I Timothy Series - Part 4

“Paul, the Woman-hater?”

1 Timothy 2:8-15 (Message #4 in 1 Timothy Series)

INTRODUCTION:

            I am not a prophet, or even the son of a prophet, but I am going to make a prophecy. Before this day is over lots of you men are going to pat me on the back and say, “Pastor Mike, you are either one of the bravest men I have ever met, or else one of the stupidest.” And a whole bunch of you ladies will be looking at me as if I were some kind of an axe-murderer, or as if I had done something unmentionable in public! 

            I am about to go where no preacher wants to go. I am about to plunge into a biblical text… and Lord, please forgive me… that I could wish were not in the Bible! However, it is in the Bible, and in fact, it is smack dab in the middle of our study of 1 Timothy, so I just do not see any way around it.

TRANSITION:

            We live in a time when any discussion of gender-roles is met with predictable hostility. In fact, just the use of that term, “gender-roles,” is enough to send some people, women and men, over the edge because they insist that that whole concept is chauvinist, misogynist, patriarchal, and totally passé.

            The problem for us who are Christians is that the Bible seems to run counter to our culture on this matter. That should not surprise us though, because it runs counter to nearly every human philosophy, anytime, anyplace. And even if what the Bible says makes us cringe, and cramps our style, we owe it to God, ourselves, and our church to pay attention to it, and to bring our thinking and practice into conformity with it, or else we should stop calling ourselves “Christians.”

            Now on the subject that we will be addressing this morning you need to know that there is some variation even between conservative, evangelical scholars of both genders. You also need to know that we are not going to end the debate this morning because of my stunning treatment of this passage, as wonderful as it may turn out to be. Also, know that this discussion is not going away anytime soon. And when I get done you may be more confused than you are right now, and for that I apologize in advance.

MAIN BODY:

Verse 8: Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension. 

• “Therefore.” Anytime we find this word we need to stop and figure out what it is “there for.” It always functions like a hinge, logically linking what has just been said with what is about to be stated. So we need to look back at the preceding argument. In the broad context Paul has been talking about the importance of prayer. That is how he began this chapter, reminding Timothy that prayer should be offered up constantly on behalf of all men, including kings and all who are in authority. Then he narrows this down to point out the importance of prayer in all aspects of ministry, especially in evangelism. In verses 2:4-7 Paul talks about God’s desire to save sinners. But for that to happen Paul says they have to deal with the Mediator, Jesus Christ. He came to give His life as a ransom for sinners and to provide a bridge to God. Then in verse 7 Paul tells us that this was exactly the message that was entrusted unto him by the Risen Christ, that he should carry the message to the Gentiles so that they could be saved. He says that he was appointed as a preacher, and as an apostle, and as a teacher of the Truth. Why? It is all about the salvation of priceless souls for whom Christ died. Everything is about winning lost people to Jesus!
• Now look again at verse 8. “Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.” Paul writes this to Timothy who was pastoring in Ephesus at the time, a church that had more than it’s share of wrath and dissension, and that was affecting the church’s outreach in a negative way. No church wracked by sin and anger and arguing is going to be effective in spreading the Gospel. That is a fact! But what is the cure for wrath and dissension? PRAYER – lots and lots of prayer!
• One more thing before we move on… Up in verse 4 where he says that “God wants all men to be saved,” Paul uses the word that is non-gender exclusive. It means humankind, and includes both males and females equally. However, here in verse 8 he changes and uses the Greek word for “males,” “men” specifically. Why does he do that? Let’s move on and see if we can figure it out.

Verses 9-10: Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, ¹⁰ but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.    

• So now, in the very same context, with the very same thought in mind, Paul addresses the women of the church. And he uses the Greek word that is specific to the female gender. He has already spoken about the Christian men of the church needing to exhibit by their behaviour the holiness that they claim to possess. Now he takes up the related subject of what genuine holiness looks like in Christian women of the First Century church.
• First, notice that in verse 9 the subject is not clothing (outward apparel), but inner beauty that exceeds the outer beauty that many women (and men) prize so highly.
• The word “likewise” applies to the women what has already been said about the men, namely that their lives, too, are to be characterized by prayer and devotion to the Gospel.
• These two verses are very similar to what we find in 1 Peter 3:3-5, “Your adornment must not be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewellery, or putting on dresses; ⁴ 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.  ⁵ 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.” Now it is important to note that neither Peter nor Paul is saying that there is anything wrong with a woman using jewellery, makeup, pretty hairstyles, and lovely clothing to enhance her natural beauty. But both of them are reminding Christian women that no amount of paint and hardware can hide bad character. As Christian men and women, our primary focus should always be on the inner qualities of godliness rather than on the outward qualities of style and fashion. So far so good! I think everyone can agree with that.
• But there is something else here, too, and that is the cultural/historical context. In many, if not most of the early pagan religions, including the Diana worship so prevalent in Ephesus where Timothy lived, women played a prominent role. For example, the worship of Aphrodite at Corinth was probably one of the most immoral in which temple prostitution was actually made into a religion. In all of the mystery religions there were priestesses, and I believe that it is because of these common heathen practices that Paul is emphasizing that sexuality is not to enter into the public prayer or worship in the services of the Christian churches. He says that when a woman is going to sing in church, to speak or pray or to have any part in a church service, she ought to keep in mind that her appeal should in no way be on the basis of sex. She should seek to please God, and there is no way in which she can appeal to Him on the basis of sex at all. Such appeal always characterized the pagan religions in the Roman world, and Paul is stressing that it should never be a part of Christian worship.

Verse 11: A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 

• Oh boy, now we are into it! So let’s check the King James. Maybe that sounds better: “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection.” Oh no, that is even worse! So what in the world are we supposed to do with this verse, or the one that follows after it?

Verse 12: But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 

• First, I think that verses 11-12 have to be looked at together because they form one thought in Paul’s mind. But what is that exactly? Well again, I believe that in this whole section Paul is dealing with the subject of “public worship” and what goes on in the public worship service of the local church. I believe that starting in verse 8 he is dealing with the conduct and appearance of those who are leading public worship. Some have concluded from these verses that Paul forbade women to speak or pray in church, but that is not true, because women praying in church is clearly implied in verse 9 and stated as fact in 1 Corinthians 11:5 so this cannot be a blanket prohibition. Rather, the point is that both men and women when involved in public worship should take care to dress modestly and appropriately, and not put on extravagant clothes that draw attention to themselves.
• But now here in these two verses Paul is talking about the learning and teaching of doctrine. He places this responsibility squarely on the shoulders of a select group of uniquely qualified males. Not all males, mind you, but some males. Most of the men were under the same injunction as the women; namely to learn in quiet submission.
• “I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man.” Some believe that Paul here prohibited only the uninstructed women of Ephesus from teaching. Other scholars see this as a general restriction for every church; that women are not to be official teachers in the assembled church. This later position is further buttressed by the phrase that follows, “…or exercise authority over a man [i.e. functioning in the role of overseer].” 
• In this egalitarian age in which we live that idea does not go down very well, does it? According to our modern way of thinking we like to say that everyone is equal in every way, and everyone, men and women alike, should have the same roles, privileges, and responsibilities. Unfortunately, God did not receive that memo! Remember awhile ago I said that as Christians we need to accept the revealed Word of God, even when it chafes and cramps our style and clashes with our preconceived ideas? Well, this is one of those places.
• We have to decide if we are going to agree that God knows what He is doing, even if we do not like it or even understand it, OR, if we are going to reject the Scriptures and rewrite them to please ourselves.

Verse 13: For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 

• As support for his position Paul refers to God’s order of creation as described in Genesis 2:7-25.  Adam was made before Eve, and thus has the privilege of the firstborn, a concept well accepted and understood by all ancient societies. Paul views the man-woman relationship set forth in this passage as grounded in the order of Creation. Of course, being made first does not make men superior to women in any way, but it does carry privilege to which we as modern people find it hard to relate.

Verse 14: And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 

• Here Paul gives his second argument for men carrying the lead in public worship, and that has to do with The Fall, way back in the Garden of Eden. According to the Scriptures it was Eve who was deceived, not Adam. In fact, we know that Adam sinned with his eyes wide open. According to Romans 5:12 he knew exactly what he was doing. “So,” you ask, “does that make Adam better?” NO, of course not, and Paul is not saying that either.
• He does, however, seem to argue that since the woman was deceived (and then led Adam astray), she is not to be entrusted with the teaching function of an overseer (elder) in the public worship services of the assembled church.
• Again, nowadays lots of self-proclaimed “Christians” have jettisoned this view as misogynist, patriarchal, and out-of-touch with the modern world. For that reason, everywhere you look you will find women pastors, women preachers, women elders, and women evangelists. They insist that Paul was wrong and misguided, a product of his times. They say, “Surely God did not mean to communicate what Paul said. Somehow Paul went off the reservation there for a minute and just threw in a little of his own patriarchal bias.” However, I do not think so. My view of the Inspiration of Scripture does not allow me to pass judgment that way. I believe that Paul was being led by the Spirit of God to write this, even though I do not fully understand all the reasons behind it.

Verse 15: But women will be preserved through [preposition διά with the genitive case meaning through, or by instrumentality of] the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. 

• This is the last verse, but things are not getting any easier! What in the world does this mean? Three possible answers have been put forth over the years:

1.       It speaks of the godly woman finding fulfilment in her role as wife and mother in the home. However, even in that day not all women were wives or mothers. So, are childless women just left out entirely? I do not think this is what Paul was talking about.

2.      It refers to women being kept physically safe in childbirth. But wait a minute. Even in those days lots of women died in childbirth, even Christian women. So what kind of a promise is that if it does not seem to hold up under closer examination?

3.      It refers to women being saved spiritually through the most significant birth of all, the birth of Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin Mary. For me, this is the best explanation of the three, and seems to me to make the most sense. I think that Paul is here referring to Genesis 3:15-16 to point to the Incarnation of Christ, the Saviour of the World. Salvation came to the world through one special childbirth. 

• J. Vernon McGee, in his commentary on 1 Timothy agrees with me. He writes: “It was the sin of Eve that brought sin into the world. Now every time a woman bears a child, she brings a sinner into the world—that is all she can bring into the world. But Mary brought the Lord Jesus, the Saviour into the world. So how are women saved? By childbearing—because Mary brought the Saviour into the world. Don’t ever say that woman brought sin into the world, unless you are prepared to add that woman also brought the Saviour into the world. My friend, no man provided a Saviour: a woman did. However, each individual woman is saved by faith, the same as each man is saved by faith. She is to grow in love and holiness just as a man is.” 

CONCLUSION:

            So here is the deal… we should not read this passage as a barrier to women working and serving in the Church. Paul was not a member the of “He-Man Woman-Haters Club.” While it is true that the woman was created second, and that it was the woman who fell into sin due to the seduction of the serpent, yet it was Mary of Nazareth who bore and who trained the child Jesus. It was Mary of Magdala who was the first to see the Risen Lord. It was four women, who of all the disciples, stood by the cross. Priscilla with her husband Aquila was a valued teacher in the early Church, a teacher who led Apollos to a fuller knowledge of the truth (Acts 18:16). Euodia and Syntyche, in spite of their quarrel, were women “who laboured in the Gospel” (Phil. 4:2-3). Philip, the evangelist, had four daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:9). The aged women were commanded to teach the younger women (Titus 2:3).  Paul held Lois and Eunice, Timothy’s mother and grandmother, in the highest honour (2 Timothy 1:5).  And there are many women’s names held in honour in Romans 16. Then, of course, there is Paul’s own statement found in Galatians 3:26-28, “So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.  ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” 

            I urge you not to go off half-cocked, like so many have done, and conclude that Paul was just wrong about this subject. You do that to your own peril. God’s Word is God’s Word, whether we like it or not! I confess that I do not fully understand all the reasoning behind this teaching, but despite that, it is my understanding that in the church there are some roles and some duties that are for certain chosen men to carry out. To arrive at any other conclusion I have to do injury to the text to try and make it conform to my modern ideas rather than simply accept it and submit to it.