Paul, Women, and the Church 
A Correlation Between 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and Genesis 3:16

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

Introduction

The 21st century dawns as an unprecedented era of human history. Today what was “science fiction” just a few years ago is now reality; 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 1 Timothy 2:15 that has significant if not fundamental bearing on the issue, namely, she shall be saved through childbearing. Since this blogspot continues the discussion of the previous one (https://denniswretlind.blogspot.com/2009/08/battle-between-sexes.html) please consult that title.

Survey of the Solutions

Biblical commentators offer four primary solutions regarding the meaning of this clause.[1]

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. 

Spiritual salvation—By birthing children the soul of the mother would be saved if she died in the process.

Spiritual salvation in the home—A woman is saved by taking care of domestic affairs. This view tends to equate “the birthing of children” (τῆς τεκνογονία) with the education of children.

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.

Items Leading to  a Reasonable 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” (αὐθεντεῖν) [2] over a man in the assembly. He explains this in verse 13 with the illustration of the Garden of Eden experience recorded in Genesis 3. “For (γάρ) 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 conjunction in verse 14. “And (καί) 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 not be overlooked. 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 Eve is replaced by “the woman” (ἡ γυνή). Then in verse 15 Paul moves from the singular “woman” to the plural form of the verb “they abide” (μείνωσιν) This demonstrates Paul’s theological broadening of the application from an individual, Eve, to women generally (“they”).[4]

 Another contextual consideration important to this passage is an understanding of the historical event of Genesis 3 Paul used to illustrate his argument and most commentators agree that the key verses in 1 Timothy 2 are verses 13 and 14.  This being so, the phrase ἐν παραβάσει grows out of that satanic garden deception of Eve as commonly understood. She was “utterly deceived”[5] writes Paul. Adam also ate of the forbidden fruit possibly as a result of Eve’s encouragement, “she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.”

Climaxing this sin the Lord delivered judgments to each of the three offending 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” in Genesis 3. But the fact is that Paul did place some emphasis on this matter in 1 Timothy 2:14. The point Paul alludes to here cannot be in contradiction with his discussion of sin in Romans 5:12ff.  Paul is talking about the usurpation of the divine order established in the Garden of Eden when Eve apparently took on a dominant role over Adam not the entrance of sin into the world.

First to Satan (verses 15-16 (poetics removed in these verses for ease of reading) God said, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

Second to the woman (verse 16) God said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, but he shall rule over you.”

Third, to Adam (verses 17-19) God said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

Using the Genesis 3 illustration in 1 Timothy 2:14, the basic idea of “transgression” (παράβασις) in is that of overstepping, of deviating from an established boundary or norm.[6]   The thrust is not the same as that found in “sin” (ἁμαρτία) [7] used in Romans 5:12.  The 1 Timothy 2:14 context focuses Eve’s “transgression” (παράβασις) by approaching Adam and sharing her new-found “delight” of the forbidden fruit. Παραβασις (transgression) corresponds quite readily with the dominance idea in αὐθεντεῖν at verse 12. These two words, Παραβασις and αὐθεντεῖν, represent the key to Paul’s whole discussion in verses 11-15.

 This problem of women’s submission to the divinely-ordained pattern of authority persists. Thus in verse 14 Paul uses the extensive perfect of γίνομαι [8] (“became a transgressor”) and the generic definite article with ἡ γυνή which becomes “she” imbedded in the following future verb at verse 15. Obviously the future verb eliminates Eve as the primary subject and the logical development of the argument as Paul moved from the very specific woman Eve to the female of the human species.

 Critical issues—1 Timothy 2:15 contains at least three matters that must be dealt with:  (1) the meaning of “she shall be saved” (σωθήσεται), (2) the meaning of “through the childbearing” (διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας), and (3) the implications of the “if” (ἐάν) clause, a third class condition speaking of possibility.

The verb “she shall be saved” (σωθήσεται) is interpreted by many scholars to refer to spiritual salvation in its initial stage, justification. 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 or sanctification. It can also refer to glorification in heaven. Sanctification is the meaning of “she shall be saved” (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 include the Christian wives of the saved husbands. Paul applies this passage primarily to female Christian worshippers.

 The most crucial term in this passage is the phrase “through the childbearing” (διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας). Although the force of the preposition “through” (διά) has been a source of difficulty as evidenced by the commentaries,  the normal force of διά and the genitive case, means, should be retained. In support, the same construction occurs just previously in verse 10 where the clear idea of the preposition is means, “by means of good works” (δἰ ἔγων ἀγαθῶν).

 Another difficulty in this phrase is the use of the article definite article, “the” (τῆς). Why does Paul make “through the childbearing” (τεκνογονίας) definite? Kent would say that it refers to the very definite incarnation of Christ.[9]

Others claim that it is used non-specifically, as a generic. The answer to the usage 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  “transgression” (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 two final clauses of the verse, “yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you”, begins with the Hebrew “conjunction” (ו, waw, in the NASB translated “yet” and “and” respectively). This conjunction can introduce a dependent clause. [11] Viewed this way it says that the woman would bring forth children with pain because her longing would be towards her husband. It focuses on 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 for Paul's focus on “through the childbearing” (διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας). To insure that the woman would not forget her subordinate position, her emotional and physical make-up, the sex act subordinates her to the sexual dominance of her husband. In 1 Timothy 2:15 Paul alludes to this plan for countering the problem of domineering women by the definite phrase διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας. 

The third aspect of 1 Timothy 2:15 which must be given special attention is the “if” (ἐάν) sentence and its implications. This aspect of the conditional 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” “then” aspect of the conditional clause (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 dependent “if” (ἐάν) clause implies that the women will probably, but not positively, abide in the faith resulting in deliverance from “transgression” (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 “overstepping the God-ordained order of authority” (αὐθεντεῖν) Thus interpreted this “if” (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, a one-time use, in the New Testament, in the Septuagint, and in classical literature. One verb form as an infinitive (τεκνογονεῖν), however, occurs in the New Testament (τεκνογονεῖν)at 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 on 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, about 65 AD, 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 with “good judgment, moderation self-control” (σωφροσύνη). The subjunctive verb form, σωφρονίζωσιν (BDAG. 987), relates closely to the emphasis in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 on “good judgment, moderation self-control.” 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” (ὑποτασσομένας τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν). The main difference between 1 Timothy and Titus is one of application.

 Conclusion and Application 

The overall interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-15 is this: as Christian women come to the worship service, if they are thinking soundly, they will accept the biblical mandate that their role 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 sexual dominance of her husband.  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, the women who desire to do something about this “temptation” (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.

[2] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd 3ed. (Chicago:  The University of Chicago Press, 2000), p. 150.  Hereafter noted as BDAG.  " . . . to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to."

[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. Eerdmans 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 to dominate Cain to satisfy Satan-inspired hunger for sin.  Similarly, the woman will bring forth children with pain, ignoring the promised pain, because of her longing for children and her husband's dominance sexually to initiate the pregnancy.

[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.