Women in Leadership (in the Church) – 1 Timothy 2:12

This post is part of a series of posts that I am doing on Women in Leadership (within the Church). If you have not read the previous posts relating to this topic, I encourage you to read them first before reading this post. Click the link below to read it:

1. Women in Leadership (within the Church) – A New Series of Posts
2. Women in Leadership (within the Church) – A Journey
3. Women in Leadership (within the Church) – A Puzzling Inconsistency
4. Women in Leadership (within the Church) – Some Books of Interest
5. Women in Leadership (within the Church) Arguments used to Deny Women in Leadership – A Response: Part 1
6. Women in Leadership (within the Church) Arguments used to Deny Women in Leadership – A Response: Part 2

NB: I don’t claim to be some great theologian, or to “have it all sorted.” I am just a follower of Christ, seeking to understand how to live out my faith in this world, and to “rightly divide the Word” of God, seeking to engage with others in the journey – because “as iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” – Proverbs 27:17

1 TIMOTHY 2:12

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

There you have it, the ultimate verse that is used to try and stop women from being elders or senior pastors (and in some cases any leadership positions at all) and from “teaching” men.

What I have found over the years and especially in more recent times, is that for anyone to gain from this ONE verse the belief that all women, for all time, are never allowed to teach or have authority over a man in a church setting, you have to completely ignore the rest of the narrative of scripture, twist and contort to allow for exceptions (think “it’s okay for a women to preach on a Sunday, she just can’t teach”), and you have to treat this verse completely differently to the way you interpret the other verses around it.

This post, which will be long, will seek to unpack the verse and see what Paul was actually meaning, and not meaning, and how we are to understand this verse today.

INTERPRETING THE VERSE

One of the things that we were taught at Bible college was that when we seek to understand what scripture is saying to us we need to understand the context of the passage:

1. Who it was written to (originally). This includes consideration of:
2. 1. Which people group it was addressing
3. 1. Their culture
4. 1. Their cultural understanding
5. 1. What century they lived in etc
6. What it was addressing
7. What type/style of writing it was
8. What differences are there between us who are reading it now and the original audience it was addressing
9. How does this verse/passage fit into the wider narrative of scripture
10. What are the underlying principles that we can take from the passage or verse that can be applied today.

This helps ensure that we do not misrepresent what any verse or passage is saying. To take them in isolation is a dangerous game to play and is how people can go off on wonky paths.

Some might make the accusation that by doing this we are devaluing the Word of God, or trying to “do away with” verses that we do not like or agree with. My response to that accusation is two-fold:

1. Rather than devaluing the Word of God, it helps to ensure that we don’t misrepresent the Word of God and instead that we “rightly divide” the Word.
2. We actually all follow the above steps, whether we realise it or not.

Take the following for example taken from Women in Ministry – Four Views:

Are we devaluing the Word of God when we don’t follow these above examples? Are we seeking to “do away with” verses that we do not like or agree with? NO! We recognise that these were written to specific people, facing specific situations. There may still be principles within these verses or passages that we can follow, but in general we do not hold these verses as universal for all times.

So why do some choose to say that 1 Timothy 2:12 is universal and for all time, and yet they seem to happily accept that the verses written around 1 Timothy 2:12 (and other passages that Paul wrote) were addressing specific situations and are not universal for all time?

Those who hold a restrictive view of women in leadership need to be willing to face up to this question and answer why they believe that the verses directly before and after 1 Timothy 2:12 are not applicable today but are time-bound and situational, but that 1 Timothy 2:12 is universal for all time.

Either we have to accept that all of it was situational and time-bound, or that all of the passage still applies. From my observation, those who hold that women can’t teach or have authority over a man, do not apply the other verses equally and with the same demand that they be followed. I simply ask “why”?

When it comes to reading scripture and being able to “rightly divide” it, context and consistency in how we treat the verses is key! We cannot expect to read it as 21^stcentury Christians, with a western world view, thousands of years on from when it was first written, and read in to it what we think it is saying to us without giving any consideration to original audience, situation and culture it was written to. When we take these things into consideration we are not somehow devaluing the Word of God, but instead we are seeking to read it  and understand it correctly and faithfully! I have also covered the puzzling inconsistency with which those who hold a restrictive view on women treat the various verses of Paul here.

AN ISSUE TO ADDRESS

Before I go any further I want to raise a concern that needs addressing. I have had it levelled at me by some of those who hold to a restrictive view of women in leadership that my stance on women being allowed to have any leadership role within the Church has put me on a “slippery slope” and that if we go down this road of allowing women to have certain leadership roles within the Church (especially an elder or senior pastor), that it is “the beginning of the end and before we know it we will be allowing all sorts of sins to be accepted in the Church.”

These accusations have to be the most ridiculous and quite frankly ill-informed and misguided that I have heard in the whole debate around women in leadership within the Church. Firstly, NO WHERE in the bible does it say, “if a women speaks or has a leadership role in the church she is sinning.” Women holding positions of leadership within the church is not a sin! Secondly, to suggest that because I support women being able to have leadership roles within the church I am on a “slippery slope” or that if we as a Church allow women to be elders or senior pastors we are on a “slippery slope” is simply absurd.

Anyone who would claim that women holding leadership positions within the church, or teaching men is “sinful” or a “sin” are either being intellectually dishonest, or are grossly misinformed. It speaks more about them and where they are at than it does about those of us who sincerely believe that Jesus and the narrative of the entire Bible clearly liberate women to be able to freely serve God. I would also remind them that if that is how they are going argue, then they need to look in the mirror and reflect on the other verse that are in 1 Timothy that they willing accept were cultural or time bound and no longer follow. We can’t say that it is “sinful” to understand the passage about women having authority over men as being time bound and situational, but that if we understandothers in this same way it is not.

I want it to be very clear. I do not support in any way understanding the scriptures that speak about and call out sin in any other way because sin is sin and that does not change! Time does not change God’s word on what HE deems as sin. The entire narrative of scripture is clear on sin.

There is a difference between sin, which in my opinion we do not compromise on, and other instructions that are given by Paul, Peter and others, that we are addressing specific situations at a specific time. As per the examples above in the photo for instance.

We are treading into dangerous territory when we begin to merge the two together and claim that women being in leadership is sinful, or that those who would like to see woman serve fully in the life of the church are somehow sinning. If this is going to be the yard stick with which we are measured by those who oppose women in leadership, then we have to apply the same yard stick to them when we consider all the other things mentioned that they no longer adhere to and willing accept are time-bound, culturally bound or addressing specific situations.

CONTEXT

The book that we call 1 Timothy is a letter that was written to Timothy somewhere between 63-67AD. Timothy had a Jewish mother and a Greek father. His mother Eunice converted to Christianity and along with his grandmother Lois, raised Timothy in the faith. Paul met Timothy during his second missionary journey and Timothy became one of his companions, along with Silas. Paul had become a mentor to Timothy, whom Paul had entrusted with numerous tasks, including overseeing the church in Ephesus.

Paul wrote this letter to Timothy to advise him concerning issues that had arisen in the church at Ephesus. 1 Timothy provides instructions for Timothy to be able to address these issues and to encourage him as he oversaw the church there.

It is clear as you read the letter that one of the primary concerns of Paul were the false teachers that had arisen amongst the church. While the letter does not specifically address what all the false teachings were, he does address his concerns about what the results of the false teaching will be and talks about how true Christianity is evidenced through a life shaped by the gospel.

The letter to Timothy falls into the category of literature known as “occasional letters”. This simply means that the author of the letter is addressing specific situations within the church that the letter is written to, rather than addressing other topics the author may have wished to write about. This is important to understand and know if we are to correctly understand this letter.

It is important to note that Paul, when writing this letter to Timothy, addressing the situation that was going on in the Church in Ephesus, would not have known that his letter would become part of the Christian Scriptures (the Bible). Paul would also have assumed that if someone else were to pick up and read the letter later that they would be smart enough to recognise that he was addressing his letter to a situation in Ephesus – which the letter itself as a whole claims to do![1]

Straight away we can see that we would not be wise to pick up the book of Timothy and assume that everything in it is speaking specifically to our situation today. First of all, we are not living in 1^stCentury Ephesus. Secondly, we are not necessarily dealing with all the issues that Timothy was having to address in the church in Ephesus. Thirdly, if we have any integrity, we have to acknowledge that Paul was addressing specific circumstances and situations, therefore it would be unwise to apply what he is saying without first considering the context.

Two other important things to consider when reading scripture in context is to consider the language that the letter was written in, what words are used, and how they have since been translated to English, and what the wider narrative of scripture shows us. We will look at each of these now.

 WORDS MATTER

This section is NOT about trying to do word contortions to make this verse allow for women today in the 21^stcentury to be leaders and speak at church. This is about ensuring that we are seeing in our English translations the message that the writer, in this case Paul, was intending when he originally wrote it in Greek.

1 Timothy was written in Greek, and that the words we read today are English. Often the same English word is used for Greek words that are from the same “family” of words, but which can mean slightly different things, or portray different intentions than what our one English word can convey. To quell any fears of those who may be reading this, I begin with an example that we all agree with. In our English translations of the Bible we have one word “love” that is used to cover 3 (or 4) different Greek words. Our word “love” does not do justice to the actual message that is often being conveyed in the scriptures when one of the 4 Greek words is used. The 4 Greek words for love are:

• Eros (Pronounced: AIR-ohs) is the Greek word for sensual or romantic love
• Storge (Pronounced: STOR-jay) describes family love, the affectionate bond that develops naturally between parents and children, and brothers and sisters.
• Philia (Pronounced: FILL-ee-uh) is the type of intimate love that most Christians practice toward each other. This Greek term describes the powerful emotional bond seen in deep friendships.
• Agape (Pronounced: Uh-GAH-pay) is the highest of the four types of love in the Bible. This term defines God’s immeasurable, incomparable love for humankind. It is the divine love that comes from God. Agape love is perfect, unconditional, sacrificial, and pure.[2]

This is obviously common knowledge these days to most Christians, but what we don’t necessarily know which form of love is being referred to in every passage of scripture that has the English word “love” as its interpretation. Yet, I am sure we will all agree, which form of love is being referred to is very important to know if we are to fully understand what the writer is trying to convey in a passage!

And so it is in the case of 1 Timothy 2:12.

A reminder of the verse:

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

When it comes to trying to understand what Paul was saying in this verse we are struck by same issue that we have with the word “love”. What has been translated “exercise authority” or in some versions “assume authority” or simply “have authority” over a man does not correctly convey what the Greek word that Paul used means or implies.

The Greek word used in this passage by Paul is authentein from the Greek verb authenteo. This word is not the usual Greek word that is used for “authority” in the New Testament. Normally the Greek word used is exousia.[3] In fact, authentein is only found once in the Bible. Surely, if Paul had wanted to convey authority in the usual way he would have used exousia.

So what does authentein mean or convey? It means or conveys aggressive, domineering[4], to thrust oneself[5], usurp (take by force)[6].

Dr Ben Witherington III has studied extensively on the issue of women in leadership within the church, including looking into the word authentein (authenteo) and discovered the following:

“In every text where some kind of correcting of a problem is going on, it always means “usurp authority over,” and in every text where it’s offering some positive thing that you ought to do, it means, “exercise authority over.” In this text, is Paul correcting abuses and problems? Yes, he is, and therefore the proper translation is, “usurp.” You should not usurp authority over the authorized and legitimate teachers,” says Paul.”[7]

This is a classic example of why it is important to understand the context of the situation being addressed, as well as what language or word was used in the original Greek text so that we don’t misunderstand what Paul was saying.

Just like the Greek words for love, where when we know what word the writers used and what they mean we can correctly interpret and understand what the writers where trying to convey, so too in this case, when we know what the words used for authority we can correctly understand and interpret what Paul was saying in his letter to Timothy and the church at Ephesus.

He is not forbidding women from having any authority over men (as we will see soon, there are examples throughout the Bible where women had authority over men), what he is forbidding is an unhealthy authority over men that some women in the church he was writing about were exercising. He is not addressing the exercise of a healthy kind of authority but is addressing the exercise of an overbearing and controlling use of power – something that men can be guilty of doing themselves!

WAS PAUL’S INSTRUCTION UNIVERSAL AND FOR ALL TIME?

Some will have read the above and either not be convinced, or dismiss it completely. So let’s look at the verse from another angle.

Did Paul mean for his instruction – if he meant “normal” authority and not the kind of authority mentioned above – to be taken as an all time, non-situational bound, non-cultural bound edict, or was it situational, cultural and time specific?

I believe, even if you dismiss the above explanation for the Greek word that was used in the passage, that it was in fact anchored to a situation that Paul was addressing and that the wider narrative of scripture tell us that it is NOT universal for all time.

As I mentioned above, there are plenty of other instructions that Paul gives in the SAME chapter of Timothy that even the most ardent of supports of restricting women from certain leadership rules don’t follow. Why? Because even they recognise that many of them are addressing certain situations or are time/culturally bound. I always find it amusing, but sad too, that strong proponents of restrictingwomen from leadership roles hold so tightly to this ONE verse where Paul talks about women not having authority over men, but completely ignore, or accept that the other verses around it and through 1 Timothy were addressing specific things.

As Alvera Mickelsen puts it:

“They ignore commands about pearls and gold and braided hair that are part of the passage. And they equivocate in varying degrees on teaching, authority and silence.”[8]

And again:

“Those who believe that verse 12 forever bars all women of all time from teaching or having authority over men usually ignore the commands in the other 6 verses in this section. This is a classic case of ‘selective literalism.’”[9]

Bill Gaultiere adds:

“In The Blue Parakeet Scot McKnight, an American New Testament scholar and professor of New Testament, says it’s a contradiction when in our churches we take one point in 1 Timothy 2:8-15 as a rule — women can’t preach or lead in church but must be silent — yet treat the other points as cultural.”

I agree with these and many others who point at the contradiction and inconsistency in the way people who hold a restrictive view of women in leadership treat these other verses.

I also feel that part of what Paul was addressing was the lack of understanding, education and training that most of the women in his day would have had when it comes to the scriptures and doctrine. Remember, this was a time when women were either forbidden to learn or didn’t get taught much at all.

Did Paul mean it to be universal? I believe the answer is no! What Paul was wanting was the women to learn first, before they begin teaching. Additionally, when they did teach and have authority, they weren’t to gainthat authority by usurping others or taking it by force!

Here, in the book of Timothy (and in other writings of Paul’s) he wants women to learn – a radical concept for 1^stcentury converts to hear, especially those who were Jewish converts.

As Paul Keener says:

“If he [Paul] prohibits women from teaching [in Ephesus – which this letter to Timothy is addressing] because they are unlearned, his demand that they learn constitutes a long-range solution to the problem. Women unlearned in the Bible could not be trusted to pass on its teachings accurately, but once they had learned, this would not be an issue and they could join the ranks of women colleagues in ministry whom Paul elsewhere commends.”[10]

In my view, even if Paul was meaning in all churches in his time he was forbidding women to teach (which I don’t think he was – as the letter was addressing the situation in Ephesus), it was not universal for all time. Back then, as already mentioned, women had not been allowed to learn the scriptures like the men had, but today women can learn the scriptures from birth, but women go to Bible college and learn the exact same stuff that the men who go to Bible college learn! If Paul was writing today he would surely not be needing to make the same prohibition as the women are all well taught.

Quite frankly, it is insulting and demeaning for men to think that they, by virtue of their male appendage, somehow are more qualified to teach than a women, especially when men and women in 21^stcentury society, have access to the same level of learning as each other.

Again, was Paul making a universal, blanket ban on women ever being able to teach or have authority over a man? No, I do not believe he was.

Ponder this thought from Paul Keener:

“What is most significant about the wording of the passage, however, is that Paul does not assume that Timothy already knows this rule. Had this rule been established and universal, is it possible that Timothy, who had worked many years with Paul, would not have known it already? Paul often reminds his readers of traditions they should know by saying, ‘You know,’ or ‘Do you not know?’ or ‘According to the traditions which I have delivered to you.” In his letters to Timothy, Paul appeals to ‘we know’ (e.g., 1 Tim 1:8), ‘faithful sayings’ (e.g. 1 Tim 1:150 and cites Timothy’s knowledge of Paul’s own life (2 Tim 3:10-11). He does give general moral counsel relating to Timothy’s situation at Ephesus, but quite clearly not all his admonitions to Timothy are directly applicable universally (1 Tim 5:11-14a, 23, 2 Tim 4:13)”[11]

If he was forbidding all women for all time, rather than addressing a specific situation that had arisen at the church in Ephesus (remember that Paul was writing the letter to Timothy who was to deal with the situation in Ephesus), then why does he commend Phoebe as a Deacon? As I said in a previous post, Paul’s mention that deacons and elders “must be the husband of one wife” was not implying that women couldn’t hold these roles, but was in fact (I believe) a restriction against certain men being able to hold these positions. Why? Because Phoebe was a female (so not the husband of one wife) and was a deacon who he commended!

What,in fact,Paul is addressing is the situation in Ephesus that he was writing to Timothy about. Certain women in that church were usurping the authority of others and seeking to promote themselves to positions that they were ready for and not qualified for. Paul was telling Timothy that these particular women were not to have authority over men or to teach, but were instead to learn quietly and in submission to those whom were appointed to the leadership roles within the church. He was also addressing the concern around these women being led astray by the false teachers – as false teaching is one of the main concerns that Paul is addressing in his letter to Timothy.

“According to Witherington, 1 Timothy 2:11 tells women what they must do (learn), while 1 Timothy 2:12 states what they must not do at that time (teach): “The verb here, epitrepō, is present, continual tense. Paul does not say ‘I will not/never permit,’ but rather, ‘I am not [now] permitting.’”⁷ The implication is that Paul’s concern is not with women teaching, but with women teaching false doctrines, the primary concern of the entire epistle in context. He is instructing the women to learn about their new faith at this time, not teach, because they need to be instructed regarding the faith so that they will be able to discern false teaching.”[12]

WIDER NARRATIVE OF SCRIPTURE

“Since this passage is related so closely to the situation Timothy was confronting in Ephesus, we should not use it in the absence of other texts to prove that Paul meant it universally.”[13]

One of the things that I was taught as a child and teenager, and again at Bible college and as an adult, is that when we read the Bible we should never take a verse in isolation and from it and it alone determine what it is meaning. Instead, we look at it in the wider context of the passage that it is taken from, and also the wider narrative of scripture. This ensures that we don’t “read into” the verse something that is either not there, or contrary to the rest of the narrative of scripture.

For instance, take the following verse from Luke 14:26:

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”

Now if I took that verse in isolation, I could, in my own mind, justify hating my family. What’s more, I can say that JESUS said those words, so JESUS is fine with me hating my family. The reality is though, that I would be taking that verse out of context, not only from within the passage I have taken it from, but also the wider narrative of scripture which shows a completely different view on hating people.

So my question is, how is it that when it comes to 1 Timothy 2:12, this is exactly what many people do when they restrict women from certain leadership roles and teaching opportunities?

I do not want to spend too much time unpacking examples of women with positions of authority over men or who taught and brought direct messages from God to the people that are found in scripture as it would make this already long post even longer. So what I will do is give you some passages and examples to go away and look at further.

My hope is that when you take these examples, and then read 1 Timothy 2:12 you will see for yourself that Paul could not have been applying a universal restriction on all women for all time from being able to “teach and have authority over a man” as the wider narrative of scripture paints the opposite picture.

 Old Testament Examples:

Miriam was a prophet (Exodus 15:20) and prophets brought messages from God to the people (including the men of course!)

Deborah was a judge, (Judges 4) and judges were leaders in Israel (including over the men!). It is noted that Deborah distinguishes herself as the most godly of ALL the judges. Not only that but she was also a Prophet! She instructed Barak (a man) in the conduct of battle and is her actions and words consistently pointed to God![14]

Huldah was a prophet (2 Kings 22:14-20)

Queen Esther (The Book of Esther)

Isaiah’s wife was a prophet (Isaiah 8)

There are others, I encourage you to search them out!

New Testament Examples:

Phoebe was a deacon (Romans 16:1-2). The Greek word used in this passage was prostatis which means “leader, one who presides, stand before, a patron.”[15]

Junia was an Apostle (Romans 16:7)

The Daughters of Phillip were prophets (Acts 21:8-9)

Anna was a prophet (Luke 2:36-38)

Priscilla taught (along with her husband) Apollos (Acts 18:24-26) – note she is mentioned first!

Chloe is a leader of a house church (1 Corinthians 1:11). Why would Paul refer to them as “Chloe’s people” if she were not the leader?

There are others too, I encourage you to search for them!

You might be wondering why I put the women prophets in this list. The reason is to illustrate a point – God doesn’t exclude women from being used by him to speak to others (men and women alike). Additionally, to be a prophet or to use the gift of prophecy requires the person to hear a message direct from God and bring it to his people. It could be a word of encouragement, correction, instruction etc. and this is a role that requires far more trust than for someone who reads the word and brings a message based on how they interpret what they read and then share. It is put best in these taken from Stanley J. Grenz and Denise Muir Kjesbo’s book Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry:

Additionally, when you read the spiritual gifts passages that Paul gives, you notice that he doesn’t assign certain gifts as “men only gifts”.  He doesn’t say there are male gifts and female gifts. Instead he says that the gifts are given by God to all.

Interestingly, the only thing Paul does do is appear to “rank” the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:28 where he puts prophets ahead of those who lead and teach, and in the three other passages, prophecy is listed before the gifts of teaching and leading, perhaps reflecting the level of importance and authority that such a gift and “office” carries in the church. This is interesting to me because as we see in the passages above, the Bible mentions (Old and New Testament) and allows women prophets and women to prophecy. Note that in the Ephesians 4 passage below regarding gifts it says that they were given to EQUIP the church!

1 Corinthians 12:28

Romans 12:3-8

1 Corinthians 12:4-11

Ephesians 4:11-13

 Jesus’ Example:

There were many women who were disciples of Jesus. The bible even names some of Jesus’ women followers:

Mary Magdalene, whom Jesus commissioned to go and tell the disciples that he had risen! Joanna and Mary – mother of James, Susanna, Salome, Mary (of Bethany) and Martha. There were, the scriptures tell us, many other womenwho followed Jesus (remember that a disciple is a follower of Jesus).

We know they were Jesus disciples because they went where Jesus went, sat at his feet and learnt(something that disciples did!) and that they were commissionedto share his message of the resurrection!

Additional to all of this, read the gospels and you can see for yourself that Jesus ministry broke down the barriers that held women back from being able to fully participate in God’s kingdom! Think: the women at the well, Mary Magdalene, the women followers, talking with women etc. etc.

Also, I have already covered other examples of Jesus interaction with women here.

WHERE TO FROM HERE?

So with all that, how do we apply this verse and what conclusions can we come to?

I will quote from two sources to sum up, as I believe their words aptly sum it all up, and I fully support what they say:

“There is a universal principle in this text, but it is broader than that unlearned women should not teach. If Paul does not want the women to teach in some sense, it is not because they are women, but because they are unlearned. His principle here is that those who do not understand the scriptures and are not able to teach them accurately should not be permitted to teach others. This text is unfortunately quite applicable today; there are all too many people teaching unhealthy interpretations of the Bible today, and most of them are men.”[16]

“So how do we apply this passage? We apply it the same way we apply other ‘regulations for people where they were.’ If a present situation is similar to that in Ephesus – if a group of people are teaching heresy or are ill-prepared to meet the temptations of Satan – Christians show loving concern by helping them become learners before they become teachers.”[17]

“I kept meeting committed women who were sure that God had called them, and I did not have sufficient conviction to tell them that they had to be mistaken. I would have to be pretty sure of my position before I used it to judge another person’s call, because if I made her stumble, it is none other than God to whom I would have to answer. And if I as a male minister could question the sincerity of her call, how could any of us men argue that we were certain that we had been called to ministry.”[18]

“…in all seriousness, it is a dangerous thing to turn people from their call, or to oppose their call if it is genuinely from God. On what basis do any of us men who are called prove our call? We trust inner conviction and the fruit of holy lives and teaching and faithfulness to that call, and if these evidences are insufficient demonstration of divine calling in the case of our sisters, how shall we attest our own?”[19]

THE FINAL WORD

If you hold a restrictive view on women in leadership within the church my hope is that by reading this post you may have come to the realisation that this verse in 1 timothy does not restrict women from holding certain leadership roles in the church and also does not restrict women from being able to teach men.

If it hasn’t convinced you, then my hope is that it has at least give you pause for thought and reflection, and that you will go away and think through things and perhaps look into it further.

If you are just as set in your position as you were before, tell me why in the comments below.

For those who, like me, believe that there are no restrictions on women in leadership within the church and that women can teach men, I hope that this post has done justice in your eyes to address the issue to some degree. If not, please feel free to offer further thoughts in the comments section.

Agree with what I have written? Why not leave a comment and let me know!

Disagree with what I have written? Why not leave a comment stating your reasons why and lets have an open discussion!

The name of this blog is Kōrerorero, which means: to talk, discuss, converse, chat. So, I would be honoured to have you join me in the journey and in the conversation! Feel free to comment below and share your story, your journey, your thoughts, and together lets Kōrerorero.

 

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 117.

[2] https://www.learnreligions.com/types-of-love-in-the-bible-700177

[3] Women in Ministry: Four Views, by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 202.

 [4]https://www.cbeinternational.org/resources/article/priscilla-papers/does-1-timothy-2-prohibit-women-teaching-leading-and-speaking

[5]Women in Ministry: Four Views,by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 202.

[6] Women and Ministry, by Dr. Ben Witherington III, A Burleigh College Public Lecture (19 August 2004) (http://sabaptist.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Women-in-Ministry-Witherington.pdf)

[7] Women and Ministry, byDr. Ben Witherington III, A Burleigh College Public Lecture (19 August 2004) (http://sabaptist.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Women-in-Ministry-Witherington.pdf)

[8] Women in Ministry: Four Views,by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 202.

[9]Women in Ministry: Four Views,by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 201.

[10] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 112.

[11] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 112.

[12] https://www.cbeinternational.org/resources/article/priscilla-papers/does-1-timothy-2-prohibit-women-teaching-leading-and-speaking

[13] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 112.

[14] ESV Study Bible, 2008,  Page 444

[15] Women in Ministry: Four Views, by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 201.

[16] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 120.

[17] Women in Ministry: Four Views, by Bonnidell Clouse (Editor), Robert G. Clouse (Editor), Robert Culver (Contributor), Susan T. Foh (Contributor), Walter L. Liefeld (Contributor), Alvera Mickelsen (Contributor), page 204.

[18] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 3-4.

[19] Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul.Craig S. Keener, page 120.