Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
1 Timothy 2 – Does This Apply to the Secular Realm?
I am ruled by women and God approves.
When considering 1 Timothy 2, people have struggled determining what realm is being discussed.
- What realm is it?
- I’ve concluded it is the household of God (chapters 2-3; 3:15), and not a secular realm such as business or government.
- [ ] Prayers for the government are made which is the only reference to that realm. Should prayers be offered to all government authorities or just the men?
- [ ] The phrase “I want men in every place to pray” (2:8) is another way of saying every congregation (1 Corinthians 1:2).
- If the context was any and every place both spiritual and secular, then here is a problem: Only men/aner are commanded to pray (2:8) in contrast to what women are commanded. To conclude this text is broader than the church would mean women couldn’t pray “in every place”!
Countering my position on this being the spiritual realm, good-hearted people ask that if the context is only church, then women are commanded to be modest and decent only in church and not elsewhere! Here are the problems with that conclusion:
- It is mishandling the scriptures to insert into the text what is not in the text. If Paul is talking about decorum in dress in the assembly, then it is wrong to conclude anything concerning a topic he is not addressing. When I say I wear a tie when preaching in church, that says absolutely nothing about how I dress when not preaching or when preaching out in the world.
- [ ] Elsewhere women’s dress is discussed by Peter in 1 Peter 3. Possibly for consistency in context, we should go to Peter’s instructions for everyday dress, not Paul’s, and therefore we do have the full picture of modesty being continuously required in and out of the assembly.
III. Another issue arises when people consider women are to not be self-appointed leaders over men (2:11-12). Some good hearted people wonder if this applies to businesses and government? Here are problems with that application:
- [ ] Already I’ve stated contextually it is the household of God (3:15). Therefore to introduce a topic not in the context is adding to the scriptures.
- [ ] God would not command us to sin. Since we are commanded to be in subjection to the authorities, that would include male and female leaders. If women governmental leaders violated 1 Timothy 2, then I could not be subject to them without sinning. One would have to inject into the text “grown male only authorities” to stay consistent. That would be adding to the scriptures.
- [ ] One of the identifying and distinguishing marks of Christianity is it can be practiced in any society. If being in subjection to female authorities was sinful then we must obey God rather than man and not submit. Would God place us in the position that we are sinning because we pull over when pursued by a female police officer? Or would we be sinning to obey the ruling of a female judge? If the woman is sinning because she is in those positions of authority over us, then we men sin either way; if we submit, we sin because we shouldn’t, and if we don’t submit, we sin because we are not in subjection to authorities and can find no scriptural basis for our defiance of that authority – the scriptures deal with spiritual authority, not secular authority. So if the female judge orders us to stop worshipping, we can – must – defy it. But wouldn’t that be true if a male judge gave the same order?
- Another objection is Paul cannot be describing the subjection of women (i.e., forbidding women from exercising authority) in the church only, because Paul talks about being a mother and that is the realm of the home. Here are problems with that understanding:
- [ ] What Paul is doing is contrasting where women do not exercise authority (church), with where women do exercise authority (home).
- [ ] In 1 Timothy 5:14 Paul again introduces the home domain and says women are to rule or manage their household. As I’ve said many times, the husband is the head of the home, but the wife is head of the house. Does this violate 1 Timothy 2? Not at all because the context there is the church, not the house – and not business or government or schools or any such secular role.
Everything goes back to Genesis 1-3 with Paul’s inspired texts: 1) Genesis 1-3 involves a husband and wife. 2) The Holy Spirit applies this to the church wherein men (but not all) rule. 3) To apply the words of 1 Timothy to government and business is speaking beyond the foundation of the house and household (Genesis 1-3), and the inspired conclusions and commands.
Conclusion: Men rule in the home (i.e., family unit). Men rule in the church. I am ruled by women in that women are currently in governmental positions of authority to which I submit. I am ruled by a woman in that my wife is head of the house. And God approves.
Comments