Why are men excluded?

I do not permit a woman to teach a man with authority (1 Timothy 2:12).

My hands are dusty-white on the palms and streaks of powder line my skirt. Chalk dust lingers in the air, but the chalkboard is wiped clean, ready for the next day’s lessons to resume across its dark slate. My grandmother gathers up books and papers from her desk, loads them into our arms and out to the car. It is a pattern she repeats for 40 years, imparting knowledge to young and old, the necessary building blocks of wisdom. It never crossed her mind to exclude men from her instruction. The notion would have been utterly inconceivable and reprehensible to her. It was a notion her granddaughter would encounter and contend with half a century later. But for the moment, that train of thought seemed to be crawling, like a baffled invalid that gained a few inches and then stopped to cough. Soon, it would gather enough steam to burst headlong into the 20th Century, creating friction all along the way. Why is a letter, written ostensibly by Paul in the first century, to Timothy in Ephesus, creating consternation in the church today? How is it used to exclude men from women’s teaching, preaching, and leading?

Context:  What did the original audience know and understand?

At one time Ephesus stood at the crossroads of six cultures and attracted such notable people as Paul, Luke, Timothy, John, Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila, not to mention King Croesus, Alexander the Great, Antony and Cleopatra. When Augustus became emperor (27 BC) he designated it as the capital of Western Asia Minor. It was a strategic move geographically, politically, and religiously, as it was a port city with access to great roads and harbors. It boasted a population of 200,000 people in the first-century and was the guardian of the temple of Artemis, a major banking center and one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. For two years and three months the city served as a base for Paul (AD 50-53; Acts 19). An uprising made the apostle decide to end his time in the city earlier than planned. The problem? Serious opposition from the followers of Artemis. So, who was Artemis of Ephesus in the world of Paul and Timothy?

Artemis, also known as Diana, means sound (free of disease, healthy). She was the daughter of Zeus. She was his firstborn, her twin brother Apollo was born second. She highly valued virginity and was not promiscuous. She did not need a man, but she liked men and allowed herself to love Orion. After his death she remained a perpetual virgin who was hailed as the lord of virginity. She was a chaste hunter with golden hair and purple knee-length tunic. She wore a gold belt, drove a golden chariot, and sat on a golden throne. With quiver and arrows, she bore her hunting arms and javelins, and her hounds followed her. City-wide processions occurred every two weeks, and a yearly festival was held in her honor. The multitudes viewing her exclaimed loudly in amazement. The statue thought to represent her as a fertility goddess, instead depicts her arrayed with jewelry, not body parts. She was a powerful deity, particularly worshipped as the goddess who protects during childbirth, granting painless delivery or painless death. Paul is aware of the Artemis connection, commenting on safe delivery in childbirth, as well as creation/birth order, later in his letter to Timothy. In short, Artemis was a powerful sovereign; she was celibate, she did not need a man, she was nobody’s mother and nobody’s wife, and prostitution was not practiced in her temple.

There were legendary women directly associated with Artemis. Open-air stone carvings in a temple in Ephesus feature Amazon women as integral to the city’s origins. The reliefs (138 BC) tell how these warrior women came from south of the Black Sea and founded Ephesus. Herodotus (484-425 BC), Euripides (480-406 BC), and others chronical their escapades. Their society was closed to men (amazon means “manless”) and they raised only their daughters and returned their sons to their fathers, with whom they would only socialize briefly in order to reproduce. They were legends who became myths in the stream of time. In the mid-1990s, on the plains of Kazakhstan, evidence was unearthed of these warrior women. The women were buried with their weapons. One young female, bowlegged from constant riding, lay with an iron dagger on her left side and a quiver containing 40 bronze-tipped arrows on her right. On average, the females measure 5 feet 6 inches, making them preternaturally tall for their time. No wonder the Greeks were both fascinated and appalled by such independent women and depicted them as beautiful, active, spirited, and brave. Approximately 1300 images exist of Amazons fighting. Only three of them are gesturing for mercy. Strabo (63 BC - AD 23), Greek geographer, philosopher, and historian associated these women with the Artemis cult. They were the first to establish an image of the goddess in Ephesus and perform a holy rite, dancing a war dance with shields and armor. In summary, Amazon women were fiercely independent, had brief relationships with men for procreation only, were formidable warriors and patrons of the goddess, Artemis, who exhibited many of the same qualities.

How might the manless mindset of the Amazons and the celibate sovereignty of Artemis have affected male-female relationships? With this question in mind, consider Paul’s statement, “I do not permit a woman to teach a man with authority” (Greek- authentein). Because it is singular, (a man and a woman) it is not occurring in a public space or a church setting. Culturally it applies to a husband and wife in the privacy of their home where women were homeschooled by their husbands. So why is she teaching him? It isn’t difficult to image the setting: morning coffee at the kitchen table, she’s asking questions about yesterday’s sermon, he’s only half-listening while perusing the daily newspaper. Through her Artemis lenses his answers appear curt and disrespectful, not hard to imagine in a patriarchal society, so she decides to educate him with “authentein.” This word occurs only once (hapax legomenom) in the Bible. In Greek literature its definition runs the gamut from domineer to murder. My favorite is “despotic domination.” By teaching her husband with “authentein” she is doing exactly what any independent-minded, hunter-goddess would do— let fly the arrows and despotically dominate her man. Chrysostom (d. AD 407) is the closest parallel passage which commands husbands not to “authentein” their wives. Here, Chrysostom is pointing directly at abuse of power, specifically “spousal abuse.” Succinctly stated, domination, despotic or otherwise, has no place in marriage (here) or any relationship—period.

Historical and Theological Progression: No view comes from nowhere. Disordered relationships between men and women have existed since the fall. Any honest contextual study of the Bible inevitably runs headlong into this disordered reality. As a researcher, it’s exhausting, like a splinter in my mind slowly driving me mad. The broken paradigm is vividly vulgar when it is practiced in the Church, the bride of Christ, for whom he made the ultimate sacrifice.

Within a century of its inception, the Church, informed by Aristotle and influenced by Roman patriarchy, came to read 1Timothy 2:12 as a blanket prohibition against women ever leading men within the church, regardless of a woman’s training, skills, or spiritual gifts. This interpretation inserted a cultural preference into the text that has created friction ever since. Because most English Bibles obscure the meaning of “authentein” by translating it “authority,” many believe it to be the technical term for “being a pastor.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is a classic example of motivated reasoning, which begins with a desired conclusion, argues backward from it, ensuring the desired outcome. In every use of the word throughout antiquity, it never refers to any kind of benevolent pastoral care of an individual or group by a pastor or church official. Hitching “pastor” to “authentein“ is as stable as a sheepshank knot. Even Jerome, in his fourth-century Latin translation of the Bible, knew better. He used dominamur (“authentein”) to translate Jesus’ and Peter’s warning to Christian leaders to not “lord it over” others (Mark 10:42-43; 1Peter 5:3). There were respites from this prohibition, such as in monastic communities in France and England (7- 10th centuries), when women were overseers for monks and nuns, charged with providing spiritual leadership to both men and women. The middle of the 20th century granted another lull when my grandmother taught male/female Sunday School classes.

The church didn’t pay attention when George Orwell warned us to beware of 1984. That year the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) resolved that women are to be excluded from pastoral leadership. Three years later the Danvers Statement was published, advancing a patriarchal version of Christianity. The SBC and the Danvers Statement mandated, in effect, women may lead a biblical studies banquet, but men are excluded from partaking in the sumptuous feast because of “authentein.” Pastor John MacArthur (here) leverages this mistaken position when he further mandates women must be silent in the church (1 Corinthians 14: 34-35). “It is disgraceful and shameful for a woman to preach, teach, or lead in the church. Those who do are in open rebellion against the Word of God.” The historical textual context is here. In light of this sweeping condemnation, we must remember scripture is inspired by God but interpretations are not. The confusion surrounding “authentein” makes this self-evident. The SBC (est. 1845) is no stranger to botched Biblical interpretations. It separated from the Northern Baptist Church over chattel slavery, which it declared to be a God-ordained institution based on its faulty interpretation of scripture. Instead of elevating women and slaves the SBC subverted them, demonstrating once again that unchecked power, perpetually held in the hands of one group, invariably leads to the subjugation of those without it. What are we to make of this debacle? First, it proves the maxim, “a text out of context is a pretext for error.” When Scripture is applied in its context there are no “isms” such as sexism and racism (Galatians 3:28). Instead, we see each other as images of God. Second, wielding authority does not imitate Christ. The most powerful man ever to walk the earth laid aside his glory and assumed the role of servant to the point of death. At his trial before Pilot, Jesus announced, “I have come to testify to the truth.” To what truth did he testify? For certain, God’s truth does not include male authority over female. It isn’t found in the Garden of Eden and it isn’t found in the Gospels. It is announced by God after the fall, not as a promise, but as a dire prediction of disordered love: the woman’s desire will be for her man, but he will rule over her (Genesis 3:16). Male-only authority is a preference, imbedded in cultural ethos. Finally, Jesus’ harshest words were directed at the male religious leaders of his day who crushed people with unbearable religious demands and never lifted a finger to ease the burden (Matthew 23:4). I wonder what he would say to the religious leaders of the church today? Many churches have forgotten that God is sovereign over all institutions—and interpretations. It is clear “the church has reached its age of accountability; it is time to assume responsibility (or liability) for excluding women from church leadership positions based on “authentein” (Cynthia Long Westfall).

How did Jesus view women? Throughout the Gospels Jesus always “sees women” (here). In Luke 13, he is teaching on the Sabbath at the synagogue, when he encounters a woman crippled for eighteen years. We’re told, “she was bent over and could not straighten up at all. When Jesus saw her…” He does not merely see her. He calls her into view. He touches her and heals her. He liberates her. She immediately straightens up, taller than she’s ever been, and praises God! Then the spiritual leaders see her. Those whose job it is to see people in their community as God sees them, did not notice her buckled over in pain for all those years. Instead of joining her in praising God, they are indignant, castigating Jesus for healing her on the Sabbath. Jesus is a master of symbolic action. First, he skewers them with a familiar epithet, “You hypocrites!” Then he sends shockwaves through the gathering; he bestows on this woman a title that has never been given before. He declares her greatness, saying, “This woman is a daughter of Abraham.” Until now there had only ever been ‘sons of Abraham’—never daughters. With three words, ‘daughter of Abraham,’ Jesus restores her place in God’s world. He establishes her, alongside the sons, as a co-heir of his kingdom. He levels a patriarchal world where all women are bent over in some way, travailing under the misconception that they are sometimes less than men, or under men (Terran Williams). Jesus bids women to stand tall. “Go ahead and do what you are called to do…If you follow [me] Christ, you will follow [me] him in tough places” (Cynthia Long Westfall).

Conclusion: Like my grandmother before me, I taught biblical studies for 20 years. Each session approximately 60 people would register and attend, many of them men. I never excluded anyone. I never taught anyone with despotic domination. We were united in our pursuit—to know Christ. For many years a retired Hebrew professor attended the class; I benefited greatly from his insights and he kindly thanked me for mine. I am happy to say it was a Baptist church that facilitated the class. For that I am forever grateful.

Afterthoughts: As human beings we always exist in a context. It defines us. History is imperative to understanding truth. What you believe to be true effects everything you do. Hierarchy is the default setting of a fallen world. Those with power must always test their authority by the Word of God in its correct context.

Sources: Nobody’s Mother, Sandra L Glahn; Paul and Gender, Cynthia Long Westfall; How God Sees Women, Terran Williams; Paul, Women & Wives, Craig S Keener; Becoming the Pastor’s Wife, Beth Allison Barr; Two Views on Women in Ministry; James R Beck; Strange Religion, Nijay K Gupta; A Raw Conversation about Women in Ministry, Sandy Richter, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK20SaGZ09k ; Must Women Be Silent In Church? https://juniaproject.com/on-1-corinthians-14-womens-silence-in-church/ ; Paul and Women, https://margmowczko.com/paul-romans-16-women-coworkers/#:~:text=Koinonia%20occurs%2019%20times%20in,%3A%20Aquila%2C%20Andronicus%2C%20Urbanus.