A Redemptive-Historical Reading of 1 Timothy 2:11-15

Reformed Syncretism or the Son and the City

Photo by Hala Al-Asadi on Unsplash

I decided to do something a bit different this week and apply some of the typology that I have been working with to a New Testament passage, 1 Timothy 2:11-15.  The very passages which some say undergird an Aristotelian anthropology, I believe herald loudest the representation of man and woman. For example, if you read Calvin on this passage, you will come across a natural law understanding of the woman. Aristotle believed that women were mutations of nature, lacked the full rational capacities of the soul, and their virtue was in line with their deficiencies, namely public silence — “the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject” (Politics 1.1254b).  Calvin concurs, “(Paul) commands them (women) to remain in silence; that is, to keep within their limits and the condition of their sex.” For Calvin, that condition is a natural condition that precedes the fall: “    . . . the case of woman, who by nature (that is, by the ordinary law of God) is formed to obey” (Calvin, Commentary on 1 Timothy, 2:12). On verse 13, Calvin writes, “ . . woman was created afterwards, in order that she might be a kind of appendage to the man; and that she was joined to the man on the express condition, that she should be at hand to render obedience to him (Genesis 2:21.) Since, therefore, God did not create two chiefs of equal power, but added to the man an inferior aid, the Apostle justly reminds us of that order of creation in which the eternal and inviolable appointment of God is strikingly displayed” (Commentary, 2:13). For Calvin, the woman was appointed to silence and servitude before creation. With the fall, her condition changed only in degree, becoming “less voluntary and agreeable than it had formerly been” (Commentary, 2:14). Finally, Calvin sees 2:15 as Paul comforting women with the hope that they, even they, covered with shame because of their “destruction of the whole human race,” might find the hope of salvation extended to them, “procuring salvation  . . . found in the punishment itself.” For Calvin, their painful childbearing gives them hope and keeps them from “falling into despair through alarm at the mention of their guilt.” Through their pain, they become “accustomed to endure calmly and patiently the necessity of servitude,” thus becoming profitable to themselves and acceptable to God” (Commentary, 2:15). 

Calvin begins with the woman’s nature, her “condition,” her secondary and subordinate status, and the necessity of her servitude which he finds in Genesis 1-2, and he ends with her guilt, shame, and the necessity of her involuntary and painful childbirth in Genesis 3. What if Calvin’s commentary on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 began where God begins in the absolute beginning, with the creation of one mankind as male and female, like him, irreducibly bearing the image of God? What if Calvin had kept in the forefront of his mind God’s command for him to esteem his female neighbor as better than himself? What if he had been aware of his dependence on Aristotle and did not assume the necessity of the woman’s public silence and servitude because of her natural condition?  What if Calvin had not presupposed the Ephesian women’s shame and guilt on account of Eve? What if Calvin had not regarded Deborah as one of the “extraordinary acts done by God (which) do not overturn the ordinary rules of government, by which (God) intended that we should be bound”? What if Calvin had not come to Paul’s words to Timothy believing “the government of women  . . . a monstrous thing” and thus “a mingling of heaven and earth, if women usurp the right to teach” (Commentary, 2:11). I will take Calvin’s mention of “heaven and earth” as a sign. Against his “heaven and earth” backdrop, I would like to give what seems to me a very different but quite plausible context for Paul’s words to Timothy in 1 Timothy 2:11-15.   

In creation, Adam comes first. He is from the earth (adamah), molded like clay and animated by God’s breath unto earthly life. He has an earthly glory, representing the first order, especially as it presses onward in time and upward in space toward the realm of God’s rest. If we read Genesis 2:1-3 in light of Hebrews 4:9-11, we see that Adam was called in Genesis 2 to imitate God’s own movement from work to rest on the seventh day, making every effort to enter the Sabbath realm and not fall back to earth by disobedience. That realm is spoken of as a city in Revelation 21:2, built and made by God (Heb11:10). It is the realm where God and man dwell in consummate union and communion, beyond the threat of Satan, sin, suffering, and death. Prefiguring this movement from earth to heaven, Adam precedes the garden of Eden and is moved to the garden of Eden. He is made before the garden sanctuary and God moves him there.  Eve is created second. She is from Adam’s consecrated side, a wall taken from Adam upon which God builds. She is not shaped like clay, but constructed like a city, and brought to Adam. Unlike Adam, she is made in the garden and she stays in the garden. She does not move anywhere. She is the Sabbath creature, with a distinct glory that reflects the enduring telos set before Adam in Genesis 2, the realm of rest.

Now applying this to the situation at Ephesus where Timothy was left behind by Paul to “instruct certain people not to teach false doctrine.” Perhaps the question at the end of 1 Timothy 2 regards the Ephesian women’s mission in light of the ongoing battle against the false teachers. Paul’s meaning might be that the “woman” is to allow the man (Timothy and those appointed to the specific work of overseeing) to battle the serpent at work in the teaching of Hymenaeus and Alexander (1:3-4). The woman is not the creature of warfare (David/conquest/mighty men) but the creature representing what comes after the battle has been won, when our weapons have been beaten into plowshares, the rest of Solomon’s reign symbolized by the temple. Read this way, it is a grace to her, not a judgment on her. She does not have to be on the front lines openly opposing the unsound doctrine of the false teachers. In other words, 2:11 is Paul’s gracious provision for women who have stepped up to confront the false teachers, putting themselves in midst of the fray, while Timothy holds back and other men fight one another (2:8), failing to exercise faith in the Spirit’s provision of power to confront false teaching.

This is not the understanding of Calvin. Calvin’s commentary leads me to believe that he synthesized the word of God with pagan thought. He had a precedent in Philo, who did the same. Philo the Alexandrian Jew syncretized pagan anthropology with the Old Testament Scriptures and came to the same set of conclusions as Calvin: “ . . ‘male’ designates good, strong, and active, and ‘female’ bad, weak, and passive,” relatively speaking.¹ I think that an argument could be made from Calvin’s exegesis that he approached 1 Timothy 2 expecting to find the natural inferiority of the women, the monstrosity that they should presume to teach a man anything, and with a desire to put them resoundingly and permanently in their place.  My guess is that Calvin assumed that Paul saw the Ephesian women as he saw them, shameful and guilty of mankind’s fall into sin. But what if Paul was speaking from a profound respect for the women at Ephesus. What if Paul thought of the women of  2:11-15 as better than himself? What if Paul well understood the dignity of the women at work in the church of Ephesus? What if Paul thought often of the wonder of his Ephesian brothers and sisters, that they were from God and through God and intended for never-ending union and communion with God? What if Paul had a deep love from the heart for his sisters at Ephesus? What if what was foremost in the Paul thoughts in these verses was the representation of the gospel through our differences as male and female?

So I return to the passage with another set of assumptions about how Paul saw the women at Ephesus and, more importantly, confidence that the Holy Spirit superintended all that was written so that the Ephesians and we might have hope, endurance, and encouragement. 1 Timothy 1 is Paul’s polemic against the false teachers that continue to wreak havoc at Ephesus whose names are finally revealed in the last verse. Timothy evidently has failed to deal with them decisively, even though Paul has turned them over to Satan so that they might be taught not to blaspheme. And there are other, possibly related, distractions. The men at Ephesus are angry and arguing with one another. By the tone and content of 1 Tim. 2:1-7, it sounds like it could be some version of the political activism we find today. We neglect prayer for our leaders because we prefer polemical discourse and imprecation. Whatever the root of the men’s anger, it has hindered, not helped, the situation with Hymenaeus and Alexander. Some women are also distracted, only concerned with their appearance and social status. Paul urges Timothy to step up and handle the false teaching as well as the belligerence, pride, and greed among his flock. Timothy perhaps has succumbed to a spirit of fear, not of power, love, and sound judgment (2 Tim. 1:6-7). Paul tells Timothy to take courage, holding on to sound teaching in the faith and love and self control that are in Christ Jesus, holding the good deposit through the indwelling Spirit. I italicize love (πνεῦμα  . . .ἀγάπης) and self-control (. . . σωφρονισμοῦ) because these are the very things Paul calls the women to at the end of 1 Timothy 2. Both Timothy and the women teachers at Ephesus are falling short. Faith, love, and self-control is what is needed all around.

In 1 Timothy 2:11-15, Paul confronts a third group, perhaps women who have taken matters in hand and opened fire on the false teachers, seeking to suppress their influence in the church. Perhaps in response, Paul is doing what shepherds do, protecting vulnerable sheep.  Paul does not allow the women to do what they are doing.  In addition to the danger, the women are interfering with important symbolism which Paul wants on display in the local church. Perhaps Paul believes in “gendered missions” in the local church, work that leads us to ponder redemptive history. Far from an absolute requisite silence for all women for all time in all places in all local churches, this shows Paul’s kindness to the women at Ephesus. They have put themselves in danger, and Paul does not want them there. Far from dragging them down, Paul is casting his weight in their direction by requiring the women step back from battling these men. The women are permitted to remain silent — “I do not permit them to teach or wield authority "over these men, rather I permit them to be silent. One might reasonably conclude that Paul is concerned for the safety of women from men he has “turned over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme” (1:20). Paul insists on the women’s silence with regard to these two men by reaching back to Genesis 2 and recalling the creation order. Paul further directs Timothy’s eyes to what this situation shares in common with Genesis 3.  The women taking things into hand is a recapitulation of the garden, where Eve entered into polemical discourse with the serpent in Gen. 3:1, while the man who was with her watched.  

In 2:13, we find Paul’s redemptive-historical understanding of male and female. He references Genesis 2:7 when Adam is taken from the earth and molded, shaped as the representative of the earth in its press toward consummation. Adam, not Eve, was commissioned as guardian of the garden sanctuary, and he is first. Eve is built from a sacred wall taken from his side, and she comes second. From the Levitical order, we understand that Adam is to do the priestly work of guarding the sanctuary from the unclean serpent (Numbers 3:7–8; 8:25–26; 18:5–7). From Judges, we understand that it is the glory of man specifically to do battle with the enemies of God (Judges 4:6-9). From the gospels, we understand that Christ did what Adam failed to do in delivering his people from the serpent and his works (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). Paul says that not only the order of creation, but also the order of redemption is marred by what is happening at Ephesus. The Ephesians are distorting the picture that needs to be before our eyes, part of our worship, lifting up the work of the Seed, the second Adam, Abraham’s offspring, David’s greater son according to the flesh, who defeats all of his and our enemies. The men, Timothy and the elders, must step forward, and the women who are teaching must step back and give way to them. Women represent the second order, Sabbath rest, the heavenly sanctuary, a city beyond Satan, sin, suffering, and death. The woman’s important representation in the local church places before our eyes what awaits God’s wilderness-traversing people, leading us to live in light of a future day. 

In 2:14, Paul continues his biblical theology of gender, laying the foundation for the deeper Protestant conception of male and female. Adam was to be on the front line, first to obey, first to overcome the serpent. It was Adam’s mission, just as it is Timothy’s mission to do battle with Hymenaeus and Alexander (1:3-4). He is not to be fearful, but like Joshua to take courage and enter the fray, wielding the power of the Spirit against those teaching false doctrines. Twenty-five times in these two epistles, Paul urges Timothy to faith and boldness in reliance on God. This is the context of 2:11-15.  Paul has left Timothy behind at Ephesus for the explicit purpose of confronting false teachers. Paul wants the beleaguered women to recede and remain silent as Timothy deals with the false teaching.

Finally in 2:15, Paul ties it all together by linking his redemptive-historical concerns to the present situation, setting all eyes on Jesus. The woman who was deceived and came into transgressing was heralded under grace as the mother of the Seed and of the all-living. The woman of Genesis 3 stepped up to confront the serpent. It was not her mission, and it is not the mission of the women at Ephesus either. By bearing the Seed (Rev. 12:1-2), Eve, Mother of the All-Living, would be saved from the ultimate deception of Satan. The women at Ephesus must devote themselves in the church to teaching that aligns with their symbolism. Through this, Eve and the Ephesian women’s own victory through Jesus Christ will be on display.  

Perhaps Paul’s reference to the women’s “life-givingness” in 2:15 is not biological but spiritual. She is an evangelist and nourisher of God’s people. The woman’s proclamation aligns with the great mothers who have gone before her beginning with Eve who believed she would bear the Seed, her Savior (4:2). This includes Mary who magnifies his greatness; Elizabeth who recognizes and calls the child in Mary’s womb “my LORD”;  the Samaritan woman, who says, “Come and see him”; Mary Magdalene, who proclaims her resurrected Lord to the disciples; and the bride of Revelation 22:17 who says, “Come.”  She proclaims him everywhere and at all times — yes, even in the local church. She is a mother nourishing and refreshing the saints with her knowledge (2 Tim 1:5). She is a bride, setting the eyes of the church on the Man and his mountain (Song 8:14). In her unique representation of Zion, she heralds the good news (Is 40:9). As the mother realm of life above, who birthed our Savior and other sons and daughters, she proclaims a coming day of consummation (Rev 12:17). In the local church, her speech aligns with her typology as herald of our Lord and the things that await us in union and communion with him, not in open combat with the false teachers. 

As you see now, I am an egalitarian, believing in the common, irreducible essence of all men and all women as image-bearing mankind.  I am also a complementarian, believing that God wants our redemptive-historical symbolism on display in the local church and in marriage. The man does this through his mission of protecting God’s people, teaching what aligns with sound doctrine, spearheading the ascent of God’s people through faith. Man’s “firstness” is visible as he leads by example, being the first to love, first to serve, first to lay down his life for his neighbor.  By this he shows that he follows his Overshepherd. Woman’s secondness is apparent as she directs our eyes to the joy set before us. I suggest we need new terminology, a third option: “representationalist.” Beyond equal and complementary, there is a birds-eye view of our relation as male and female which directs our gaze to the triune God who loves us, Christ who gave himself for us, and the city which he has prepared for us.

1. Dorothy Sly, Philo’s Perception of Women, 216.