Understanding Paul’s Prohibition in 1 Timothy 2:12
I recently was asked whether male authority in the family and church is the result of the Fall. Was there, the questioner wondered, an equality of person and rank that would have continued forever had sin not marred the relationship between the sexes?
To answer this question, I pointed the questioner to 1 Timothy 2:11–15:
Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 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.
This is a well-known section of Paul’s letters, if for no other reason than that it is controversial in debates about male and female roles in marriage and the church. This text is particularly important because it reveals that male authority is a pre-fall institution. It is part of God’s creational design.
Paul’s reasoning in this passage is twofold: Adam was formed first and it was Eve who was deceived. It may be that the second reason is a consequence of Eve’s sin, but Paul first grounds male authority (specifically teaching authority in the church) in the creational order. This order is clearly stated, but Paul does not elaborate in this section. What is it exactly that Paul saw in the creation account that led him to argue in this way? Being able to answer this question is important since Paul does not explain his application of Genesis 2–3. I think we can confidently say the following.
“It is not mere chronology,” as the New Testament scholar George Knight III puts it in his comments on 1 Tim 2:13, “that Paul appeals to here but what is entailed in this chronology” (emphasis added). Consider the order of creation. Adam is made first (Gen 2:7). What, however, is the significance of this fact? It is this: Adam was given the task of working and keeping the garden (Gen 2:15) and naming the animals (Gen 2:19) before Eve was created. Naming implies authority, something Adam will subsequently do for Eve as well (Gen 2:23; cf. 3:20). Even more so, the task of working and keeping the garden is the fundamental task of dominion given to mankind, and it is given prior to Eve’s creation. Eve has an indispensable and vital role to play in this dominion; man and woman together are to “fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Gen 1:28), but their roles are fundamentally different. Adam was created first and given the commission to rule before Eve was created. Eve was created to help Adam carry out this task. She is a “helper fit for him” (Gen 1:18). Adam, in fact, cannot carry out his task alone: “it is not good that man should be alone” (Gen 1:18). Eve, however, is a helper suitable for Adam as he exercises his God-given authority, rather than a coequal authority, which is powerfully displayed in the fact that she “was taken out of Man” (Gen 2:23). The creational order, then, as seen in Genesis 1–2, and as stated by Paul in 1 Timothy 2, clearly shows that male authority is built by God into the very fabric of nature.
Admittedly, Paul’s second reason—that Eve was the one who was first deceived—is more difficult to explain. Some would even say this part of Paul’s prohibition is based on the pre-fall situation, that there is something inherent to the female constitution, while not in itself sinful, that is more easily twisted in a sinful direction than is the case with men. On this way of thinking, man is made to rule and to fight for the cause of righteousness in the world, while the female disposition, in this particular instance the female disposition to submit to authority—“woman, who by nature (that is, by the ordinary law of God) is formed to obey” (John Calvin)—is twisted in Eve’s submitting herself to a false authority. Most interpreters, however, because of Paul’s use of the verb “was deceived” (1 Tim 2:14; see Gen 3:13) would argue something along the lines of Calvin: that Paul “alludes to the punishment inflicted on the woman,” which is itself stated in Gen 3:16: “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.” Paul’s second reason, then, most likely is based on the fall.
Some (but certainly not all) complementarians have been rightly criticized for arguing, in effect, that male leadership in the family and church is an arbitrary decision on God’s part. This is a version of complementarianism that insists that “women can do anything un-ordained men can do,” and that there is no difference between men and women in family, church, and society apart from the status of office and authority. That authority, then, appears to be arbitrarily delegated since women are just as capable as men of carrying out the same tasks. They just don’t have the authority from God to do so. This way of thinking either denies, or does not rightly emphasize, that male leadership in family, church, and society is firmly rooted in God’s creational intention and design. This leadership is not, in the first instance, a result of the fall, though the fall is also a part of the equation. Paul’s grounding of male authority in 1 Timothy 2 in the creation account in Genesis 1–2, therefore, is essential for rightly understanding the authority structures God has built into the world.
Image Credit: Unsplash
Go ahead and say you want Taliban laws over women. You want us kept weak and stupid so that we cannot ever deny men anything. Endorse wife-beating and rape. If women are as utterly worthless as hou describe here, quit pretending that you have any usw for us other than to be broodmares who can be killed off at menopause.
Karen, your unhinged angry screeds on here on indicative of a deeper problem. You are letting the darkness win. You are that which you claim to hate and have become a judgmental sexist bigot.
Why you continue this pathetic work is beyond me. No one takes you seriously. You are a fool that I pray is attempting to troll. Otherwise, may God have mercy on your soul.
So, show me where I’m wrong? Show me how your side actually encourages women to be anything but boring domestic drudges? Where you encourage women to actually use our brains?
You can’t, because a women who thinks will destroy patriarchy. You depend on women being weak, stupid, and cowardly. Any demonstration of competence or courage by a woman wrecks your carefully constructed lies.
What is my side? Do you know what I believe? You don’t. (FWIW, I’m actually egalitarian in my views. I think Ben misses the mark here).
But that’s my point. You don’t listen to others. You don’t take the time to actually read these articles. You hysterically draw laughable conclusions like “you want Taliban laws over women.”
You are clearly an unserious person. That’s where you’re wrong. You are unable to have a mature conversation on these things which is why others push back against you. It’s not because you’re a women, it’s because you interact on here like a toddler.
Wow. This article merely reported what the apostle said about women running churches and why he held that view. You somehow found the Taliban in the mix. You somehow found vile, foul, sickening things about women that were never mentioned or implied. You somehow found actual violence toward women in this piece. Conclusions: 1) Hate is not an argument for your radical leftist ideas, 2) lies are not the way to make your point, 3) you need to either increase or decrease your meds, or else you will have another stroke, and 4) you really ARE a Karen, Karen. Just wow.
Dear Karen,
do not be deceived by idolatries and blasphemies inherent in this piece.
The subordination of women declared in this piece claims that Apostle Paul subordinated women as inferior to men, because, it is claimed, (a) ‘Eve’ is a figure of ALL WOMEN of all TIME and of EVERY PLACE, forever and ever, (b) so women are always inferior to men, and (c) therefore – according to this eugenical social theory – society needs to subordinate and control women. But Paul – a scholar of Jewish teaching does not believe this. Rabbinical teaching includes in the to and fro of arguments that make up Midrash and Aggadah elaborate descriptions and discussions that portray women’s excellent qualities including leadership qualities. For example:
“Why does a man ask a woman [to marry and engage in intercourse], but a woman does not ask a man?” He replied: “To what is this comparable? To a person who lost something. He seeks what he has lost, but what he has lost does not seek him” [Eve was part of Adam’s body, and therefore he must restore the part that he lacks]. And yet another question: “Why does the man put seed in the woman, but the woman does not put seed in the man?” His reply: “This is like a person who has a deposit in his hand, and he seeks a trustworthy person with whom to entrust it” [and the woman may be trusted to guard the deposit] (Gen. Rabbah 17:8).
We see here that the flourishing of men’s Godly qualities requires the flourishing of women’s Godly qualities. Including, above qualities of leadership.
Apostle Paul does not reject the ancient Jewish traditions respecting the leadership of women and God’s giving leadership to women. How could he?! He knows of Ruth, Esther, and Mary, to name a few.
American Reformer writing is full of antinomianism and adjacent antisemitism. BOTH are hideously un-Biblical!
Eugenical social theories of women’s inferiority are blasphemous and idolatrous. This is clear directly from Apostle Paul in his claim that God’s design overthrows eugenical and other social theories about racial or gender subordination, and nationalist bigotries. Overthrowing these hideous idolatries and blasphemies are obvious accomplishments of many New Testament writing: that women are welcome to follow Jesus of Nazareth and are given teaching DIRECTLY by Jesus and healed DIRECTLY by Jesus (Jesus did not disallow women to touch him, question him, join in ministry). Acts reveals this too, many times.
Do not believe any antinomian, antisemitic, un-Biblical and un-Christ like teachings wherever they are. And THEY ARE HERE in American Reformer. They will – soon enough – be got in their own wicked deceptions. God promises it.
If you truly believe this website is “antinomian, antisemitic, un-Biblical and un-Christ” then why are you here? Why do you engage with these authors? Do you think the tens/hundreds of readers here are going to listen to you? You clearly do not wish to engage with the articles. You clearly are not looking to have a conversation. You are here to yell and vent and curiously provide “support” to what is a bad-faith hysterical poster (possible troll). Why?
And, yes, I say this as an egalitarian who would push back against Ben’s thoughts.
What a silly comment, really. The Biblical record shows that God’s people are required to speak out against idolatry.
Antinomianism (and adjacent antisemitism):
Failing to engage the rabbinical and other historically situated Jewish commentaries: the witness of God’s covenant people! before the ‘new covenant’.
Un-Biblical:
Failing to address the roles and meanings of specific women in the old and new covenant:
e.g. Ruth, Esther and other women are regarded as exemplars. Esther particularly as a deliverer of God’s oppressed and endangered people. Various women in the Hebrew scriptures and the New Testament are recorded making important announcements, prayers, interpretations. Various women are recorded in theologically and spiritually important connections with Jesus public ministry and teaching: Jesus addresses them directly in public discourse, they ask Jesus questions in public discourse, etc.
e.g. no mention at all of Mary. That is astonishing and causes great suspicion about the intentions of the piece.
Un-Christlike:
see above about Jesus’ direct engagement and public discourse with women.
Furthermore, Apostle Paul affirms that this comment in the piece cannot be accepted as final:
” male authority is built by God into the very fabric of nature “, because Jesus Messiah/Lamb of God/Word of God has fulfilled and renewed ‘the very fabric of nature’ in a ‘New Creation’ in which there – ontologically – no separation of male and female.
Furthermore, morally
any submission of women (or any of God’s people) to slavery, degradation, abuse, violence is impermissible. Why in this piece – and generally throughout American Reformer – there are no discussion of the moral requirements/prohibitions upon men with regard to women?
Hummhhh?!
Bizarre claims, but points awarded for excellent use of imagination and creativity.
Pleeeeeeease!! Every man (and woman) knows in the “patriarchy”, women are in charge of the household. The household is the bedrock of every civilization that has ever existed. Enough said?
Isaiah 55:8, which says “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.”. The things that God thinks and purposes are not the things that man thinks and purposes, and therefore, because the thoughts are different, the outcomes of them in deeds are divergent. Out paths with God should be parallel. Righteousness and beauty and truth and goodness are the same things in heaven and on earth, and alike in God.
God set the order, timing of creation and who can say they set the order? Our true challenge in this fleshly body is making our ways parallel to God’s ways. Standing in the way are ‘Your thoughts;’ ‘your ways,’-self-dependence and self-confidence are the master-evils of humanity.
Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33 gives a deeper understanding. I will focus on the following words and reverse the order for emphasis. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. There is no greater love than a husband who loves his wife in this manner and the returning love is beyond our understanding. (God’s love)
Making the first last and the last first. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. So, each has its role in the family design of God and one is not superior to the other. It is merely, the way God in His infinite wisdom designed for us to find a love and peace without rival and to have our ways parallel His ways.
“He who has ears let him hear” often said by our Lord. The importance of listening and understanding spiritual truths and not everyone is receptive to it. Which one are you?
Thank you Ben for your article regarding “Male Authority in God’s Creational Design”.
Our churches have based their organizations (denominations) after mans organizations, not Gods Pattern for His Church and Families.
Man’s churches are failing as we enter the end of days of which we have been forewarned. Man’s Churches have assumed to themselves priesthoods and authority (as they supposed) thereby dividing believers one against another. They also assumed responsibilities which God ordained and appointed for Men and Women (The Family) not men’s churches. That is why Christian Families are failing like secular families.
What is God’s Church? It’s Jesus Christ and Born Again Believers having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit our True Guide, our True Teacher, our True Comforter along with God’s Word and the Testimony of His Creation. They are the living breathing Church Of God, adopted Sons and Daughters of God destined to be with Him throughout eternity.
I invite you visit https://www.knowingforyourself.com/
Money has no value here, no trips to Alaska, no books to purchase, no – none of that.
Important:
If nothing else read from the home page and then at the top read from: God’s Family – God’s Church
– Message of the Temple Veil, and the Women at the well – Rebuild Restore.
I say to all think for yourself and share this site with others. “For there is nothing hidden that shall not be disclosed, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come out in the open.” Luke 8:17
Best to all in Jesus Christ our Savior and Redeemer. Daniel
Want to know who is the Prince of this world, and his followers? First read the ten Commandments (Thou shalt not) as given in your Bible. Then read them again starting first with the 10th command saying ”Thou Shalt” and you shall know who the god of this world is and those who follow him. Think about it.
1) Husband headship was never part of God’s original plan. He gave the same command to “be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, and tend the garden” to both Adam and Eve. That a husband would have rule over the wife…indeed, even that her desire would be for him… was actually part of the curse, not God’s ideal. Adam was standing right with Eve on having the forbidden fruit. He followed her lead but was not held responsible for her sin…just his own failure to stand with God against temptation. (As to honoring the curse being biblical, I have to point out that the curse on Adam’s making the earth produce by the sweat of man’s brow has not been seen as sacred, since the church does not condemn the alleviation of that curse by technology. That is, I have never heard anyone say trying to remove that curse is a sin. Interesting inconcistency.
2) Male headship over women in general is ABSOLUTELY NOT a biblical principal. HUSBAND headship in the home seems clear (although the definition of headship is more narrow), and while there is some room for debate about male leadership in the church, I think it leans toward a male at the head of the church hierarchy. But the idea that women can’t be an under-shepherd leader is negated by Scripture itself. Deborah was a judge, Lydia was a deaconess, and Junia (a woman’s name) was an apostle. Jesus ministry was supported by women, and He elevated the roles of women. The first person to whom Jesus revealed his resurrected life was Mary Magdalene…making her, not the 12 disciples, the first evangelist of the gospel (the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus as our savior). Jesus even made an evangelist out of the woman at the well…and they both “taught men.”
3. The church is hypocritical about their position of women not teaching men. The denominations who are most vocal opponents of women in leadership in the US (Baptists and PCA Presbyterians) are all too willing to send a woman on a foreign mission field where they will be teaching men. The hypocrisy is embarrassing…and inexcusable.
4. Church history leaves egg on the faces of those who refuse women’s opportunities to fulfill their calling. There are great women leaders throughout church history. Mother Theresa is well known…she taught everybody. Great men of our day—Billy Graham, Bill Bright, etc.—were theologically trained at Forest Home, a training center for evangelists established by Henrietta Mears who was also their theology teacher. Two of the most extensive Bible Study programs today that are now international were written and overseen by women—Bible Study Fellowship and Precept Ministries. Millions “rise up and call those women blessed.”
So my question is, did these women, who have done so much good and whose ministries have been blessed with international acclaim, sin? On what basis will the proponents of silencing women call their good, “evil?”
1 Corinthians 11:7 A man shouldn’t have his head covered, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is man’s glory.
Ambrosiaster wrote: Paul says that the honor and dignity of a man makes it wrong for him to cover his head, because the image of God should not be hidden. Indeed, it ought not to be hidden, for the glory of God is seen in the man. … A woman therefore ought to cover her head, because she is not the likeness of God but is under subjection.
The man was created first, as a likeness of our Father and Son Godhead, and he was granted dominion to rule in the image of God. The dominion of men was foretold even before the first man was created. Consequently, the wife is supposed to reverence her husband. (Ephesians 5:33) Ephesians 5 explains that the woman is the image of the ever-straying church, while her husband images Jesus Christ, who is God. So, how you treat men counts as how you treat God.
Matthew 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.