me a break… sigh…)
This article does not address women pastors or overseers, just as 1 Timothy 2:12 does not (but 1 Timothy 3 does). Nor does it address feminism, the belief that women are better and superior to men, that they don’t need men, and/or that they need to be able to do everything men can do physically. (God has made our bodies and minds different and capable of doing different things more effectively than the other. But I’m not here to talk about that.)
Phew… That was an awful lot of information to divulge (and probably much more to digest for you…) but I hope that at least now you will feel comfortable to examine this subject more closely.
The most helpful study you could do would be one on marriage. After that, look and see how many passages in the Bible are left that talk about how unmarried men and women are to get along with one another in the church (differentiated from all believers getting along) and study those. I think you will find there are not many.
God is very concerned about His picture of covenant in relation to Christ and the church. There is one more passage that I will leave you with, even though it is, yet again, a bad translation. But even with a poor translation, we, in our broken English, can still understand what God is really saying.
1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman/(wife), and God is the head of Christ.
It’s a headship of the family thing. It’s not a gender related issue. And more importantly it’s about His Glory!
Written by Caleb Jensen, Director of WORD Center Ministries
