Gifts For The Common Good

The Godly Service of Women

A Conversation

When John the Baptizer said that “A man can receive only what is given him from heaven” (John 3:27) he was speaking about his own giftedness and calling, the ministry that he had been given by grace. In this statement I see a connection with an even broader reality that proclaims we are all dependent on the grace of God for where we are spiritually, not only for the good works that are put into our hands to do, but even the understanding and faith that we are given (Romans 12:3). Instead of this truth being construed as a way of absolving us from responsibility, I say this to make us God-aware and merciful with one another. Knowing that God is the Lord of each believer’s journey teaches us to be patient. We teach one another in all gentleness as we look to God to grant whatever repentance might be appropriate as He leads people into a knowledge of truth (2 Timothy 2:25), which is the person of God Himself.

In this spirit I offer the following thoughts. There is no way that my words ought to be seen as representative of our community’s “stance” or that of anyone else. These are my convictions at this time and they are shared very much in the spirit of a conversation. Our dialogues are ongoing, and these words are part of our discussion . . . and even a conversation I’ve been having with myself over the years as my beliefs have changed.

Why write this if I am not making some definitive statement? The journey is often more important than the destination. I doubt that we would actually know if we arrived . . . but I pray that my words may be part of the journey for someone else. Maybe in some way these words connect us to the Word. If that happens, then God who gives us grace to be who we are and what we are becoming, will be glorified.

Generally Speaking . . . an introduction

Our Bible contains many verses which at first glance appear to be contradictory. At least some of these conflicts can be explained by realizing that the opposing pair of statements include a general truth and an exceptional instance. General truths describe for us what is usually the case, while the exceptions are rare instances that call for something else. If you are unsure of whether this is the true, let me offer some examples.

In Galatians 6:10, we read, “as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people . . .” and we should. Yet in 2 John 1:10 we read “if anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.” Not welcoming this person and not showing hospitality doesn’t sound like doing good. In fact, we are being told not to do good to some people. But wait a minute! Paul tells us to do good to all people . . . then we’re told not to be kind. How do we understand these two contradictory passages?

I know that you are actually ahead of me and already see the answer. The solution to this disagreement is fairly obvious, but important for where our discussion will eventually lead. So let’s state the obvious just to fully illustrate this point.

Generally, and in most circumstances, we are to do good to everyone. However, there may be exceptions to that basic truth. In 2 John we see one of those special circumstances. Here is a particular condition or situation that means we don’t follow the general rule. The teachers who are being talked about have a message that is anti-Christ and their deception is spiritually dangerous. To do good to everyone is still what we try to do, but helping someone who is not doing good to others, rather misleading them, is not doing good to all people. In this case, doing good to the greatest number of people means not doing good to the person who would mislead and deceive others.

You may think I said a lot on an obvious point, but we need to realize that to misunderstand which of these two passages is the general rule and which is the exception would be disastrous. We wouldn’t want to go around thinking that in general we are to be unwelcoming and inhospitable, and that only in exceptional cases are we to be kind. That would be to distort the Christian message. Let’s take another example.

Paul tells Timothy, “I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone . . .” (1 Timothy 2:1). Paul uses a variety of words to describe all the types of prayers that Christians should be offering up for everyone. We should be praying in every way for all people. That is what is clearly taught by Paul, and yet let’s look at John’s words: “If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that.” (1 John 5:16).

Here we are instructed not to pray for someone. Is that the general rule or an exception? I think we would all immediately respond that this is an exception. Why do we recognize this as an extraordinary instance which is not the norm? We see that there is a special condition or situation involved which makes this different. This is fairly easy for us to determine because we’ve been taught correctly. If someone were to try and begin now teaching you and me that we are to be stingy in praying for others and use 1 John 5:16 and other verses to prove their point, we would reject the idea immediately. Because we have been taught well we readily identify the misleading teaching.

But let’s imagine that we have always been taught from early childhood that we need to be very careful about who we pray for. Then it might not be as easy for us to recognize that praying for everyone is what is typical for Christians. We would have be trained by teaching and reasoning that prayer is important and not be used indiscriminate-ly for just anyone . . . that we should be certain first that the person is within God’s will before we pray for them. Do you see how easy it would be to have a sincere view about restricted prayer but for it to be wrong? Not knowing which is the general truth and the exceptional situation is not a matter of being consciously wrong, but often being sincerely uninformed. Any of us could be sincere and yet mistaken about our views on righteousness and goodness.

We could continue with other examples. Does 2 Thessalonians 3:10, which says, “if a man will not work, he should not eat”, teach us to not feed the hungry, or was that an exceptional situation contrary to the general rule that we feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and show compassion to those in need? Perhaps someone looking for an excuse to not help the needy would use that verse to justify not helping people in general. Sometimes we are moved by our own desires without being aware of it. A person might have had a bad experience trying to help someone in need, and now justifies his or her choice to not help anyone by referring to this passage. I am not saying that this person is not sincere, but just as lifelong teaching might affect our understanding of things, experience shapes our perceptions as well.

Even if we had sincere teaching but with the wrong emphasis, or unfortunate experiences, we have hope that God will lead us to understand that generosity and kindness to those in need is the general teaching we embrace from Jesus. Practicing ‘tough love’ is appropriate in certain circumstances which are exceptional.

When Paul says “If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him . . .” (2 Thess. 3:14) is Paul telling us to break off all association with every person who is wrong on any matter? Or did Paul have in mind some limited matters about which he was specifically speaking? How do we figure out what is the general rule and the exception?

Maybe you have found all of my illustrations up to this point simple to discern. Or perhaps, you have differed with my opinion on what is the general truth in these instances. Whatever your thoughts, I think we can agree that determining what is the general rule and the exception is important to interpreting these statements. But how do we distinguish between the two? It is a difficult task especially when the teaching we have received or past experience has to be overcome . . . but let me suggest a couple of things that help us.

How Do I Decide What is Exceptional?

First, one has to begin with an understanding of the nature of God. If one does not know God it is very unlikely that one will succeed in comprehending the intent of scripture – the Word of God. The understanding of God I am talking about is not so much facts about God’s nature, but an inner sense of God’s love. A guide to His heart. That is something not taught as much as learned through experience and in communion with God. That is the result of prayer.

Is God primarily a harsh and critical judge, who only infrequently and hesitantly shows love and compassion? Is He quick to condemn, obliterate, destroy, and banish for every slight offense, or is God full of mercy and love and willing to forgive our heinous sins? Is God primarily a law-giver who demands strict obedience and stands ready to reprimand every offense, or is God a loving, gentle, and caring parent who nurtures us as children, loving extravagantly and disciplining as necessary to keep us close to Himself?

I give two distinct and opposite views of God because how we see God treating the people He has created will affect the way we treat people as well. How we see God will determine how we understand what He says in scripture. If God is the law-giver who demands perfect obedience, then scripture is seen as a law code full of threats of the penalties we will incur if we fail. If God is a loving parent, then scripture is encouraging, directive, and points us to goodness – warning us away from everything that would harm us.

I hope we would all answer quickly and unreservedly that God is truly loving and generous, slow to anger, and full of mercy and grace. Even God’s judgment occurs under the over-arching characteristic of His love. God is not by nature a rule-loving disciplinarian more concerned with strict adherence than love and nurture. God is love, and in that love He persistently draws us to Himself.

When we start with this gracious and loving understanding of God’s being, we are able to interpret God’s words correctly. We do not turn them into laws to be applied harshly and mercilessly to condemn others and justify ourselves . . . counting on our own careful obedience as our spiritual security. Instead, we are able to sense the heart and love of God in everything. The contradictory passages we have seen become clearer as we understand that not helping, not feeding, and not associating are aberrations brought on by special situations and not how God’s love and mercy is usually expressed. Not doing something we might ordinarily do is an exceptional expression of

love . . . but it is still love.

Second, often the context of the words we are looking at, something in the scriptures surrounding those words, points to the fact that the situation described is exceptional. In other words, as we explore why the statement was made, it becomes clear that a peculiar circumstance was the basis for the instruction being put forth. Conversely, such extraordinary contextual elements are often absent when general rules are stated.

Revisiting one of our examples we see this point illustrated. In Galatians 6:10 there is the admonition to do good. What is the surrounding context? After the statement Paul moves on to describe his writing style, so there is no limiting circumstance after our passage. Before the statement he had talked about not being weary in doing good, and before that he talked about sowing to the Spirit rather than to the flesh. The context does not point to this being an exceptional statement out of the norm, but a summary statement of what is typical! I could summarize it in my own words like this:

Don’t focus on your own lusts and desires, follow the Spirit’s prompting to do good . . . don’t get tired doing good because you will see the results . . . and so do good to everyone, especially fellow believers. Notice how I write . . . (on to other matters).

On the other hand, the context of the passage about not welcoming and not being hospitable (2 John 1:10) is filled with evidence that the situation is a limited exception. The admonition only regards those who do not bring the teaching about Christ. There is nothing general about the passage. Instead, it is very specific about a certain situation. Looking at the context helps us see that one passage is the general summary of typical Christian behavior and the other is an extraordinary case which is a limited exception based on special circumstances.

A New Contradiction

Now let’s look at another apparent contradiction in scripture, this time regarding the service of women within the body of believers.

And it shall be in the last days, God says,
that I will pour forth of my Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
and your young men shall see visions,
and your old men shall dream dreams;
Even on my bondslaves, both men and women,

I will in those days pour forth of my Spirit
and they shall prophesy.     Acts 2:17-18
 

On the other hand . . .

The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.
If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.  1 Corinthians 14:34-35

These two passages are in stark disagreement. The first talks about men and women jointly enjoying the empowering of God’s Spirit and being moved to speak God’s message. The second restricts women to being silent, not being permitted to speak. Obviously one of the passages must be the general truth that is ordinarily practiced, and the other an exceptional situation addressing particular circumstances. We can look at these passages with either one being the general rule.

1. Generally, women are to be silent according to 1 Corinthians. Only under limited circumstances can they speak as is mentioned in Acts 2.

Or

2. Generally, women can speak because they are empowered by the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts 2. Only in certain circumstances are they to be silent according to 1 Corinthians.

Personally, I think that the second interpretation is the one which is consistent with the nature of God and the evidence of scripture. At this point of the discussion, I am choosing to simply explain what I believe and why, rather than making an exhaustive attempt to show what I think is wrong with the other interpretation. That would take more time than I have now. However, if what I demonstrate here seems truthful, that generally women are empowered to exercise their giftedness without any restrictions due to gender, and the limitations we see being described in scripture were designed to address particular situations and problems, then we ought to seek to have another good look at whatever objections jump to our minds. Maybe those matters need a fresh review as well.

Women in the Life of the Early Church

First I want to look at scriptures, taken from the New American Standard Version, which give us insight into how women participated in the life of the early church. I group these verses in the sections you see. My comments in italics follow some of the passages to illustrate what I see in them regarding women in the life of the apostolic church.

Scriptures Declaring Men and Women to Share Equally in Life of Faith

And it shall be in the last days, God says,
that I will pour forth of my Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
and your young men shall see visions,
and your old men shall dream dreams;
Even on my bondslaves, both men and women,

I will in those days pour forth of my Spirit
and they shall prophesy.     Acts 2:17-18
 

Galatians 3:28
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 Jesus.

This appears to be a general principle that within the Kingdom of God the worldly categories don’t exist. This very teaching may have been “taken too far” by some early Christian women causing them to begin dressing outrageously and acting in ways unbecoming for one with “a gentle and quiet spirit” (1Pet. 3:4)

1 Peter 2:9
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

There is no reason to assume that this verse speaks only to men. Both women and men are God’s priests.

1 Peter 3:7
You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.

The husband is reminded that his wife is his spiritual equal, a fellow heir of the same grace he enjoys. This was a radical departure from Jewish and Greek ideas which viewed women as spiritually inferior. Similar views have often remained in the Christian church where women were viewed as spiritually inferior and needing the guidance of men: “The University of Salamanca was dominated by the school of thought that asserted a woman was by her very nature incapable of silent meditation. Her emotional disposition makes her prone to being easily driven into heresy. For that reason, inward, genuinely spiritual prayer should be left exclusively to the man and his intellectual lucidity . . . Women, who grew up without Latin and often without the skill of reading, would do better to heed the admonitions of

clerics . . .” Dorothee Soelle, The Silent Cry: Mysticism and Resistance, Fortress Press, 2001, p. 75. You will hear the same idea today. Maybe God’s design is that each gift, both men’s tendency to be more rational and women’s tendency to be more intuitive are given to jointly build up the church. I think much fighting that has gone on by men in the church, due to male competitiveness, would not have happened had women been in those discussions exercising their gifts. That might be one example of how the gifts of each benefit all.

Examples of Women’s Service in the Early Church

Philippians 4:2-3
I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to live in harmony in the Lord. Indeed, true companion, I ask you also to help these women who have shared my struggle in the cause of the gospel, together with Clement also and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Euodia and Syntyche are two women who Paul cites as fellow workers, using the same term he uses to speak of men such as Timothy (1 Thess. 3:2), Luke (Philemon 1:24), Titus (2 Cor. 8:23), and the others listed in this verse. See same term used in passages below.

Romans 16:3
Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus,

Romans 16:6
Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you.
 

Romans 16:12
Greet Tryphaena and Tryphosa, workers in the Lord. Greet Persis the beloved, who has worked hard in the Lord.

Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis are all female names.

Romans 16:13
Greet Rufus, a choice man in the Lord, also his mother and mine.
 

Whole Churches Being Associated with Women

Colossians 4:15
Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house.

Romans 16:15
Greet Philologus and Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them.

In the two preceding passages when Paul thinks of greeting some churches, he thinks of both men and women who have obviously some standing among the believers.  

Women Serving as Prophets

Acts 21:8-9
On the next day we left and came to Caesarea, and entering the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we stayed with him. Now this man had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses.

1 Corinthians 11:5
But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.

This instruction from Paul assumes that women will pray and prophesy in the church, but because of the men who are present they should cover their heads. This is not about women praying and prophesying with only other women, but serving this way in the assembly of the church. This is not women covering their heads while they listen to someone else pray or prophesy. This is women praying and prophesying in an assembly where there are also men gathered. Women covered their heads not in the presence of other women or children, but in the presence of men.

Revelation 2:20-24
'But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.
'I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality.
'Behold, I will throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds.
'And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.
'But I say to you, the rest who are in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not known the deep things of Satan, as they call them--I place no other burden on you.

It is most interesting that nothing negative is said about this woman being a prophetess and teaching the believers, but the problem was with what she was teaching. If it had been wrong for her as a woman to be teaching you would imagine that Jesus would first say “I have something against Jezebel who usurps the divinely mandated male authority, God’s ordained order, and disobeys by teaching when she should be silent. Moreover, what she teaches is wrong . . .” Jesus gave this prophetess time to repent of her immorality, but said nothing about requiring her to repent of acting outside the role of women in the church. The problem was with what she taught that church, not that she taught men and women in Thyatira.

Women Serving as Deacons

Romans 16:1-2
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well.

The phrase “who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea” is literally “who is a deacon of the church which is at Cenchrea.”

1 Timothy 3:11

Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things.

In verse 2 of this chapter Paul began talking about the personal qualities of overseers (elders). In verse 8 he says likewise in talking about male deacons, showing how they must be personally mature individuals like the elders. Now he says likewise in talking about women who are just as much servants in the body as the overseers and male deacons. Likely, these women are female deacons and not the wives of the deacons as has often been argued. Why talk explicitly about the wives of deacons and say nothing about the wives of elders, if indeed these are wives of the deacons? The following verse (12) mentions that a male deacon is to be married and a good husband and father. Why talk about the wives of deacons and then state that they need to be married? If verse 11 is talking about the wives of deacons, shouldn’t it come after verse 12 where Paul says deacons should be married men?

Women Servings as Apostles
Romans 16:7
Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

The name Junias is rightfully the female name “Junia” in Greek and is a woman who is identified as outstanding among the apostles. In virtually all translations the name is changed to “Junias” to make it male in form, though nowhere in all of Greek classical literature, the Greek tragedies and plays, or any Greek writing has any instance of a Greek man being named “Junias” ever been found. Junia was a common Greek female name. The reason the name has consistently been given a male form is that many are unwilling to consider the possibility that a woman could be an apostle, but that is a bias they bring to scripture and not the result of open-minded inquiry.

Women Serving in Prayer

1 Corinthians 11:5
But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.

Women were praying in the presence of men, but needed to do that while showing proper humility by covering their heads. By covering their heads when they prayed, these women showed that though they were doing something neither Jews nor Greeks allowed it was not an act of defiance against men, but a humble act done in submissiveness.

1 Corinthians 11:13
Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?

Again, there is no question that women can pray, but only how to conduct themselves when they pray. If praying in the assembly is not allowed, why does Paul engage in a pointless discussion of proper attire?
 

Everyone Using Spiritual Gifts in the Assemblies of the Church

1 Corinthians 12:7
But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.

The “each one” includes both men and women, as in chapter 11 where Paul talks about both men and women praying and prophesying in the assembly and both doing so while properly attired. There is no textual reason to think that Paul is only talking about men. The Spirit gives gifts to each one, both men and women, for the common good. The common good means for the edification and blessing of all. Women are not given gifts for only the good of women and children, but for the common good of the whole church.

1 Corinthians 12:11
But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

Every Christian, male or female, is given whatever gifts the Spirit chooses.

1 Corinthians 14:5
Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying.

Paul says he wanted them all to speak in tongues, but even more that they all would prophesy in the church. The “all” is not just all the men, but women too . . . and he is definitely talking about what they do when they all come together.

1 Corinthians 14:23-24
Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all;

Again, when the whole church comes together Paul envisions “all” speaking and edifying one another. When the whole church assembles Paul believes that all can prophesy.

1 Corinthians 14:26-27
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret

The Corinthian practice was for each believer (not just the men) to bring something to share in the worship assembly. The consistent picture of the Corinthian church in all these passages is one where men and women participated together in singing, communion, prayer, tongue-speaking, and prophecy. Until one reaches I Cor. 14:34-35 (one of the two passages to be examined in a moment) there is no hint that women are not to share in all that has been discussed.

The Two Restriction Passages

I believe that more passages and examples could be given of the early Christian communities being very inclusive of all races, all ages, and both men and women. I believe the reason we see so many verses, as have been cited, about women participating fully is because generally the rule was that all are gifted by God’s Spirit and all are free to use those gifts. In the church gender was not the source of division that it was in the ancient world. The church was different. It was unified, everyone was serving, and everyone was to do that humbly.

However, sometimes in those apostolic churches both men and women did not use their gifts in a way that edified others. In those cases, both men and women were sanctioned for their improper conduct - not because of their gender, but because of their actions. I believe the same to be true today.

However, if what I am saying is true, how are we to understand the two passages that put restrictions on women? Do these really present themselves as instructions based on specific circumstances that warrant an exception? Let’s take a look at 1 Corinthian 14:34-35, by first examining 1 Corinthians 14:23-40 to get the whole context.

1 Corinthians 14

Problems with the Actions of Some Tongue-Speakers

23 Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?
24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all;
25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.
26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret;
28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.

Problems with the Actions of Some Prophets
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.
31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted;
32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets;
33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

Problems with the Actions of Some Women
34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.
35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

The Need for Teachable-Humility and Orderly Gatherings

36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?
37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment.
38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.
39 Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues.
40 But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

I have divided the verses into four parts with a heading over each section to show the three subjects which are handled and the summary section. The fact that in verse 39 Paul mentions prophecy and tongue-speaking again shows that the whole piece is one literary unit and that verse 39 is part of a summary.

The repeated theme of the section is edification through order rather than confusion within chaos. Notice how in each section, again demonstrating literary unity, this theme is included:

26 . . . Let all things be done for edification.

33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

34 . . . for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

40 But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

Paul wants the Corinthian gatherings to be times of edification where everyone participates, but in a way that doesn’t lead to confusion. When there is chaos no one is learning or growing . . . and so Paul offers one solution for each situation: silence.

        28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church;

        30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.

                34 The women are to keep silent in the churches

Paul believes that the problem of chaos and confusion will be addressed if certain people keep silent. It seems without dispute that the silence encouraged for the tongue-speakers and prophets is not absolute, but only circumstantial. When there is no interpreter that is the circumstance when tongue-speakers ought to be silent. When someone else receives a revelation that is the circumstance when a prophet ought to be silent. No one would argue that these tongue-speakers or prophets should always and forevermore be silent. There is a time for them to speak, and a time to be silent . . . and the guiding principle is doing what works for the common good.

What about the women in verses 34 and 35? I think that the context and parallel literary form of how Paul is dealing with three similar situations and making virtually the same recommendation makes it hard to say that the first two cases involve temporary silences based on a circumstance but the third is a permanent silence based on a person’s unchangeable gender. Sure, it is possible to assert that, but it also does not seem to fit with everything Paul is saying in this letter beginning in chapter 11. He has not given any indication that women are to observe a strict and total silence based on their being created female. In fact he has talked about women prophesying and praying, and everyone having gifts and all coming together with something to share.

Much more consistent with the context is the interpretation which says that like the other two situations, the silence of these women is proper based on a circumstance. What is that circumstance? They were acting in ways which were causing confusion, evidently by asking questions. There is no restriction in this passage on women teaching, but on asking questions. That is the specific speaking that is mentioned twice, in both verse 34 and 35. If they want to inquire about something then they should ask their husbands. This passage is talking about being silent instead of asking questions. It is not saying anything about not praying or prophesying . . . actions which Paul has already approved as long as they are done respectfully and humbly.

This passage raises another question: is Paul so silly as to fail to recognize that not all women have husbands? Certainly not. In this letter, chapter 7 and verse 13, Paul himself knows that some of the Christian women in Corinth have husbands who are not believers, and evidently some women’s husbands had left them. Obviously those women cannot go home and ask their husbands about their questions, not to mention the situation faced by widows and the unmarried. He has already spoken to the virgins (7:25-26) and recommended that due to the “present crisis” they not marry. They also would not have husbands to ask. So when Paul knows personally that there are women in Corinth who have no husbands to ask, is he just having a mental lapse when he tells these women to ask their husbands at home? Is he speaking to all the women in Corinth?

I don’t think so. There is a very good explanation. The Greeks had no word for “wife”, or for “husband” either. The words “woman” and “man” were simply used to mean either woman or wife and man or husband. So when we are reading I Corinthians 14:34-35 it could be translated

34 The wives are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.
35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a wife to speak in church.

This would explain much. We now can see that Paul is talking to the wives, probably of the men who were teaching. Instead of speaking, which means asking questions of their husbands in public, they are to be subject. This matter of being subject is now clearer as we see that Paul is directing these women to be respectful to their husbands. Paul explains the obvious, that they have ample opportunity to ask their questions at home since their husbands are the teachers. In Paul’s thinking there is something improper about a wife questioning her husband in public. We know how that could be just as uncomfortable today! Don’t we all feel uneasy if a husband and wife start having a disagreement in front of us?

The Christians were allowing women to practice their spiritual gifts in ways that neither the Jews of Greeks permitted. But it was important to Paul that though the women were doing things unheard of in other religions, they should be careful to be respectful so that outsiders do not believe that Christian women are in rebellion against their husbands. Earlier this issue involved keeping the veil on (chapter 11) and here it involves a wife not openly questioning her husband.

I believe that this passage is a very limited and exceptional case of certain women (wives of prophets) being silent (not asking questions) in a particular situation (when their husbands are teaching), and not a general rule that each and every woman is to be forever silent in all Christian gatherings. To take this latter view means making all those other verses exceptional cases. I think the humble and respectful use of any spiritual gift by a woman, be it teaching, prayer, reading, or serving the congregation is consistent with the practice of the apostolic church. But let’s look at the second restrictive passage.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Again, we should begin with the large context.

Christian Conduct in the World
1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men,
2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.
7 For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

How This Applies to Men and Women
8 Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.

9 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.
11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.
12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.
14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.
15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

My first observation is illustrated by the way I divide the text into some general statements Paul is making to all Christians about how we comport ourselves, and specific admonitions to men and women. We should note that nothing is said here to indicate that Paul is talking about Christians gathering for worship. These are teachings to men and women about how to conduct themselves in life, not just “in church.”

When Paul moves to make some specific applications to men and women we need to recognize these as subtle clues to the problems that were occurring. No one wastes time giving instructions about problems that don’t exist. So let’s look at the specifics of this passage in these two parts.

In the first section Paul looks at our Christian conduct. He emphasizes that we are praying people who intercede for all people . . . including the governmental authorities who were already persecuting Christians at the time of Paul’s writing. Paul says that the goal is to live peaceful and quiet lives while sharing the Gospel which is for all. Paul wants these Christians to not fight against those who are unbelievers, but to pray for them and share the news that Jesus died as a ransom for all.

Second, Paul then moves to some more specific instructions. Men are to be prayerful individuals who do so without anger and divisiveness. Women are to express themselves not with outward signs of wealth and beauty, but through good works. Paul’s instruction involves an attitude that shows what these women want to be about, outward beauty or God’s works of love. Paul continues in verse 11 by addressing another attitude: humility which accepts instruction. Christian women should not be rebellious in refusing to be taught.

For the purposes of our discussion, verse 12 is the key. Paul says he does not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. Without this verse there is nothing at all in this passage which limits women from any kind of service, so let’s take a careful look.

The second word Paul uses after he says women should not teach is very significant. Its weight must be understood because it explains the type of teaching Paul is talking about when he says women should not teach men. The Greek word auqentein is rendered usurp authority (KJV), have authority (NIV, RSV), exercise authority (NASV), take over (Message), have dominion (ASV), or have rule (Basic English Bible). This Greek word only occurs here in our Bible, and the definition from a Greek lexicon (like a dictionary) that you can look up at www.crosswalk.com gives these meanings:

1. one who with his own hands kills another or himself
2. one who acts on his own authority, autocratic
3. an absolute master
4. to govern, exercise dominion over one
    

Can you see why Paul said women shouldn’t teach or auqentein over men? He’s talking about taking over in a way that is like murdering someone to take that person’s place. It is being autocratic and an absolute master. An autocrat refuses to be taught. A person like that does all the teaching and no learning.

Some Greek scholars say that auqentein is functioning as a modifier to “teach” and describes the manner of teaching. Then the passage would be translated “I do not allow a woman to teach domineeringly over a man” or “to teach autocratically over a man.” Is that what Christian women should do? Why say this, except that this is precisely what some were doing, or wanting to do. The women Paul is admonishing to learn quietly and submissively are ones to want to teach and domineer over men. They want to supplant the men, push the men out, and take over.

Women who have this attitude are wrong. Men who have this attitude are wrong. What is wrong here is not some woman teaching, but how she is teaching. She is not wrong because she is a woman, but because of the “I want to take over and be in charge” attitude. That was the same type of “me first” attitude that Jesus rebuked in his male disciples. The one who wants to be first, should instead become the servant of all. It is wrong for any man or woman to have this attitude. In this letter, Paul was talking about women who display this wrong attitude.

Again, this seems to be an obvious exception to the fact that women can pray and prophesy. Men can teach, but men who teach falsely are commanded to stop (1 Timothy 1:3). Women can teach, but women who teach unsubmissively are told to stop. Just because some men were told to stop teaching in 1 Timothy 1:3 does not lead us to say all men are to stop teaching. We understand that the problem was the false teachings they put forth. The fact that some women were told to stop teaching in a way that was domineering does not mean that other women cannot teach humbly. In my opinion too often the reason for the admonition has been misunderstood to be womanhood, rather than the real problems of disruptiveness, disrespect, or autocratic rule. The problem Paul addressed was not a gender problem, but of attitude and action. Men could be as guilty of the same wrong attitudes and actions.

But What About Eve?

If what I am saying is true, why then does Paul bring up Adam and Eve? Some would say that this shows that Paul is appealing to God’s ordained order, a sign that this is a general rule for all women at all times to never teach men. Then they add “or read scripture, or pass communion trays, or lead songs, or make announcements” . . . all things never mentioned in scripture but prohibited based on this so-called universal rule of women not teaching men. To me it is quite a stretch to take two passages, one which says women should not ask questions, and another which says women should not teach men, and then say women cannot pray, start songs, pass communion trays, or stand and say anything.

Here’s my thought on this passage: Paul is talking about some women who are unteachable. They want to dominate over the men and believe they have nothing to learn. What better way to undercut their assertions then to point out that even Eve could be wrong. From the beginning, both men and women have been wrong. Everyone needs teaching and should be humble enough to accept it. Paul is not saying men make better leaders – as if this verse had anything to do with leadership (who’s in charge). Paul is not saying Adam was better than Eve. Eve was deceived and sinned unawares, but that means Adam sinned knowing full well what he was doing! That is no argument for asserting that men make better leaders and should be in charge. It is accurate in my experience that men will rationalize and do wrong knowing they are wrong, and that women are often more genuine and truer of heart. But that is not proving who makes better leaders (there aren’t those types of “in charge” leaders in a body of servants anyway) or better teachers.

I seems to me that Paul is simply pointing out that women can be deceived, not that all women are, but a woman could be deceived like Eve was and so she should be willing to learn. He then focuses the women back on the inner good works which he had previously mentioned, but this time in talking about raising children and abiding in faith, love, and holiness with self-control. These are the true marks of spirituality, not becoming an unteachable and domineering prophetess.

Starting to Summarize . . .

Paul’s criticism of Corinth was that sometimes things became disorderly. The communion time lost its fellowship purpose and some people were being left out. The tongue-speaking lost its purpose and became mass confusion, just like the confusion created when multiple prophets were speaking at the same time. Paul’s solution was to tell the tongue-speakers to be quiet if there was no one to interpret, the prophets to be quiet when someone else was speaking, and certain women (probably the wives of some prophets) to be quiet if they had questions they could ask their husbands at home. All these instructions were to create more order in the Corinthian times of worship so that everyone would be edified.

When writing to Timothy in Ephesus, Paul did not address the Ephesians’ worship gatherings. He did correct the wrong attitudes and actions of both men and women. The men were obviously displaying anger and divisiveness instead of prayerfulness with clean and holy hands. The women were concentrating on outward appearances instead of good works. They were not leading quiet lives with teachable humility, but wanted to teach and dominate the men. Both the men and women were told to stop their wrong actions, and adopt new attitudes and ways of service.

The Picture We See in Scripture

After looking at all the verses about the robust life of the early church, with men and women working together, not under a hierarchy, not competing for power and position, but as each is gifted to serve the Body of Christ, we should have a vision for our faith community. It seems to me that we see Joel’s promise of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on all flesh, both men and women, being lived out in the early church. They were a community without the worldly distinctions of slave and free, Jew and Gentile, male and female, or any of the others we might add today like blue-collar and white-collar, or educated and uneducated. This is why the two passages that we have looked at which limit women’s participation appear to me to be exceptional instructions for particular situations and not the general rule of life in the early church.

I believe that for reasons rooted in the world and not in God, there has been and continues to be a belief that says matters of faith are divinely sanctioned to be male-led. With that as a starting point, the two scriptures about what women shouldn’t do are turned into a general rule and all the scriptures about what women did in the early church are explained away as “that was women serving women,” or “women serving children,” or “some time or place outside the official worship of the church.”

Not only does this approach create the thorny problem where there is one set of rules for worship times, and other rules for the rest of the week, if the passage of 1 Timothy 2:12 is taken literally a woman cannot teach a man about anything. Nothing in the passage says that the restriction is for religious matters. I witnessed such an attitude at Lads to Leaders in Nashville where one man objected to a woman giving a group of men, of which I was a part, instructions about how to judge the boys’ speeches. In this man’s very literal and consistent belief, a woman should never be instructing a man . . . not even how to fill out his speech judging forms and conduct the speech sessions. In his mind this man thought men have to be in charge of everything.

I question the idea that God has established a principle of “male leadership” in spiritual matters – which means in practice that every spiritual decision, all teaching, and all guidance must emanate from men. This belief that God ordained men to be in charge is a whole other subject which I can’t address adequately here. Suffice it to say that a careful examination of being the “head” in scripture reveals that it has nothing to do with being in control, but being the life-giver. Christ is head of the church and in that capacity gave Himself for it. If we want to talk about Christ being in control, and He is, let’s look at Him being King, the Creator who reigns. That is the Biblical language for being in control . . . and it is not used as a metaphor for the roles of males in either marriage or the church.

You Are Going Along with Today’s Culture!

Some may think that I am simply giving in to a feminist agenda or blatantly trying to be “politically correct”, but nothing could be further from the truth. In my experience, much of feminism is anti-male, and consequently comes under the sanction of Paul’s rebuke. Basically the feminist movement repeats the mistakes that males have been making for centuries. Feminists end up acting like men in men’s worst sins: becoming competitive, domineering, assertive, and combative. God’s instruction to both men and women is that we are all to be servants, seeking the good of others and not ourselves, being humble, submissive, kind, peaceful, gracious, gentle, and loving. The feminist attitude is not Christlike, but neither is the typical male attitude. Throughout history men have often not been very godly, and have mistreated women and other men terribly. But the feminist movement seeks an equality with men by being as aggressive and destructive as men, which is very sad indeed.

What I see in scripture is not some secular idea of gender blindness, or sexual equality which ignores our differences as men and women. This isn’t about equal rights, but about everyone, male and female, giving up his or her rights and being servants. I believe we are all called to humble and submissive service to one another for the sake of Christ. None of this is about leadership in the sense of who has the power and authority. This isn’t about who rules and makes the decisions. This is about each one of us using our gifts for the common good of all.

My Acceptance of the Spirit’s Work

I should not ignore a particular gift of the Spirit because I am a man and the Spirit gave the gift to a woman. I don’t see scripture saying that the Spirit gives men gifts for the whole community, but gives women gifts for other women and children only. I don’t see the Bible saying men’s gifts can be used during the “worship hour” but women’s gifts can’t be used then. That a woman can write thoughts for a man to read for the edification of the whole body, but it would be wrong for her to speak those words to the whole body.

All those rules have been created by human beings to govern hours, to determine who can and can’t pass communion trays, to rule on whether a woman can teach a 10-year-old boy who has been baptized, and on and on. There is nothing wrong with having rules per se, but claiming those are commandments ordained by God is misleading if cynically said, and uninformed is sincerely said.

The restriction of women from using their gifts for no other reason than because they are female, is to me, patently ungodly. I don’t want our daughters believing that they are spiritually inferior, that their role is to stay in the nursery or children’s classrooms. I want to see our daughters develop gentle and quiet spirits, and to learn to use their giftedness in humility to serve the common good. That is exactly what I want for our sons. The instruction to lead a gentle and quiet life is not given only to women (1 Tim. 2:2, cf. Gal. 5:22-23).

I should not suppress nor deny a woman the opportunity to serve the common good of all. It is one Spirit who gives gifts to each one as God chooses. I must acknowledge and receive the blessings of the Spirit’s gifts wherever they are found – in men, in women, in children, in a believer from an other denominational heritage, or in the person who seems most unlikely to my way of thinking.

Conclusion

The two passages that I believe are exceptional situations where we see Paul telling women to be silent, or to stop dominating men, do not negate the opportunity for both men and women to serve the common good of the body in humble ways without doing wrong. I do not see scripture as teaching that being a woman restricts a believer from sharing a spiritual gift or participating in the common life of faith of all the other believers. The issue in those two passages is not gender, but attitude.

None of this compels any man or woman to serve in specific ways. No man has to prophesy, no woman has to pray. But gender in itself should not be a barrier to humble service for the edification of all.