This is the last of three blog entries on biblical teaching
on women in ministry.
When we last left off, we had seemingly reached a stale-mate
on whether the Egalitarian or Complementarian views of the 1st
century context of Ephesus were correct. We move forward with the understanding
that, at this present moment, there are two possibilities of the context.
Certainly, if the biblical interpretation is dependent upon one of these views,
then our certainty of correctness is dependent upon the correctness of our
understanding of the context. Yet, if our biblical interpretation is
discernable from the text itself without necessary dependency on either context
theory, we can move forward with certainty.
God has communicated His Word to us and desires for us to understand it.
In some of the commentaries on this issue (and not all
commentaries I’m looking at in this study are thoroughly Orthodox), a common
approach employed is to assert the truth from Galatians 3:28 and to
subsequently declare the teaching from 1st Timothy 2:11-12 to be
false or incorrect or in need of serious modification. Though the “analogy of faith” approach of
using an easy to understand passage to interpret a difficult to understand
passage is time-tested in the Church, this particular case raises the question
of which passage is actually the “easy” one to read that will be used to determine
the other’s interpretation. In this case, the ”easiness” of reading seems to
perhaps stem more from the values (biblical or otherwise) that we bring to the
passage rather than the vagueness of the Author’s intent. This phenomenon is similar to how some people
find it difficult to combine the truths from Romans 4:1-4 with the truths from
James 2:14-18. My approach then, in this
study, will be to look at the teaching of 1st Timothy 2:8-15 alone,
separate from “analogy of faith” considerations. Subsequently, I’ll look at a
Systematic Theology approach, which will combine 1st Timothy 2:11-12
with Galatians 3:28 (and other verses).
The reference to “woman”
(γυνή) in this passage can either
refer to a woman in general or a wife, but the context seems to support the
broader meaning. The word “silence” (ἡσυχία)
can either mean “silence” or “quietness”, but a context of teaching and
learning suggests the former. To whom is the woman to be submissive toward? Is
it to the men in verse 8 or to the Church authorities in verse 12 or both? The
word order chiasm in Greek suggests that it is both. What kind of teaching are
women not allowed to do? Teaching here seems to be the transmission of the
tradition about Christ as well as the proclamation of God’s will. As a reminder, the phrase in the passage is
“have authority” and not “usurp authority”. Two reasons are given: 1. Order of
creation – Being created out of man’s rib shows a woman’s God given role as a
subordinate helper. 2. The one who sinned first – Eve’s failure serves as an
example and possibly a cause of women in general to be susceptible to deception.
(Moo 63-70)
Now, having seen the prohibition for women to teach in 1
Timothy 2:11-12, we look at how this fits in with other passages in the Bible
on this topic. Galatians 3:28 is one
such passage. 1 Corinthians 14:33-36 is
another such passage. Ephesians 5:22-33
is another. Genesis 2:18 is another.
Another is 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. 1
Corinthians 11:2-16 teaches that man is God’s glory and woman is man’s
glory. And the expression of this
timeless universal truth is given in the cultural custom of head-coverings. Today,
one application of this is that a woman may pray or prophesy in the church
under the authority of a man. “Teaching involves a sustained and orderly exposition
of divine revelation already given, while prophecy in the New Testament occurs
when someone has a spontaneous revelation or impression, the whole or parts of which
may or may not be from the Lord.”(Piper 218) Genesis 2:18 teaches that women were created
to complement men. Women are equally
valuable as men, but they were designed for a different function. Ephesians 5:22-33 teaches that the
relationship between a man and a woman is meant to mirror Christ and the
Church. 1 Corinthians 14:33-36 teaches
that a woman may prophesy but may not participate in evaluating the validity of
a prophesy. (Piper 142) Galatians 3:28
teaches that every believer, whether Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or
female, is equal in Christ. That is,
“every believer in Christ inherits fully the Abrahamic promises by grace apart
from legal works.” (Piper 156)
There are some who would like to say that a woman is allowed
to teach but not hold authority. Susan Foh calls this the Male-headship
view. But, in arguing for this, her
starting point is as follows:
“The Bible may be approached as: (1) God’s word without
human error or opinion or (2) God’s word mixed with human opinion. Those who hold the latter view attribute Paul’s
commands concerning women to the human element in Scripture and thus believe
these commands are no longer applicable today.”
(Clouse 69)
Essentially, her starting point is that God’s word contains
errors and non-authoritative opinions. This is not a Bible-believing
approach. 2 Timothy 3:16 teaches us that
all of scripture is inspired by God. And this applies both to the Old Testament
and the New Testament. What should be done is discerning ideas bound to the
original context from ideas which are timeless universal truths for the Church
to apply. But, the main point/principle that the Author is trying to make is
never culturally bound. Thus, the “Male-headship”
view, as defined by Susan Foh, is not an Orthodox position.
Moo summarizes, “Nothing which would have effect of
restricting the application of Paul’s advice in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 to a
particular time and place has been discovered. Indeed, the very structure of
the passage must point to the inherent improbability of such restrictions, for
Paul roots his teaching deeply in the culture-transcending events of the
creation and fall of man and woman” (Moo 82)
WORKS CITED
Clouse,
Bonnidell, Robert G. Clouse, and Robert Duncan. Culver. Women in Ministry:
Four Views. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1989. Print. http://amzn.com/0830812849
Moo, Douglas J.
"I Timothy 2:11-15: Meaning and Significance." TrinJ 1.NS
(1980): 62-83. Web. http://djmoo.com/articles/1Tim2.pdf
Piper, John, and
Wayne A. Grudem. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to
Evangelical Feminism. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1991. http://cdn.desiringgod.org/pdf/books_bbmw/bbmw.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment