“I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” (1 Timothy 2:12)

“The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” (1 Corinthians 14:34)

“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control” (1 Timothy 2:14-15).

“Male and Female” are part of the created order, but how ought we understand their respective roles, biblically?

Paul establishes what to modern eyes can either look misogynistic or like a restoration of the “Great Chain of Being” mindset, where there is a hierarchy from God on down, with women as lower than men because of Eve’s sin. In these passages, it can be easy to read that a woman should be quiet, barefoot, and pregnant, because she “will be saved through childbearing.” And reading these verses in isolation would make it seem as though Adam was right in his “the woman whom you gave to be with me” schtick about why he ate the forbidden fruit. 

Modern Debates on Established Scripture 

Time and again, the church revisits issues that are hotly debated in culture, such as homosexuality, gender identity and gender relations. 

What happens when feminism arrives in the church? Can women have additional responsibilities and newfound freedoms in our cultural context, or must we conform to the practices established in scripture?

Before anyone closes the browser and deems scripture as a clear winner, think of whether you know any church where women must truly be silent (1 Corinthians 14:34), or pray with their head covered (1 Corinthians 11:5-7). Paul cites the created order in 1 Corinthians 11:9-12 as a reason for covering women’s heads, but we largely ignore this.

In our cultural climate, the anonymity of a head covering has become a protest symbol for women who feel oppressed: their rights and individuality are not recognized, according to this symbol

Yet, recently, Owen Strachan has argued against Beth Moore’s idea of women teaching men in the church for the exact created order mentioned above. I’m not sure Strachan has ever gone on record in favor of head coverings. However, he does state, “The man is created first in the Old Testament, and possesses what the New Testament will call headship over his wife. Adam is constituted the leader of his home; he is given authority in it, authority that is shaped in a Christlike way as the biblical story unfolds.” 

Strachan goes on to explain, in light of verses such as the ones I quoted above, that: “If we take the Bible at its word, then we recognize that there is no way for a woman to instruct the gathered church, whether in an authoritative or ‘non-authoritative’ way.”

Strachan cites as problematic a Twitter thread where Beth Moore jokes about “teaching a men’s Sunday school class full of Calvinists” and states that she is “doing Mother’s Day” (in reference to preaching on Mother’s Day). 

He also cites J.D. Greear who discusses that it is fine for women to teach in a “non-authoritative” way, as long as it not confuse people that this is an actual “sermon” presented by someone like an elder: an official office of the church.

Greear in turn states that women did not always have to be silent, as they could “prophesy publicly” in 1 Corinthians 11:5, for example.

Deriving a Principle 

I think if both sides of this debate were fully honest, they would have to confess to deriving a biblical principle that must be applied. 

This is an important distinction, as it makes clear that each side is presenting an interpretation and application of scripture, not simply scripture as it is. 

“Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire” (1 Timothy 2:9) established a lack of ostentation and a degree of “self control” for women, before discussing that “women should remain quiet” (v. 12). 

Pearl’s as a status symbol might only be part of the status problem Paul addresses.

As someone who makes a profession in public lecturing, I understand how words can be flashy. We can think of Jesus story about making a public show of praying (Matthew 6:5) to see a spiritual dimension of this. Better to be quiet than detract from the purpose of prayer or teaching in building others up!

Perhaps the speech of these women was an extension of their physical adornment for show.

Is it possible that what is missing from these women’s speech was modesty and self control? I suppose that the case can be made that under no circumstances should women speak, but Paul may be driving at proper behavior more than women remaining absolutely quiet. How could they prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11:5, otherwise, as Greear points out?

I am going to lead a small group discussion this week in a group of men and women. Here is a mental exercise for you: should I command the women to be silent and ask their husbands about what I say, per 1 Corinthians 14:35? If I did, it would be just me and one other man speaking, then. 

Your answer just might reveal insight into how we should treat women teaching in the church.

Food for thought, anyway.

Let's read 1 Corinthians 11:5 alongside 1 Timothy 2:12. Paul may be driving at proper behavior (for both sexes) more than women remaining absolutely quiet. Click To Tweet