From Women, ministry and the Gospel: exploring new paradigms; Mark Husbands and Timothy Larsen, pp. 45-51.
According to the instructions on the role of women in the previous chapter (esp. 1Tim 2.12), only men are eligible for this office…Both Jesus and Paul confirmed the husband’s headship in the home, and both affirmed male leadership, Jesus by appointing 12 men as his apostles and Paul by grounding his teaching on the subject in the foundational creation narrative in the book of Genesis and by stating that elders in the church ought to be “faithful husbands”, implying that only males were eligible for such a position.
It is also demonstrable that the NT does not refer to any women serving in the position of pastor or elder in the churches planted by Paul or those under his apostolic jurisdiction…the interpretation of 1Tim 2.12, then, the overarching “single idea” is that women ought not to serve in authoritative church positions, whether by teaching men or by ruling (both functions are reserved for male elders)—two functions that are distinct yet closely related. In other words, “exercising authority” is a larger term than “teaching”, since a person may exercise authority in other ways besides teaching (such as by making decisions binding on the entire church or by exercising church discipline; see also 1Tim 5.17). Conversely, teaching is one major way in which authority is exercised in the church.
[An] unconvincing argument [is] that Paul sought to forbid women perpetrating false teaching in the Ephesian context. Yet this does not follow from a reading of 1Tim 2.12 in the context of the immediately following verses. Specifically, Paul states that Adam was created first (1Tim 2.13) and that it was not Adam who was deceived but the woman (1Tim 2.14). This makes clear that Paul’s concern is with the woman as the victim of deception, not as the perpetrator of false teaching. Nowhere in the context of 1Tim 2.12 is Paul’s point regarding Eve that she taught Adam falsely. Instead, in Timothy’s Ephesus there seems to have been those who told women that true spirituality consisted in refraining from engaging in their natural functions of marriage and childbearing (see, e.g., 1Tim 2.15; 4.3; 5.14).
Paul’s concern for women in this context was for them not to fall prey to such deception by engaging in teaching or assuming a ruling function, or by aspiring to the pastoral office (see 1Tim 3.1-2). Instead, he wanted them to be devoted to fulfilling their domestic and familial roles. Also, if Paul’s injunction in 1Tim 2.12 was merely for women not to “assert independent authority over men”…why would it be the case…that the present tense form of “I do not permit” in 1Tim 2.12 “fits a current prohibition better than a permanent one”? Is there ever a time when it is biblically appropriate for women to “assume independent authority over men”? It is hard to conceive of such a circumstance.
For these reasons, there continues to be every reason to believe that Scripture teaches that men should serve as heads of households (e.g., Eph 5.23-24; 1Tim 3.4-5) and as elders in the churches (1Tim 2.12; 3.2; see also 5.17).
In this way, the Bible links the authority structure in the natural family and the authority structure in the spiritual family, “God’s household” (1Tim 3.15), the church. This does not mean that women are denied significant participation in the ministry of the church. Nor is their role as wives and mothers to be disparaged or diminished in any way (see, e.g., 1Tim 2.15). In this life, God so chose to order male-female relations in the family and the church that wives submit to husbands and the church to male elders. This neither reflects any merit on the man’s part or demerit on the woman’s part; such is the will of God according to Scripture.
Paul’s teaching on gender role is notably consistent. His explanation as to why women are not to teach or exercise authority over men in 1Tim 2.13-15 is conceptually equivalent to the explanation seen in 1Cor 11.
According to the instructions on the role of women in the previous chapter (esp. 1Tim 2.12), only men are eligible for this office…Both Jesus and Paul confirmed the husband’s headship in the home, and both affirmed male leadership, Jesus by appointing 12 men as his apostles and Paul by grounding his teaching on the subject in the foundational creation narrative in the book of Genesis and by stating that elders in the church ought to be “faithful husbands”, implying that only males were eligible for such a position.
It is also demonstrable that the NT does not refer to any women serving in the position of pastor or elder in the churches planted by Paul or those under his apostolic jurisdiction…the interpretation of 1Tim 2.12, then, the overarching “single idea” is that women ought not to serve in authoritative church positions, whether by teaching men or by ruling (both functions are reserved for male elders)—two functions that are distinct yet closely related. In other words, “exercising authority” is a larger term than “teaching”, since a person may exercise authority in other ways besides teaching (such as by making decisions binding on the entire church or by exercising church discipline; see also 1Tim 5.17). Conversely, teaching is one major way in which authority is exercised in the church.
[An] unconvincing argument [is] that Paul sought to forbid women perpetrating false teaching in the Ephesian context. Yet this does not follow from a reading of 1Tim 2.12 in the context of the immediately following verses. Specifically, Paul states that Adam was created first (1Tim 2.13) and that it was not Adam who was deceived but the woman (1Tim 2.14). This makes clear that Paul’s concern is with the woman as the victim of deception, not as the perpetrator of false teaching. Nowhere in the context of 1Tim 2.12 is Paul’s point regarding Eve that she taught Adam falsely. Instead, in Timothy’s Ephesus there seems to have been those who told women that true spirituality consisted in refraining from engaging in their natural functions of marriage and childbearing (see, e.g., 1Tim 2.15; 4.3; 5.14).
Paul’s concern for women in this context was for them not to fall prey to such deception by engaging in teaching or assuming a ruling function, or by aspiring to the pastoral office (see 1Tim 3.1-2). Instead, he wanted them to be devoted to fulfilling their domestic and familial roles. Also, if Paul’s injunction in 1Tim 2.12 was merely for women not to “assert independent authority over men”…why would it be the case…that the present tense form of “I do not permit” in 1Tim 2.12 “fits a current prohibition better than a permanent one”? Is there ever a time when it is biblically appropriate for women to “assume independent authority over men”? It is hard to conceive of such a circumstance.
For these reasons, there continues to be every reason to believe that Scripture teaches that men should serve as heads of households (e.g., Eph 5.23-24; 1Tim 3.4-5) and as elders in the churches (1Tim 2.12; 3.2; see also 5.17).
In this way, the Bible links the authority structure in the natural family and the authority structure in the spiritual family, “God’s household” (1Tim 3.15), the church. This does not mean that women are denied significant participation in the ministry of the church. Nor is their role as wives and mothers to be disparaged or diminished in any way (see, e.g., 1Tim 2.15). In this life, God so chose to order male-female relations in the family and the church that wives submit to husbands and the church to male elders. This neither reflects any merit on the man’s part or demerit on the woman’s part; such is the will of God according to Scripture.
Paul’s teaching on gender role is notably consistent. His explanation as to why women are not to teach or exercise authority over men in 1Tim 2.13-15 is conceptually equivalent to the explanation seen in 1Cor 11.
