THEOS prōtos

1 Timothy 2:1-15

• Gender Roles are ordained and appointed by God.
• Spiritual authority as given to men by God.
• Women are to respectfully and peacefully, without contention, submit to the ordained role of the men by God.
• Women are not to have authority or doctrinally teach without subjection to the leadership of men in their local church.
• If no men are leaders in the local church, they will be held accountable to God for their lack of obedience.  
• If women assert themselves as the local church authority, they are also disobedient to God.
• Women, in their different role, are equally valuable and equally important to God.

1 Timothy 3:1-13

Verse 1 (context): “if any man… he desires to do…”
Verse 2 (Specific): “the husband of one wife,…”  ἀνήρ – anēr – masculine noun – ἀνήρ anḗr, an’-ayr; a primary word (compare G444); a man (properly as an individual male):—fellow, husband, man, sir. 

• The qualifications for pastors and teaching elders with spiritually authoritative roles in the church.
• The role of overseer and elder is gender specific – “he” – any male – the first qualification
• Qualification 2: “must be above reproach” – all women would fail this simply because of Qualification #1, #3, #12, #13, and #14
• Qualification 3: “the husband of one wife” – gender-role specific.
• Qualification 12: “one who manages his own household competently, having his children under control with all dignity.” – gender specific
• Qualification 13: “He must not be a new convert” – gender specific
• Qualification 14: “he must have a good reputation among outsiders” – Gender specific
• Deacons and Wives are addressed separately. – v8, 11
• Deacon Qualification: “Deacons must be husbands of one wife, managing their children and their own households competently.” – also puts “they/them/their” in the context of men, they, all the men, as husbands.

Titus 1:5-9

Verse 6a: (context): “if any man…”
Verse 6b: (Specific): “the husband of one wife,…”  ἀνήρ anḗr, an’-ayr; a primary word (compare G444); a man (properly as an individual male):—fellow, husband, man, sir. 

• Elder (Overseer) Qualification #2: “the husband of one wife”
• Qualification #1: “who is blameless” – being disqualified by Qual.#2 would violate #1
• The office is gender specific – “he will be able both to encourage with sound teaching” v9

Biblical Support for Godly Ordained Gender Roles and Divine Usage:

1. God gave commands to Adam, not Eve (Gen. 2:16-18).
2. Eve was deceived, not Adam, but Adam failed to lead so Eve took charge and led Adam (Paul’s argument).
3. Husbands love his wife like Christ loves the church: Christ is the head of the church, thus Husbands love their wives by also leading them at the expense of himself.
4. 3,750 years of spiritual history were 95% of all Doctrinal Authority who are ordained by God have been male. The the Bible, a total of 3,397 names were identified. Among these, 1,967 names of individuals, 1,051 names refer to places, 315 names denote collective entities or nations, and 85 names are allocated to miscellaneous items such as months, rivers, or pagan deities. Professor Karla Bombach says one study produced a total of 3000–3100 names, 2900 of which are men with 170 of the total being women. However, the possibility of duplication produced the recalculation of a total of 1700 distinct personal names in the Bible with 137 of them being women. In yet another study of the Hebrew Bible only, there were a total of 1426 names with 1315 belonging to men and 111 to women. That means only 12% to 8% of persons recorded in The Bible are Women.  Of that 12-8%, around half of those were predominate positive figures (6-4%).  That means God used less than 15 women in an authoritative position in the span of 2,000 years, averaging 1 legitimate spiritually authoritative woman every 133 years. This shows that undoubtably God used men 95% of the time in His gradual revelation of Scripture and redemptive history.  Which also means, God using women to spiritually lead his people is extremely rare and far from normal.  Which also means the rare use of women was for special circumstances, such as judgements on the men of Israel.
5. God DID make gender roles unique:  Men are used by God to bring SPIRITUAL LIFE, after women are used by God to bring PHYSICAL LIFE. And there is no spiritual life without first physical life.  This shows that men and women are equal, and equally necessary and valuable, but different and unique in their godly purposes and roles.
6. Angels are directly connected to God as his messengers, and they have never appeared to people in a female form, only in a male form, when relaying messages from God.

The Explicit & Direct Statements to reconcile:

1. 1 Tim 2:12:  “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.”  It is translated peaceable there. The idea is without contention instead of silence.  ἡσυχία, -ας, ἡ, (from the adjective ἡσύχιος, which see; the feminine expresses the general notion [Winers Grammar, 95 (90)], cf. αἰτία, ἀρετή, ἐχθρά, etc.), [from Homer down]; – “quietness: descriptive of the life of one who stays at home doing his own work, and does not officiously meddle with the affairs of others” – the idea of women receiving the teaching of the men God has chosen to lead in the church, with submission instead of contention.  Paul’s meaning seems clear. Women are not to have the role of teaching authority in the church. To be under authority is the principle; not teaching is the application.  Paul is saying that the church should not recognize women as those having authority in the church regarding matters of doctrine and Scriptural interpretation. Not all speaking or teaching by a woman is necessarily a violation of God’s order of authority in the church. Whatever speaking or teaching is done by a woman must be done in submission to the men God has appointed to lead the church.  The strength of Paul’s wording here makes it challenging to obey this command in today’s society. Since the 1970’s, our culture has rejected the idea that there may be different roles for men and women in the home, in the professional world, or in the church. In this text (among others), the Holy Spirit clearly says there is a difference in roles.  This idea of authority and submission to authority are so important to God that they are part of His very being. The First Person of the Holy Trinity is called the Father; the Second Person of the Holy Trinity is called the Son. Inherent in those titles is a relationship of authority and submission to authority. The Father exercises authority over the Son, and the Son submits to the Father’s authority — and this is in the very nature and being of God. Our failure to exercise Biblical authority, and our failure to submit to Biblical authority, isn’t just wrong and sad — it sins against the very nature of God.  The Bible is just as specific that there is no general submission of women unto men commanded in society; only in the spheres of the home and in the church. God has not commanded in His word that men have exclusive authority in the areas of politics, business, education, and so on. It also does not mean that every woman in the church is under the authority of every man in the church. Instead it means that those who lead the church — pastors and ruling elders — must be men, and the women (and others) must respect their authority.  
2. 1 Tim 3:1-2: “If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife…” ἀνήρ, ἀνδρός, ὁ, a man, Latin vir. The meanings of this word in the N. T. differ in no respect from classic usage; for it is employed 1. with a reference to sex, and so to distinguish a man from a woman; either a. as a male: Acts 8:12; Acts 17:12; 1 Timothy 2:12; or b. as a husband: Matthew 1:16; Mark 10:2; John 4:16ff; Romans 7:2ff; 1 Corinthians 7:2ff; Galatians 4:27; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6, etc.; a betrothed or future husband: Matthew 1:19; Revelation 21:2, etc. 2. with a reference to age, and to distinguish an adult man from a boy: Matthew 14:21; Matthew 15:38 (where ἄνδρες, γυναῖκες and παιδία are.  “A one-woman man.” It is not that a leader must be married (if so, then both Jesus and Paul could not be spiritual leaders in our churches). Nor is the idea that leader could never remarry if his wife had passed away or was Biblically divorced. The idea is that is love and affection and heart is given to one woman, and that being his lawful and wedded wife. This means that the Biblical leader is not a playboy, an adulterer, a flirt, and does not show romantic or sexual interest in other women, including the depictions or images of women in pornography.  Explicitly only referring to men, the male gender. 

These two verses are incompatible and explicitly contradictory to any claim of female overseer/bishop/ office of teaching elder.  None-the-less, anyone attempting to claim female doctrinal authority must first reconcile these verses with their claim to office to justify their claim to their desire for authority in Christ Jesus’ church; as HE is the head of the Church and HE breathed these verses, qualifications, and requirements, as HE guided Paul’s penmanship.

OBJECTIONS:

1. “Women were typically uneducated in that time of that culture.”  1 Tim. 2:11-14 does not mention the educational status of men or women.  Thus, education was not part of the context.  If that were the case, most of the Apostles would be disqualified, they were just fishermen and tax collectors.
   
2. “Paul was only talking to the church of Ephesus.”  It is true that Timothy was the pastor of the Church in Ephesus.  Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, and women were the authorities in that branch of paganism. So some would try to conclude that Paul was only resisting the female-led customs of the Ephesian idolaters, and the church needed to be set apart. But, 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention the standard practice of Artemis worshipers.  Thus, much like the first objection, does not pertain to the context of what and why Paul wrote what he wrote.  No matter the cultural norms in what ever region a local church finds itself in, being set apart is expected in general.  Also, Titus, has the same qualifications, but for a different church.
   
   [PAGAN CUSTOMS?] Some people have argued that Paul was only applying those qualifications to that certain Church in that area because of the pagan female-led customs of Ephesus.  And to protect the church from bringing in those worldly cultural customs, he limited the female role in that region.   Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis where women were authorities in that branch of paganism.  But, this is an assumption not supported by scripture.  Paul could have very well mentioned this as to his justification, but he didn’t.   Paul wasn’t talking about any sort of paganism.  This theory to discredit the broad application of Overseer qualifications is unbiblical.
   
3. “Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in the Old Testament were women who were spiritual authoritative leaders.”  This is true.  BUT these women were specifically chosen by God for a special service.  First, not all women in the Old Testament were, most weren’t. These three were unique, extremely rare, and was not normal practice but was only done for specific reasons at that time (See ‘Biblical Support…’ #4).
   
   [CHURCH AND ISRAEL ARE NOT THE SAME] Secondly, when it comes to the context of the Church, the church had not been established in the Old Testament.  The New Testament is a distinct shift in God’s plan for mankind.  Thus, involves a new unique structure alien to the Old Testament and not for the nation of Israel.  For the same reason why the church does not continue the same ceremonial practices of Israel.  The structures of religion in the Old Testament have no relevance besides their historical value, cultural understanding, foreshadow of the coming Christ, revealing nature of God, or universal morality.
   
   [WERE A SIGN OF JUDGMENT] Yes, God raised up a Judge over Israel that was female.  But that was actually a judgment on the men of Israel.  It was their duty to lead and they failed.  In that culture this would have been extremely insulting and humiliating; and that was God’s point.  This is an extremely poor justification for any sort of female leadership in The Church today.  Again, this was over The Nation of Israel, a completely different entity than the church.
   
   [PASTOR ELDER AND PROPHETS ARE NOT THE SAME] Being any sort of Prophet or Prophetess does not, by default, justify anyone to be a Elder or Overseer in the Church.  In fact, there were even real prophetesses that were evil and wicked (1 Kings 18:1-19; Revelation 2:18-23; Ezra 8:33; Nehemiah 6:5-14).  These two things are unrelated and thus, don’t support this issue.
   
   1. Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, in Exodus 15:20, only worshiped with the women.  God even rebukes and punishes her for speaking against Moses, his servant (Numbers 12:7-15). Very poor example to use.
   2. Deborah, a judge in Israel, was appointed a judge in a time when Israel did “what was evil in the sight of the Lord after Ehud died.” She was appointed by God when God Judged Israel. Judges 5:7-9 shows she came to power at the time of judgment.  Male leadership has failed to do what God commanded them to do (Judges 2:1-3), the male “leader” even begged Deborah to go with him into battle (v8), they were weak in faith.  God would not even give him the honor for the victory either.  She was appointed as “leader” because the male leaders were failures. She is God’s judgment on the men of israel, and NOT as an example for women leadership in the Church (which is vastly different from being a Judge over Israel in the OT).
   3. Huldah, a prophetess, was made a prophet in the time when they literally lost the Book of the Law in Judah.  He states “great is the wrath of the Lord that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.”  She is used by God to inform them that God is going to judge them even more harshly.  Like Deborah, she was appointed during a time of judgment.  Huldah was actually appointed to speak forth judgment.  She is God’s judgment on the men of Israel, and NOT as an example for women leadership in the Church (which is vastly different from being a Judge over Israel in the OT).
      
4. “Anna and the Daughters of Phillip were Prophets.”  We see in the New Testament Anna, the prophetess (Luke 2:36-38), and the four daughters of Phillip (Acts 21:1-9) were prophetess.  But, you still run into the same problem.  Being a prophetess does not automatically quality anyone for the Office of Elder or Overseer.  It is nothing more than a spiritual gift and anyone can be given that gift, the gift of prophecy.   When we look at Anna and the daughters of Phillip, nowhere does the Bible state that they held any kind of Elder, or Overseer role.  They were just using their gifts to benefit the church, as they should, as everyone should.
   
   Joel 2:28-32 prophecy of the Spirit is used a lot in argument for female authority in the church.  Joel states that sons and daughters will prophesy and male and female servants too.  As mentioned above, he was right, Phillips daughters were prophesying and The Holy Spirit now will give that gift to whom ever He so chooses, regardless of sex.   But all these statements pointing out that there are and will be female prophets, prophetess, is unrelated to the Office of Overseer and Elder.  One does not have anything to do with the other.  They are separate.  One is a gift of the Spirit, now, the other is an actual position and office within the authority of the Church.
   
5. “Phoebe was a church leader.”  Paul gives a shout out to a female named Phoebe in Romans 16:1-2.  He calls her “our sister” which just means a sister in Christ.  But Paul does give her a better recommendation.  He calls her a “servant of the church.”  Who is called to serve the local body of Christ and their communities?  All Christians.  She is just better at it and more reliable than most, hence her recommendation from Paul.
   
   Deacon qualifications in 1 Timothy shows she could not have been officially appointed Deacon, but just like all Christians serving their church, she is just really good at it.
   
   For the sake of argument, even if she was an unofficial Deacon appointed as judgement over all the men of that church, she still had no teaching authority because the office of deacon is not an authority on doctrine anyway.  Regardless, she had no doctrinal authority.
   
6. “Priscilla in the New Testament were spiritual authoritative leaders in the church.”  Kind of, Priscilla was a faithful minister for Christ, but we all are called to be.  Yes she taught “the way of God more adequately” (Acts 18:26), but we are all called to do so.  But nowhere in scripture was she ever stated as being a teaching Elder or Pastor of a local church nor an authoritative leader of a congregation.
   
   The only thing scripture reveals about her is she was a truly faithful servant of the Lord; as we all ought to be.  The typical argument assumes her pastoral role in the church, but this is incorrect as Scripture does not state this.  Her support from Paul does not validate a pastoral role either, there are a number of people Paul supports and encourages, who are not pastors.  Paul does not only speak about pastors.
   
   A point the argument makes is that because “she was mentioned first, proves that she was the leader.”  Again, this is assumed.  She could have been mentioned first simply because she was more predominant and known due to other various reasons such as availability of service.  Maybe she was the primary message runner for the local church leaders.  We can go on and on about maybes and assumptions.  That’s the point.  Her, as a pastor or lead elder is not stated therefore we can also assume just the same that she was not a pastor or lead elder.  But we let scripture interpret scripture.
   
7. “The Mother of John Mark was a Pastor.”  This is false.  Acts 12:12 just specifies which Mary of the house where they met to pray.  This is not a pastoral endorsement but a statement to help the reader know exactly who’s house they went to.  To assume this is a pastoral endorsement by Luke is a baseless conclusion and poor interpretation of scripture.  She simply hosted the gathering and was a notable faithful host.
   
8. “Chloe was a Pastor” (1 Cor. 1:11).  Much like objection 5, this is a baseless assumption not revealed in scripture.  Though she is noted as the household head, this could simply be due to her being an unmarried widow.  To assume she was a pastor would contradict other areas and the totality of Scripture.
   
9. “Nympha was a Pastor” (Colossians 4:15).  Same for objection 7, this text simply states that the church met at her house and does not state that she was the pastor of that church.  Again, she could have been an unmarried widow as well.  She could have also been a predominate business woman.  The designation that it was her home does not imply pastorship but a designation of a specific person that the local church would know.
   
10. “Lydia was a Pastor” (Acts 16:14-15).  This verse is simply referring to a woman who was a business woman; who was converted by Paul and simply invited them over to her house to support his missions.  She was an influence in converting her family as well, as all mothers are. But to assume she then became a pastor of that new local church is not stated in scripture.  In all honestly, with the totality of scripture, she would have for sure influenced the spread of Christianity in the community and joined the local community.  
    
11. “God says men and women are equal, stated in Galatians 3:28.”  This is true.  But, gender equality is not the issue, ordained roles are.  The difference in the roles does not negate equality.  The value of both roles are equal, yet, still different in role.  Galatians 3:28 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 are both true.  When one argument is supported by one verse but contradicts another, it is the argument that is faulty.  This argument is faulty because it falsely assumes the different roles are not equal; but, in God’s eyes, they are equal.
    
12. “No men are available or willing to lead the local church so women fill their role.”  This does not negate God’s original plan and historical pattern of his redemptive history.  The men of that local church will be judged by God for not faithfully fulfilling their ordained role and the women of that community need to support and encourage their men to step up, not walk over them.  How faithful we are to the Lord reflects our respect and duty in our role, as men and women.
    
13. “The Common English Bible translation states the elder and deacon qualifications differently, it is gender neutral and states “spouse” instead of “husband” or “wife.”  This is a terribly failed agenda driven translation.  When we look at the actual oldest manuscripts, they do not state this.  This translation does not reflect the oldest manuscripts.  In their translation of 1 Timothy 2:8-15 we see them change from broad “men” and “woman” to “wife” and “husband”, yet, the same Greek word is used and the context has not changed; therefore, the proper translation would continue to translate the word as “man” and “woman” given that the context had not changed.  This poor translation also negatively effects Paul’s justification.  Paul cannot be referring to Adam as a husband because he is talking about something prior to Eve’s creation, such as his own; and Adam represents all men just as Eve represents all women in this context; or Paul’s argument is rendered irrelevant.  The same is true with Titus 1:5-9.  The manuscripts specifically state “if any man…the husband of one wife” where as the CEB translates it as “Elders… faithful to their spouse“.  The masculine noun Greek word ἀνήρ (see Literal word for word Translation of the NASB) is in the text which can only be properly translated as “husband, sir, fellow, or man”.  Thus, showing the poor translation of the CEB.  When basing doctrinal “truths” off an untrustworthy translation, you are naturally lead to false doctrines and false assumptions.  When ideologically driven translations are used to erase what is actually stated in the manuscripts, it can then be justified to make other assumptions that are not stated in scripture.
    
14. “Women pastors were only prohibited by The Council of Laodicea in the 4th century.”  This is untrue.  When only considering Holy Scripture in its proper translation and proper contexts we clearly see that the office of pastor was ordained by God for men.  There could have been an influx of churches post-Apostles that began giving pastoral roles to women, which contradicts scripture, thus, the councils decision to act and address this issue.  But an increase in disobedience does not make the act of disobedience justified.
    
15. “Only allowing Men as Pastors is sexism, and thus is sin.”  This must be assumed in order to believe that it is in some way unequal or different in value to God.  This is simply a failure to see the true transcendent value in women’s ministries and women’s roles as stated above.  That would also require the belief that Paul, in 1 Tim. 2:11-12, is sexist.  To then assume Paul was sexist, how can you not then question everything else he taught?  If he was wrong to teach that, how do you know he wasn’t wrong in other areas?  How can you tell someone else, when they say he is wrong about another matter because they disagree with something else he taught, that they are wrong? See the natural direction we logically go when we reinterpret scripture in our own image? 
    
16. “Culture is different and times have changed.”  This is by far the worst argument that can be made with regard to applying (or not) God’s Word.  Yes, cultures and societies continually evolve and change in their social norms and social constructs but, God doesn’t.  What was once a sin, will always be a sin.  What God once called good, will always be good.  God’s truths are completely independent from the continually evolving and changing social norms and social constructs.  God is not surprised by the future.  He already knows how things will change and how many times every culture in all history will change until the end of the world.  God’s truth revealed in scripture is not subjective or relative; or He can not truly be God.  And, as studied above, God’s truths are revealed.  But do we obey them and remain faithful to God’s revealed word or construct complicated arguments to justify our sinful hearts to do what we think is right in our eyes, in our time of age?  “Paul didn’t know that women would be hired by Christian Universities to teach doctrinal classes”  Think about that statement for a second.  This assumes God is ignorant, after all, the Holy Spirit spoke through Paul.  All that statement really does in condemn those Christian Universities for being disobedient to God.  Paul isn’t in the wrong, ever. 

The context is either ignored or what is not stated is just added in and assumed to be true.  A major assumption that plagues all these objections is that the difference in roles makes a difference in value and equality.  This is a lie.  A second major problem is the assumption itself.  They are assuming what scripture is not saying.

1.  First, the Church is not the same as The Nation of Israel or any other Old Testament entity.  So to apply OT religious structures on the NT Church is not very accurate; eating pork, getting circumcised, and worshiping on Saturday, for example.  This is the error for a lot of the arguments for female church authority that use OT justifications.

2.  Second, just because God uses someone to do something, doesn’t mean that is how it should have been in the first place.  God used Egypt and Babylon to enslave Israel, are we then to assume that because God used Egypt and Babylon that in some way they are a good and an example for us to follow?  No.  There are hundreds of actual and real prophets in the OT that were evil.  Yes, God uses women, he is the creator of them and the universe.  But “use” doesn’t mean anything more than that, used.   To say “Because God used women, women should be leaders” now apply that logic to all the evil people used by God.  It doesn’t work.