Preface: I would be a fool
if I thought that this article would put to rest the emotion-packed topic of
women’s roles. On the other hand, I would be unfaithful to my calling as a
biblical exegete if I did not set forth another viable option for this passage.
I fully expect that forthcoming comments will seek to overturn my conclusions
in this all-too-brief article, and maybe I have overlooked something. However,
in discussions with scholars and in reading commentaries my conclusions stem
directly from the conviction that much has indeed been overlooked and need to
be developed. May intellectual openness and Spirit-led kindness accompany all
who read and choose to make comments.
Dennis O. Wretlind,
Ph.D
An Exegesis of 1 Timothy 2:15
The 21st century
dawns as an unprecedented era of human history. Today what was “science
fiction” just a few years ago is now real; what was once labeled immorality is today an alternative lifestyle. Being a homemaker used to be a respectable role for women. Now it has subtly
become a disparaging term. In short, we live in a day of social upheaval. For the Church of Jesus Christ, this social
restructuring can lead to unprecedented opportunities for outreach as people
search for identity and meaning in life. It must also, however, become a time
to diligently clarify the teachings of the Bible that impinge upon the social
changes all about us.
In the religious context a major social adjustment has been the ordination of
women and their newly-acceptable role as pastors and senior pastors in many
denominations. Traditionalists and many conservatives reject such a role for
women based in part on the teaching of 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Without serious
debate, this passage represents a politically and theologically charged text
around which revolve philosophical and exegetical arguments pro and con. This
article will not silence the debate, but it will attempt to bring clarity to an
often neglected clause in the text that has significant if not fundamental
bearing on the issue, namely, she shall
be saved through childbearing.
Survey of the Solutions
Commentators offer four primary solutions to the meaning of this clause.
[1]
q Physical salvation—A
woman who continues in faith, love, holiness and sound thinking would
experience physical salvation in childbearing; that is, when she gave birth she
would not die.
q Spiritual salvation—By
birthing children the soul of the mother would be saved if she died in the
process.
q Spiritual salvation in
the home—A woman is saved by taking care of domestic affairs. This view
tends to equate τεκνογονία
with the education of children.
q Spiritual salvation
through the incarnation—The term τῆς
τεκνογονίας refers to the birth of the Messiah promised in Genesis
3:15 in the Garden of Eden. Although Eve sinned and is worthy of eternal death,
because of the promise and the childbirth
of Christ, women may find salvation if they put their trust in Jesus.
Issues Impinging Upon A
Solution
Contextual issues—The overriding
concept in 1 Timothy 2-3 is decorum in the church (3:14-15). When the men of
the church gather for prayer, they are not to be harboring criticisms and
grudges (2:9). When women come into the assembly they are to dress moderately
(2:9-10) and must behave according to prescribed patterns (2:11-12). This concept of women’s behavior is the
catalyst from which the troublesome phrase, “she shall be saved through
childbearing,” stems.
In 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul states that he
does not allow a woman to domineer (
αὐθεντειν)
[2]
over a man in the assembly. He explains (
γάρ) this in verse 13 with the
illustration of the Garden of Eden experience recorded in Genesis 3. “For Adam
was first formed, then Eve.” That is, God established a divine order of
authority in the Garden. Man was to be the leader, and the woman was to be
subject to him. A second reason given for this restriction follows the
continuative
καί in verse 14. “And Adam was not deceived; but the
woman, being utterly deceived, has entered a state of transgression.”
[3] Therefore, states Paul, a woman does not
dominate the man in the church.
An important movement in this passage
must be noted. Paul uses the names Adam and Eve in the first part of his
explanation, but in the second part he only uses the name of Adam while
ἡ
γυνή replaces the name of Eve. Then in verse 15 Paul moves from the singular
γυνή
to the plural form of the verb. This is indicative of Paul’s thrust. “
St. Paul says
ἡ
γυνή rather than
Εὕα , emphasizing the sex rather
than the individual, because he desires to give the incident its general
application, especially in view of what follows.”
[4] Womankind, then, has entered a state of
transgression as a result of Eve’s transgression and this application is
applied to the plural subjects of the verb
μείνωσιν.
Another
contextual consideration important to this passage is an understanding of the
historical event that Paul used to illustrate his argument. Most commentators
agree that the historical basis underlying verses 13 and 14 is Genesis 3. This being so, the phrase ἐν
παραβάσει grows out of that garden deception. What was this
transgression?
The event that took place in the Garden
of Eden is commonly understood. Eve was “utterly deceived”
[5]
by the serpent, and she ate of the forbidden fruit. Later Adam also ate of the
fruit as a result of Eve’s
suggestion.
Climaxing this situation the Lord delivered judgments to each of the offending
individuals.
First, to Satan God said, “Because thou
hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the
field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of
thy life: and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy
seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel”
(ASV 1901).
Second, to Eve God said, “I will greatly
multiply thy, pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children;
and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
Third, to Adam God said, “Because thou
hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which
I commanded thee, saying, ‘Thou shalt not eat of it:’ cursed is the ground for
thy sake. . . .”
There is a significant difference in
God’s statements to these three individuals. To the serpent and to man God
predicates punishment based on a specific cause. To the woman, however, God
does not say anything as to the reason for the punishment. Does this mean that
Eve did not sin? Theologians rarely interact with this question. The reason is
obvious. If the Scripture expressly states that sin entered the world through
Adam (Romans 5:12), then it would be precarious to make too much out of Eve’s
transgression. But the fact is that Paul did place some emphasis on this matter
in 1 Timothy 2:14. The issue Paul
alludes to here cannot be in contradiction with his pointed discussion of sin
in Romans 5:12ff. Paul is not talking
about the entrance of sin into the world in 1 Timothy 2:14. He is talking about
the usurpation of the divine order that took place in the Garden of Eden when
Eve took on a dominant role.
God said to Adam that he was being
punished in part because he listened to the voice of Eve. He should not have
listened, but then also Eve should not have solicited submission from Adam
either. A divine order of authority was established by God, and Eve, by her αὐθεντοῦσα
over Adam, was found to be ἐν παραβάσει.
The basic idea of
παράβασις used in 1 Timothy 2:14 is
that of
overstepping, of deviating from
an established boundary or norm.[6] The thrust is not the same as that found in
ἁμαρτία[7] used
in Romans 5:12. In the 1 Timothy 2:14 context not Eve’s original
ἁμαρτία
(if it existed) is under discussion, but her later
παράβασις
of approaching Adam and instructing him as to her new-found “delight.” The word
παραβασις
corresponds quite readily with the
dominance
idea in
αὐθεντεῖν used in verse 12, the fulcrum of Paul’s
whole discussion. Eve, by her
αὐθεντοῦσα was found to be
ἐν
παραβάσει by overstepping the divinely-ordained boundary of authority.
This problem of
submission to the divinely-ordained pattern of authority persists. Thus in
verse 14 Paul uses the extensive perfect of
γίνομαι[8] and
the generic article with
γυνή which becomes simply “she”
imbedded in the following future verb at verse 15. Obviously the future verb
eliminates Eve as the subject and the logical development of the argument has
moved from the very specific woman Eve to the female of the human species.
Critical
issues—1 Timothy 2:15 contains three matters that must be dealt with: (1) the meaning of σωθήσεται,
(2) the meaning of διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας, and (3) the implications of the ἐάν
clause.
The verb σωθήσεται is interpreted by many
scholars to refer to spiritual salvation in its initial stage. The word,
however, does not always refer to this initial experience, it also refers to
deliverance from the present sinful activities of saved Christians, continuing
salvation. This is the meaning of σωθήσεται in 1 Timothy 2:15. The
woman shall be delivered from the
tendency of overstepping the divinely ordained order of authority providing
certain conditions are met. Nothing in this passage presupposes that Paul had
unsaved women in mind. The women who would be in the church services would be
the Christian wives of the saved husbands. Paul applies this passage to female
Christian worshippers.
The most crucial term in this passage is
the phrase διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας. Although the force of the
preposition διά has been a source of difficulty as evidenced by
the commentaries, the normal force of διά
and the genitive, means, should be
retained. In support, the same construction occurs just previously in verse 10
where the clear idea of the preposition is that of means.
Another difficulty in this phrase is the
use of the article
τῆς. Why does Paul make
τεκνογονίας definite?
Kent
would say that it refers to the very definite incarnation of Christ.
[9] Others claim that it is used
generically. The answer to this question can be found within the
Genesis 3 historical framework of this
passage.
Kent finds the support for his
incarnation view in Genesis 3:15.
[10]
The “seed of the woman” refers to the Messiah who would bring salvation.
Few evangelicals disagree with
Kent’s interpretation of Genesis 3:15.
However, how does this relate to the womanly problem of usurping male
authority? A better view ties the historical reference to Genesis 3:16, a
passage which relates directly to the woman’s
παράβασις.
In Genesis 3:16 God punishes Eve with a
two-pronged judgment. She would bring forth children with much pain and her
longing would be to her husband who would dominate over her.
The second line
of Genesis 3:16 begins with the Hebrew
waw.
This conjunction can introduce a hypotactic clause (contrary to most
translations).
[11]
Viewed dependently it says that the woman
would
bring forth children with pain
because
her longing would be towards her husband. It includes motherly aspirations—she
wants children—
[12]
coupled to the natural attraction of and the biological necessity to have sex,
a relationship where
she by nature is the subordinate partner. Thus
enters preventative medicine. To insure that the woman would not forget her
subordinate position, her emotional and physical make-up subordinates her to
her husband.
In 1 Timothy 2:15 Paul
alludes to God’s primary plan for countering the problem of domineering women
by the definite term
τῆς τεκνογονίας.
The act from which childbearing stems is definite, so the definite
article is used.
The third aspect of 1 Timothy 2:15 which
must be given special attention is the
ἐάν sentence and its
implications. The sentence
protasis,
with its verb
μείνωσιν and plural subjects (“they,” the antecedents
being saved, Christian women who attend the church services), is placed last in
the text, effectively emphasizing the “fronted”
apodosis and its troublesome clause,
she shall be saved through childbearing. The subjunctive
μείνωσιν
does not imply an entrance into a state, that is
, becoming believers. The word’s meaning denies this as does the
entire context. Rather, the subjunctive implies volition.
[13]
“If they determine to abide” would be a good translation. Thus, the apodosis
beginning with
σωθήσεται is conditioned by willful abiding in faith,
love, holiness, and sound thinking (
σωφροσύνης).
The third class ἐάν implies
that the women will probably, but not
positively, abide in the faith
resulting in deliverance from παράβασις.
There is the possibility that some of these Christian women will not so
abide; consequently, as expressed in the apodosis they will not be delivered from
the contextually defined transgression of αὐθεντεῖν. It can readily be
seen what contextual and theological problems result from viewing eternal
salvation at stake in the apodosis. Thusly interpreted, this ἐάν
clause coordinates well with the context beginning at verse 11.
Cross
reference issues—The stated interpretation of τῆς τεκνογονίας
is based upon the meaning of the word, the context, and the Old
Testament allusion. One reason for the difficulty of interpretation stems from
the fact that the noun τεκνογονίας is a hapax legomenon in the New
Testament, in the Septuagint, and in classical literature. One verb form with
this root, however, occurs in the New Testament (τεκνογονεῖν, 1 Timothy 5:14) and
this has definite bearing on the meaning of the noun in 2:15. First, the
contexts are similar—the behavior of women. Second, Paul focuses on marriage
and family living. Third, mention is made of some women who like Eve have
already turned aside after Satan (5:15). The primary differences in these two
passages revolve around different circumstances. In 2:15 the circumstances
center around church conduct; in
5:14, general conduct. The closeness
of ideas in these two chapters appears to be mutually interpretive.
Titus 2:3-5 provides a second cross
reference. Since 1 Timothy was written before Titus but not by more than a few
months, it would not be too bold to expect similar ideas within them that can
shed light on each other.
The subject under discussion in Titus
2:3-5 is the duty of the older women who are to teach the younger women how to
live decently (σωφροσύνη). The causative σωφρονίζωσιν relates
closely to the emphasis in 1 Timothy 2:9-15 on decent living as a product of
sound thinking. The younger women are instructed to love their husbands, to
love their children, to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, and to
be in submission to their own husbands. Many of the ideas here are also found
in 1 Timothy 2 and 5. The main difference, again, is one of application.
A Conclusion and Application
The overall interpretation of 1 Timothy
2:12-15 is this: as Christian women come
to the worship service, if they are thinking soundly, they will realize that
their place is one of submission to male authority. The tendency to usurp
the authority belonging to the man is a problem that God dealt with in the
Garden of Eden when He stated that through the childbearing process the woman
must by nature submit to the man. Such submission
becomes a continual, gentle reminder.
For the 21st century Christian woman the
meaning of this passage is two-fold. First, she must not seek to rearrange the
divine order of authority in the church.
[14]
Second, women who have a hard time in this regard, and who desire to do something
about this
παράβασις, must reflect on the fact that her
subordinate role is divinely-ordered and biologically infused into her very
being.
Living obediently to this
God-given role reflects faithfulness, love, and holiness, all as an outgrowth
of sound, biblically-centered thinking.
[1] Homer A. Kent Jr., The Pastoral Epistles (Chicago:
Moody Press, 1958), pp. 115-21.
[3] A. T. Robertson, A
Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research
(Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), p.
893. Hereafter designated by ATR.
[4] Newport J. D. White, The First and Second Epistles to Timothy (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Pub. Co., Vol. IV, [n.d.]),
p. 109.
[5] Paul clearly differentiates between the simplex ἀπατάω and the complex ἐξαπατάω in this passage.
ATR, p. 596.
[6] BDAG, P.
758.
[7] BDAG, P.
50-51.
[8] ATR, pp. 893-94.
[9] Kent, Epistles,
p. 119.
[10] Ibid.
[11] E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley (eds.), Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (Oxford: The
Clarendon Press, 1910), p. 492. Since
this is crucial to the interpretation of Genesis 3:16, another passage must be
set forth that parallels the grammatical construction. Genesis 4:7 reads, “If
you do well, is it not exaltation? But
if you do not do well, sin crouches at the entrance, for its longing is for you, and you are obligated to rule over it”
(author’s translation). This identical construction
accepts the same syntax; indeed, the waw
used as a hypotactic conjunction here is even more pronounced. Sin crouches at the entrance because
of its longing for Cain. Similarly, the
woman will bring forth children with pain because of her longing and her
husbands rule.
[12] H. C. Leupold, Exposition
of Genesis (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1942), p. 172.
[13] ATR, P. 933.
[14] This applies to the home as well, but it is
not the focus of 1 Timothy 2.
