What do you think?
Rate this book
I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking I Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence
Solid scriptural and archaeological evidence refutes the traditional interpretation used to bar women from leadership.
250 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 1998
35 people are currently reading
310 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
August 14, 2017
WHY HAVE I NOT READ THIS BOOK BEFORE?? AND WHY, IN MY 37 YEARS OF FOLLOWING JESUS, HAVE I NEVER HEARD A SERMON PREACHED THAT CONTAINS THIS INSIGHT?? I found myself crying, angry, and comforted. Though I've read lots on women in leadership, the Kroegers' book helped me to finally understand why I have been so troubled by the hermeneutic that has been offered to me by so many American (male) pastors. I Suffer Not a Woman is well researched and will be a balm to many women who have been held down by inadequate, biased interpretations of 1 Timothy 2.
March 5, 2025
Gnostic heresy is wild
Extremely detailed analysis of the spiritual and social context of the pastoral Epistles. A lot of primary source quotations of the various heresies floating around the early church world make for a fascinating if disturbing read. I do find their conclusion to be pretty reasonable, and actually makes more sense of the verses than a “plain” reading. Never underestimate the value of good hermeneutics.
This book would have greatly benefitted from a “Conclusion” chapter, which I will make an attempt at trying to create in brief here.
Essentially, the authors contend for a revised reading of 1 Timothy 2:11-15, though they do not proffer a suggested fully-formed alternate translation. In fact, their solution to understanding this portion of scripture involves both a revision to the English translation in some parts as well as a different interpretation to what we would typically arrive at with Western eyes in other parts. To summarize their conclusions, I will try to render a paraphrase of the verses in question below following the ESV translation for purposes of comparison.
ESV
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Paraphrase
11 A woman should make herself a student and should be allowed to learn, with all reverence appropriate to God’s instruction.
12 I permit a woman neither to teach nor to represent herself as the originator of man, but she is to keep silence on this.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 Nevertheless, childbearing does not bar women from salvation—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Notably, the main advocated differences are in verses 11 and 12, though they affect the subsequent meaning of the following verses. The authors contend that while we see the emphasis in verse 11 as being on “quietness and full submission” — and feel that this says in some way that women should not be able to speak in church and do whatever men tell them to do — for the original audience the truly confrontational portion of the verse is in the instruction that women should learn, something very unusual for the day, especially among Jews. Furthermore, the phrase “in quietness and full submission” is an ancient Near Eastern phrase or formula which indicates readiness to hear and obey the word and will of God. Thus the verse stands not as a rebuke but as an invitation for women also to apprentice themselves faithfully to scripture and the gospel of Jesus. The need for appropriate learning on the part of women is made apparent through the next verses as well as elsewhere in the Pastoral epistles (1 Timothy 4:7, 5:8, 5:11-15, 2 Timothy 3:6-7, as well as other passages dealing more generally with false teaching being spread & imbibed) .
Justification for an alternative translation of verse 12 takes up the majority of the book as the authors address three key Greek words: didaskein (to teach), oude (nor/not even), and authentein (to have authority over). Didaskein is always accompanied by another clarifying verb in 1 Timothy (1:3-4 “not to teach another doctrine nor to become preoccupied with myths”, 4:11 “proclaim these things and teach them”, 6:3 “anyone who teaches a different doctrine and does not agree”). In the words of the authors, “the second verb is bound with the first in the total thought,” ergo authentein seems to qualify didaskein in verse 12. There are thirty instances of didaskein in various forms throughout the pastoral Epistles and it is evident that sound teaching, especially in contradistinction to erroneous and heretical teaching is a major, if not the main, theme of these letters. In all other uses of didaskein, either orthodox teaching is affirmed or heterodox teaching is condemned. Thus it follows that here too in verse 12 we should expect to see a condemnation of heterodox teaching; that is, we should see what *kind of* teaching is restricted.
In any case, it is impossible to be faithful to the rest of scripture, much less Paul’s writings, to assume that all teaching by women is verboten. It is a matter of comprehending what kind of teaching is being singled out here. The authors maintain that it is untenable to interpret this as a blanket ban on women teaching men, as Paul instructs in 2 Timothy 2:2 that Timothy should “entrust [Paul’s teachings] to faithful anthropos (persons, female and/or male) who will be able to teach others also.” Later in the same letter he commends Timothy’s faith, saying
“I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also…continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures” (2 Timothy 1:5, 3:14-15).
It is evident that Timothy was taught by his mother and possibly his grandmother, both (obviously) women. Paul also commends Priscilla who in Acts 18:26 along with her husband “explained to Apollos the way of the Lord more accurately.” Furthermore, both men and women are prophetically gifted, as in the case of Phillip’s 4 daughters or in Paul’s instructions on how women ought to wear head coverings when they prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11. This is to say nothing of Mary, Lydia, Junia, Phoebe or other women in the NT who are invested with various levels of authority in the Christian community.
What then could this instruction be pertaining to? A brief study of oude (nor/not even) reveals that Paul uses this negative to link didaskein and authentein to convey together the meaning of what is not being permitted —
“oude indicates that authentein explains what sort of teaching is prohibited to women. For instance, if we should say, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or discuss differential calculus with a man,’ it becomes clear that the subject in which she should not give instruction is higher mathematics.”
We must then turn to the possible definitions of authentein, which has a wide semantic field and whose various uses are well-attested to in Greek literature. It is notable that this word only occurs once in the Bible and thus it is more challenging than other words to easily nail down the sense in which Paul meant to use it. Most of the rest of the book is focused on understanding what is behind the word authentein. This section is quite detailed and well-documented, including numerous quotations of primary sources and further supplemented by a large appendix. In short, there are four main meanings of authentein:
1) To begin something, to be primarily responsible for a condition or action (especially murder),
2) to rule, to dominate,
3) to usurp power or rights from another, and
4) to claim ownership, sovereignty, or authorship.
All four meanings are investigated and given attestation in wider Greek literature. One example for each will suffice here.
1) The father of Achilles accuses Menelaus of being an authentēs (a murderer); that is, he bears responsibility or is to blame for the death of Achilles (though Menelaus did not directly kill Achilles).
2) John Chrysostom taught that Mary came to see Jesus in Matthew 12:46-50 not to visit with him but to demonstrate to the people that she authentein-ed (wielded power and authority over) her child.
3) A man is accused by his relatives of authentein-ing (usurping) them by depriving them all of the inheritance from their mother and father.
4) Jesus is alternately called the authentēs (originating) Word, the authentēs (author) and introducer of a new law of salvation, and the authentēs (creator) “who came and made” by early Christians.
After walking through each of these meanings, the authors hone in on the fourth use and make the case that this is the intended meaning of the word in verse 12, on the basis that Paul is refuting an influential teaching that woman, or Eve, is the author, source, or originator of man. This position is then extensively supported through primary source quotations and commentary on a combination of recently discovered gnostic literature, heterodox Jewish myths and syncretistic pagan religion that were all predominant in Asia Minor and Ephesus particularly at the time.
Though there is certainly variation, a heavily truncated summary is that these teachings constituted a total reversal of the creation account in that Adam, and depending on the account, even Yahweh came out of Eve. Eve — and by extension, woman — is the originating principle of reality. In addition, the snake came to free Adam and Eve from the evil creator god who had mistakenly made the material universe. He opened their eyes to a higher truth than what they had been told by Yahweh, a truth which then frees its adherents to ascend to heaven after death. This was given first to Eve, who then instructed Adam. In some teachings Eve copulates with (or knows, in the biblical sense) the serpent in order to receive this higher knowledge. Thus in various sects followers are encouraged to participate in perverse sexual rites to receive knowledge, some no doubt forming the backdrop of Jesus’ strong words to the nearby church of Thyatira in Revelation 2 regarding Jezebel.
Features of these teachings involved complex genealogies and nonsensical babbling meant to convey a sense of mystery or alternatively have magical power. Notably, Paul anathematizes both babbling and endless genealogies 1 Timothy 6:20 and 1:4, respectively. Thus these heterodox teachings form the backdrop not only for 1 Timothy 2:12 but make up at least a part of the wider false doctrines being refuted throughout the pastoral Epistles.
Understanding verse 12 to be a rebuke against the false teaching that woman is both superior and prior to man, and that Eve imparted wisdom on Adam leads us to then read verses 13 and 14 as corrective teaching, namely that in fact it was Adam that was made first and rather than being enlightened, Eve was deceived by the serpent. In this reading, Paul references a particular strand of false teaching prevalent in Ephesus and then immediately corrects it with an orthodox understanding of the narrative in question.
Finally, questions around the meaning of verse 15 are briefly addressed in the final chapter, again with reference to heterodox teachings and practices forming the backdrop. The authors read this verse as a “defense of feminine functions” in contradistinction to popular teaching at the time which denigrated the body as a material prison; by extension, birth was seen as a perpetuation of this evil on the world and everything from coitus interruptus to forced abortion to cannibalism of birthed children in order to return their life essence to the begetter was practiced in response to this understanding. Paul on the other hand is affirming the beauty of childbearing and motherhood and that to engage or aspire to these things is not unclean nor does it cut one off from salvation. The authors do not mention it but this is consistent with Paul’s teachings elsewhere affirming marriage and sex as opposed to popular teachings that these were impediments to holiness.
Extremely detailed analysis of the spiritual and social context of the pastoral Epistles. A lot of primary source quotations of the various heresies floating around the early church world make for a fascinating if disturbing read. I do find their conclusion to be pretty reasonable, and actually makes more sense of the verses than a “plain” reading. Never underestimate the value of good hermeneutics.
This book would have greatly benefitted from a “Conclusion” chapter, which I will make an attempt at trying to create in brief here.
Essentially, the authors contend for a revised reading of 1 Timothy 2:11-15, though they do not proffer a suggested fully-formed alternate translation. In fact, their solution to understanding this portion of scripture involves both a revision to the English translation in some parts as well as a different interpretation to what we would typically arrive at with Western eyes in other parts. To summarize their conclusions, I will try to render a paraphrase of the verses in question below following the ESV translation for purposes of comparison.
ESV
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Paraphrase
11 A woman should make herself a student and should be allowed to learn, with all reverence appropriate to God’s instruction.
12 I permit a woman neither to teach nor to represent herself as the originator of man, but she is to keep silence on this.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 Nevertheless, childbearing does not bar women from salvation—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Notably, the main advocated differences are in verses 11 and 12, though they affect the subsequent meaning of the following verses. The authors contend that while we see the emphasis in verse 11 as being on “quietness and full submission” — and feel that this says in some way that women should not be able to speak in church and do whatever men tell them to do — for the original audience the truly confrontational portion of the verse is in the instruction that women should learn, something very unusual for the day, especially among Jews. Furthermore, the phrase “in quietness and full submission” is an ancient Near Eastern phrase or formula which indicates readiness to hear and obey the word and will of God. Thus the verse stands not as a rebuke but as an invitation for women also to apprentice themselves faithfully to scripture and the gospel of Jesus. The need for appropriate learning on the part of women is made apparent through the next verses as well as elsewhere in the Pastoral epistles (1 Timothy 4:7, 5:8, 5:11-15, 2 Timothy 3:6-7, as well as other passages dealing more generally with false teaching being spread & imbibed) .
Justification for an alternative translation of verse 12 takes up the majority of the book as the authors address three key Greek words: didaskein (to teach), oude (nor/not even), and authentein (to have authority over). Didaskein is always accompanied by another clarifying verb in 1 Timothy (1:3-4 “not to teach another doctrine nor to become preoccupied with myths”, 4:11 “proclaim these things and teach them”, 6:3 “anyone who teaches a different doctrine and does not agree”). In the words of the authors, “the second verb is bound with the first in the total thought,” ergo authentein seems to qualify didaskein in verse 12. There are thirty instances of didaskein in various forms throughout the pastoral Epistles and it is evident that sound teaching, especially in contradistinction to erroneous and heretical teaching is a major, if not the main, theme of these letters. In all other uses of didaskein, either orthodox teaching is affirmed or heterodox teaching is condemned. Thus it follows that here too in verse 12 we should expect to see a condemnation of heterodox teaching; that is, we should see what *kind of* teaching is restricted.
In any case, it is impossible to be faithful to the rest of scripture, much less Paul’s writings, to assume that all teaching by women is verboten. It is a matter of comprehending what kind of teaching is being singled out here. The authors maintain that it is untenable to interpret this as a blanket ban on women teaching men, as Paul instructs in 2 Timothy 2:2 that Timothy should “entrust [Paul’s teachings] to faithful anthropos (persons, female and/or male) who will be able to teach others also.” Later in the same letter he commends Timothy’s faith, saying
“I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also…continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures” (2 Timothy 1:5, 3:14-15).
It is evident that Timothy was taught by his mother and possibly his grandmother, both (obviously) women. Paul also commends Priscilla who in Acts 18:26 along with her husband “explained to Apollos the way of the Lord more accurately.” Furthermore, both men and women are prophetically gifted, as in the case of Phillip’s 4 daughters or in Paul’s instructions on how women ought to wear head coverings when they prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11. This is to say nothing of Mary, Lydia, Junia, Phoebe or other women in the NT who are invested with various levels of authority in the Christian community.
What then could this instruction be pertaining to? A brief study of oude (nor/not even) reveals that Paul uses this negative to link didaskein and authentein to convey together the meaning of what is not being permitted —
“oude indicates that authentein explains what sort of teaching is prohibited to women. For instance, if we should say, ‘I forbid a woman to teach or discuss differential calculus with a man,’ it becomes clear that the subject in which she should not give instruction is higher mathematics.”
We must then turn to the possible definitions of authentein, which has a wide semantic field and whose various uses are well-attested to in Greek literature. It is notable that this word only occurs once in the Bible and thus it is more challenging than other words to easily nail down the sense in which Paul meant to use it. Most of the rest of the book is focused on understanding what is behind the word authentein. This section is quite detailed and well-documented, including numerous quotations of primary sources and further supplemented by a large appendix. In short, there are four main meanings of authentein:
1) To begin something, to be primarily responsible for a condition or action (especially murder),
2) to rule, to dominate,
3) to usurp power or rights from another, and
4) to claim ownership, sovereignty, or authorship.
All four meanings are investigated and given attestation in wider Greek literature. One example for each will suffice here.
1) The father of Achilles accuses Menelaus of being an authentēs (a murderer); that is, he bears responsibility or is to blame for the death of Achilles (though Menelaus did not directly kill Achilles).
2) John Chrysostom taught that Mary came to see Jesus in Matthew 12:46-50 not to visit with him but to demonstrate to the people that she authentein-ed (wielded power and authority over) her child.
3) A man is accused by his relatives of authentein-ing (usurping) them by depriving them all of the inheritance from their mother and father.
4) Jesus is alternately called the authentēs (originating) Word, the authentēs (author) and introducer of a new law of salvation, and the authentēs (creator) “who came and made” by early Christians.
After walking through each of these meanings, the authors hone in on the fourth use and make the case that this is the intended meaning of the word in verse 12, on the basis that Paul is refuting an influential teaching that woman, or Eve, is the author, source, or originator of man. This position is then extensively supported through primary source quotations and commentary on a combination of recently discovered gnostic literature, heterodox Jewish myths and syncretistic pagan religion that were all predominant in Asia Minor and Ephesus particularly at the time.
Though there is certainly variation, a heavily truncated summary is that these teachings constituted a total reversal of the creation account in that Adam, and depending on the account, even Yahweh came out of Eve. Eve — and by extension, woman — is the originating principle of reality. In addition, the snake came to free Adam and Eve from the evil creator god who had mistakenly made the material universe. He opened their eyes to a higher truth than what they had been told by Yahweh, a truth which then frees its adherents to ascend to heaven after death. This was given first to Eve, who then instructed Adam. In some teachings Eve copulates with (or knows, in the biblical sense) the serpent in order to receive this higher knowledge. Thus in various sects followers are encouraged to participate in perverse sexual rites to receive knowledge, some no doubt forming the backdrop of Jesus’ strong words to the nearby church of Thyatira in Revelation 2 regarding Jezebel.
Features of these teachings involved complex genealogies and nonsensical babbling meant to convey a sense of mystery or alternatively have magical power. Notably, Paul anathematizes both babbling and endless genealogies 1 Timothy 6:20 and 1:4, respectively. Thus these heterodox teachings form the backdrop not only for 1 Timothy 2:12 but make up at least a part of the wider false doctrines being refuted throughout the pastoral Epistles.
Understanding verse 12 to be a rebuke against the false teaching that woman is both superior and prior to man, and that Eve imparted wisdom on Adam leads us to then read verses 13 and 14 as corrective teaching, namely that in fact it was Adam that was made first and rather than being enlightened, Eve was deceived by the serpent. In this reading, Paul references a particular strand of false teaching prevalent in Ephesus and then immediately corrects it with an orthodox understanding of the narrative in question.
Finally, questions around the meaning of verse 15 are briefly addressed in the final chapter, again with reference to heterodox teachings and practices forming the backdrop. The authors read this verse as a “defense of feminine functions” in contradistinction to popular teaching at the time which denigrated the body as a material prison; by extension, birth was seen as a perpetuation of this evil on the world and everything from coitus interruptus to forced abortion to cannibalism of birthed children in order to return their life essence to the begetter was practiced in response to this understanding. Paul on the other hand is affirming the beauty of childbearing and motherhood and that to engage or aspire to these things is not unclean nor does it cut one off from salvation. The authors do not mention it but this is consistent with Paul’s teachings elsewhere affirming marriage and sex as opposed to popular teachings that these were impediments to holiness.
May 16, 2014
Well researched! This book really helped me understand the issues in Ephesus at the time that Paul wrote Timothy to give him advice. It is a shame that we have misread I Timothy 2:11-15 for so long. How many have been harmed? How many have not been able to accomplish the work that God set forth because the church has not given careful enough consideration to this passage? The Kroegers give great wisdom and help us to understand God's will for His people. "I do not allow a woman to teach nor proclaim herself the author of man." According to the Kroegers Paul wrote this to counter the seeds of Gnostic heresy occurring in the church in the first century, not to proclaim that women should not have a position as teachers among God's people. The Kroegers give fantastic evidence regarding the mystery religions, the beginnings of Gnostic thought, and the interweaving of Greek mythology with the creation myths of Scripture. In giving these insights, they allow us all to understand that Paul was seeking to counter the teachings of some in the church at Ephesus when giving his directive in I Timothy. He was not suggesting that women have no place of leadership in Christ's redeemed community. Such a thought would certainly be inconsistent with teachings from other letters by Paul and the fact that he partnered with many women while teaching the Gospel. The church consistently needs to consider the books of the Bible and to what context they were written so that we can better live as God's people in the world and so that we can better follow His guidance in making disciples. All of those created as His church in this world have the opportunity to make disciples, teaching them, both men and women alike.
June 9, 2024
WAS 1 TIMOTHY 2 WRITTEN TO OPPOSE GNOSTICISM?
Authors Richard and Catherine Clark Kroeger wrote in the Preface to this 1992 book, “If there is one verse in the Bible more than any other that is used to disbar women from proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ and exercising their talents for his glory, it is 1 Timothy 2:12… On the basis of this translation [KJV] of verse 12 women are denied a vote in church affairs, rejected as teachers of adult Bible classes, kept home from the mission field, disenfranchised from the duties and privileges of leadership in the body of Christ, and forbidden the use of their God-given talents for leadership… Many evangelicals view all biblical passages about the role and ministry of women through the lens of 1 Timothy 2:12… The spiritual leadership of Huldah, Deborah, Miriam, Priscilla, Phoebe, and others is denigrated or denied… It is necessary to compare Scripture with Scripture to find the correct meaning. We must consider ALL that the Bible has to say about the activities of women committed to God’s will… Our purpose is to maintain on the basis of Scripture that both men and women are equally called to commitment and service… We believe that much of the problem over the difficult texts has arisen because so little is known in our churches and seminaries about the lives and outlook of the women to whom Paul wrote. This book is an effort to correct the imbalance.” (Pg. 11-15)
In the Introduction, they observe, “Frequently we meet women who tell of their conviction that God has called them to ministry. Many have been deflected from their calling by other Christians who tell them that this cannot possibly be God’s will. The women … are thwarted by the determined obstruction of sincere believers who would gladly support the call to ministry of a male with equal talents… We are commanded neither to grieve nor to quench the Holy Spirit of God… A traditional interpretation sets believers against their own prayer lives… There are many gifts of leadership and service… No limitation with respect to gender is indicated… Persons endowed with the gift of teaching are expected to develop this potential to the glory of God, while those in authority should be scrupulously conscientious.” (Pg. 23-24)
They explain, “Essentially, this is a book about the interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15… Some Christians … feel that no interpretation is necessary. Yet all of us interpret every passage of the Bible in one way or another… A knowledge of the context is necessary to clarify the biblical account. Otherwise the story might be open to serious misunderstanding. Such a consideration of context is essential in approaching the Pauline passages on women. We need first to see Paul as one trained at the feet of Gamaliel in rabbinic tradition… Next we should ask, ‘What does the text say?’ Here a knowledge of the biblical languages is critical… we must get back to the fundamental text rather than putting ourselves at the mercy of translators… Next comes the matter of language. Is there more than one meaning for some of the words employed in the passage… The Greek word for silence has as least five different meanings in the New Testament… Then there is the matter of grammar. Is there an unexpected construction which might give another interpretation? First Timothy 2:12 can perhaps be construed as an indirect statement with a redundant negative so that the emphasis is upon the content that women are forbidden to teach rather than upon their teaching or administrative function.” (Pg. 34-37)
They note, “Our treatment will deal with the epistle [Ephesians] as reflecting a troubled situation in the Christian community there, especially as it applied to women and their religious concerns.” (Pg. 58) They continue, “although these people wished to be teachers of the law, they did not understand what they were saying or anything about the matters upon which they spoke so confidently… Few of the individuals who opposed sound doctrine are mentioned by name… We shall suggest that at least one of the individuals … was a woman, and that 1 Timothy 2:12 forbids her to teach a heresy which was creating serious problems for the church. She is certainly not the only one whose teaching must be stopped, however.” (Pg. 59-60) They add, “We cannot rule out the possibility that some of the younger widows had been attracted to such a [Gnostic] philosophy… We again find a linkage of women with the false teaching in 2 Timothy 3:6-9… Women are once again connected with the false doctrine, this time as learners; but there is a reference to the false teachers who go surreptitiously from house to house.” (Pg. 62-63)
They suggest, “Women were specifically granted permission to prophecy, provided that their heads were appropriately covered (1 Cor 11:5). Prophecy, according to 1 Corinthians 14:3 consists of ‘edification, and exhortation, and consolation.’ Surely these are basic elements in Christian instruction. Thus it becomes evident that a number of other Pauline passages support the concept of women sharing instruction with men as well as vice versa. We must therefore consider whether a specific sort of teaching is prohibited, rather than all teaching of any kind.” (Pg. 82)
They point out, “Junia is called a ‘noteworthy apostle’ (Rom 16:7). Efforts by translators to turn this common feminine name into a masculine one (Junias or Junianus) simply cannot be substantiated. Paul mentions several women, including Priscilla, as ‘fellow laborers’ and asks that Christians be subject to such as these (Phil 4:2-3, etc.)… A number of Christian women appear to have presided over churches which met in their homes… and women were involved in the first decision made by the early church.” (Pg. 91-92)
They argue, “‘To be in silence’ can mean ‘to keep something a secret.’ Secret knowledge was an important part of ancient mystery religion and of Gnosticism… The word ‘hesuchia,’ however, can also mean ‘peace’ or ‘harmony’… This, we believe, is the preferred translation here for the term… In New Testament times, ‘hesuchia’ also denoted a disengagement from public life and debate. Politicking and heated emotions were considered incompatible with serious study… This may constitute a specific appeal that the women who had become embroiled should stand aloof from the conflict and give themselves instead to learning the truths of the gospel.” (Pg. 103-104) They summarize, “We have argued that 1 Timothy 2:13-14 should be considered an orthodox refutation of Gnostic-like mythology.” (Pg. 171)
They conclude, “This book has been written for men and women alike, with the prayer that they may find God’s purposes for their lives. First Timothy 2:9-15 is not meant to be a burden or yoke of oppression. Rather it is a launching pad for service and study and the development of Christian character… In this book we have attempted to show that the passage called upon women to learn the truth and to refrain from teaching error. The writer presents an orthodox view of the seminal ideas in Genesis 1-3 in order to rectify distortions… His desire is to lead women away from victimization by false teachers toward a ‘knowledge of the truth’… to enable them to accept themselves as women and mothers and servants of Christ.” (Pg. 180-181)
This book will be of keen interest to Christians studying these passages, and male/female roles in the church, in general.
Authors Richard and Catherine Clark Kroeger wrote in the Preface to this 1992 book, “If there is one verse in the Bible more than any other that is used to disbar women from proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ and exercising their talents for his glory, it is 1 Timothy 2:12… On the basis of this translation [KJV] of verse 12 women are denied a vote in church affairs, rejected as teachers of adult Bible classes, kept home from the mission field, disenfranchised from the duties and privileges of leadership in the body of Christ, and forbidden the use of their God-given talents for leadership… Many evangelicals view all biblical passages about the role and ministry of women through the lens of 1 Timothy 2:12… The spiritual leadership of Huldah, Deborah, Miriam, Priscilla, Phoebe, and others is denigrated or denied… It is necessary to compare Scripture with Scripture to find the correct meaning. We must consider ALL that the Bible has to say about the activities of women committed to God’s will… Our purpose is to maintain on the basis of Scripture that both men and women are equally called to commitment and service… We believe that much of the problem over the difficult texts has arisen because so little is known in our churches and seminaries about the lives and outlook of the women to whom Paul wrote. This book is an effort to correct the imbalance.” (Pg. 11-15)
In the Introduction, they observe, “Frequently we meet women who tell of their conviction that God has called them to ministry. Many have been deflected from their calling by other Christians who tell them that this cannot possibly be God’s will. The women … are thwarted by the determined obstruction of sincere believers who would gladly support the call to ministry of a male with equal talents… We are commanded neither to grieve nor to quench the Holy Spirit of God… A traditional interpretation sets believers against their own prayer lives… There are many gifts of leadership and service… No limitation with respect to gender is indicated… Persons endowed with the gift of teaching are expected to develop this potential to the glory of God, while those in authority should be scrupulously conscientious.” (Pg. 23-24)
They explain, “Essentially, this is a book about the interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15… Some Christians … feel that no interpretation is necessary. Yet all of us interpret every passage of the Bible in one way or another… A knowledge of the context is necessary to clarify the biblical account. Otherwise the story might be open to serious misunderstanding. Such a consideration of context is essential in approaching the Pauline passages on women. We need first to see Paul as one trained at the feet of Gamaliel in rabbinic tradition… Next we should ask, ‘What does the text say?’ Here a knowledge of the biblical languages is critical… we must get back to the fundamental text rather than putting ourselves at the mercy of translators… Next comes the matter of language. Is there more than one meaning for some of the words employed in the passage… The Greek word for silence has as least five different meanings in the New Testament… Then there is the matter of grammar. Is there an unexpected construction which might give another interpretation? First Timothy 2:12 can perhaps be construed as an indirect statement with a redundant negative so that the emphasis is upon the content that women are forbidden to teach rather than upon their teaching or administrative function.” (Pg. 34-37)
They note, “Our treatment will deal with the epistle [Ephesians] as reflecting a troubled situation in the Christian community there, especially as it applied to women and their religious concerns.” (Pg. 58) They continue, “although these people wished to be teachers of the law, they did not understand what they were saying or anything about the matters upon which they spoke so confidently… Few of the individuals who opposed sound doctrine are mentioned by name… We shall suggest that at least one of the individuals … was a woman, and that 1 Timothy 2:12 forbids her to teach a heresy which was creating serious problems for the church. She is certainly not the only one whose teaching must be stopped, however.” (Pg. 59-60) They add, “We cannot rule out the possibility that some of the younger widows had been attracted to such a [Gnostic] philosophy… We again find a linkage of women with the false teaching in 2 Timothy 3:6-9… Women are once again connected with the false doctrine, this time as learners; but there is a reference to the false teachers who go surreptitiously from house to house.” (Pg. 62-63)
They suggest, “Women were specifically granted permission to prophecy, provided that their heads were appropriately covered (1 Cor 11:5). Prophecy, according to 1 Corinthians 14:3 consists of ‘edification, and exhortation, and consolation.’ Surely these are basic elements in Christian instruction. Thus it becomes evident that a number of other Pauline passages support the concept of women sharing instruction with men as well as vice versa. We must therefore consider whether a specific sort of teaching is prohibited, rather than all teaching of any kind.” (Pg. 82)
They point out, “Junia is called a ‘noteworthy apostle’ (Rom 16:7). Efforts by translators to turn this common feminine name into a masculine one (Junias or Junianus) simply cannot be substantiated. Paul mentions several women, including Priscilla, as ‘fellow laborers’ and asks that Christians be subject to such as these (Phil 4:2-3, etc.)… A number of Christian women appear to have presided over churches which met in their homes… and women were involved in the first decision made by the early church.” (Pg. 91-92)
They argue, “‘To be in silence’ can mean ‘to keep something a secret.’ Secret knowledge was an important part of ancient mystery religion and of Gnosticism… The word ‘hesuchia,’ however, can also mean ‘peace’ or ‘harmony’… This, we believe, is the preferred translation here for the term… In New Testament times, ‘hesuchia’ also denoted a disengagement from public life and debate. Politicking and heated emotions were considered incompatible with serious study… This may constitute a specific appeal that the women who had become embroiled should stand aloof from the conflict and give themselves instead to learning the truths of the gospel.” (Pg. 103-104) They summarize, “We have argued that 1 Timothy 2:13-14 should be considered an orthodox refutation of Gnostic-like mythology.” (Pg. 171)
They conclude, “This book has been written for men and women alike, with the prayer that they may find God’s purposes for their lives. First Timothy 2:9-15 is not meant to be a burden or yoke of oppression. Rather it is a launching pad for service and study and the development of Christian character… In this book we have attempted to show that the passage called upon women to learn the truth and to refrain from teaching error. The writer presents an orthodox view of the seminal ideas in Genesis 1-3 in order to rectify distortions… His desire is to lead women away from victimization by false teachers toward a ‘knowledge of the truth’… to enable them to accept themselves as women and mothers and servants of Christ.” (Pg. 180-181)
This book will be of keen interest to Christians studying these passages, and male/female roles in the church, in general.
July 16, 2013
This is a very difficult text (Timothy 2:11-15). The English translation never made any sense to me, considering the rest of the bible. I felt that the authors did a lot of work to get the meaning of the original text and did a great job supporting it. It may have been how I read it but I felt like the book ended abruptly. Maybe that was just me though. I know I will be reading it again.
January 5, 2016
I love this! As a Classicist just starting my journey with Greek, as a feminist, and as a Christian I loved this book. I saw it on the shelf at my college interfaith library and loved it.
September 17, 2020
It was amazing how research into Paul's opponents for the purity of the gospel, the Gnostics, provides a reasonable and detailed explanation for the passages in First Timothy that have kept women from being allowed from using all the spiritual gifts that the Holy Spirit has placed in them. I strongly recommend this book to those who think Paul was antiwomen because it not only shows that he was for women but he was against the things that set themselves up against Christ. This should be required reading for all male pastors and churchleaders.
July 31, 2019
Cuando hacía mi Maestría en teología, descubrí este libro y fue una revelación, entender que los textos bíblicos deben ser siempre entendidos en su contexto, o de otro modo, les hacemos decir lo que no dicen. Un libro indispensable para quien quiere tener una comprensión sana del texto bíblico.
April 2, 2024
A great book! Really helped me come to terms with some of the biblical attacks from people who think I shouldn't be following a career
August 8, 2017
Using evidence from archaeological finds, Gnostic religious texts, historians, and studies of Greek grammar and terms, Mr. and Mrs. Clark Kroeger give us a clearer picture of what was being taught about Eve (and woman, and child-bearing) in society and in homes at the time of the early church in Ephesus. They quote/summarize myths popular at that time, which had restructured the creation story in Genesis so that Eve and the serpent were being worshiped, sometimes confusing Eve with the Greek creations of Sophia and Zoe; these encouraged the views that woman had authored man – that woman existed before and was spiritually superior to man. They also quote/summarize other Gnostic teachings which taught the opposite – that women were spiritually inferior; these encouraged the views that just being female was something a woman should scorn about herself, with childbearing being viewed as both indicting proof of femininity and the possible fragmentation of one’s soul (passing pieces of oneself off to descendants, hindering one’s admittance to the afterlife). In light of these false teachings in the culture of Ephesus, and after considering how best to translate some of the Greek in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 (e.g. authentein, and the ouk/oude statement), the Clark Kroegers propose that Paul’s intent in these verses was to set the record straight as regards Adam, Eve, the temptation by the serpent – to forbid false teaching about these topics and to comfort those who had been misled into thinking that they should not bear children. To be clear: Paul’s aim was not to prevent women from teaching the Bible to men, but to prevent the church from (either at their meetings or in their own homes) endorsing/propagating false teachings travelling about the culture of the time about women being the author of man, or childbearing being spiritually harmful. He desired to prevent the spread of lies that degrade either gender.
“’Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number…’” Genesis 1:26-28
“You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galatians 3:26-28
“’Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number…’” Genesis 1:26-28
“You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galatians 3:26-28
November 25, 2022
This is my third time reading this book, but the first time I'm writing a review. I read it at least once before 2013 which is when I first joined an online book site.
Research = 5 stars
Necessity of this work = 5 stars
Hermeneutics = 4.5 stars
Readability outside of the Academic realm - 3 stars
This was a long overdue, deep study and analysis of a passage that has traditionally been used to suppress women despite over 100 instances of faithful women doing exactly the sorts of things they are told not to do here. However, to really understand this takes a long look at scripture, archaelogy as well as many primary source documents. As for me Please note that
In a grossly oversimplified nutshell, the late Clark Kroegers (this has two authors--the name you can't see is Dr. Catherine Clark Kroeger who was a leading figure in the very vital Biblical egalitarian movement in the 20th C) this is saying that women can be saved/made whole even if they have one or more children, but that they aren't to claim that Eve was made first plus a few other things (note that the serpent was often worshipped or at least respected, plus more.)
Research = 5 stars
Necessity of this work = 5 stars
Hermeneutics = 4.5 stars
Readability outside of the Academic realm - 3 stars
This was a long overdue, deep study and analysis of a passage that has traditionally been used to suppress women despite over 100 instances of faithful women doing exactly the sorts of things they are told not to do here. However, to really understand this takes a long look at scripture, archaelogy as well as many primary source documents. As for me Please note that
In a grossly oversimplified nutshell, the late Clark Kroegers (this has two authors--the name you can't see is Dr. Catherine Clark Kroeger who was a leading figure in the very vital Biblical egalitarian movement in the 20th C) this is saying that women can be saved/made whole even if they have one or more children, but that they aren't to claim that Eve was made first plus a few other things (note that the serpent was often worshipped or at least respected, plus more.)
August 28, 2013
Dr. Kroeger presents an interesting argument that I Timothy 2:11ish should be seen as an attack on Gnostic heresies rather than any sort of limitation on women in Christianity. When he sticks to the verses at hand, he makes a fair argument, but resorts to assuming the consequent to make his points. He cannot accept Biblical complementarianism, therefore, it cannot *possibly* be that 'usurpation' would be a good description of female leadership in the church. Rebuttals to it have been thorough. Additionally, what could have been an interesting and in-depth study of a few verses was tarnished by an out-of-context and shallow accompanying analysis of various other New Testament verses in an attempt to ultimately argue for clerical egalitarianism and women's ordination. The author touts Galatians 3:28 (sans context, of course) and conveniently ignores Ephesians 5, Paul's words to Timothy on the Bishops, and the entirety of Christian Tradition.
October 6, 2007
Richard and Catherine Clark Kroeger (founder of Christians for Biblical Equality) offer here a solid, well-reasoned interpretation of I Timothy 2:11-15. I found their arguments for women in ministry as supported by Scripture to be persuasive-- although, of course, I came to the table already persuaded. Their detailed research and obviously encyclopedic knowledge of the ancient world lends support to their contention that the Pauline prohibition in this text was NOT meant to prohibit all women from teaching and authoritative positions int he church. This is a great resource to have handy, ladies, when the patriarchal types start giving you flack about using your gifts.
August 16, 2013
Although terribly boring and academic, the book provided a solid argument and truth for an incredibly controversial and dividing text. With that in mind, I'd recommend it for anyone - men or women - interested in understanding the 2 Tim passage.
Read
February 10, 2022Excellent Scholarship
I found this book to not only be a read that was so very rich from an exegetical point of view but it will also be an incredible tool in my future exploration in the Pastoral Epistles in my preaching and teaching!
I found this book to not only be a read that was so very rich from an exegetical point of view but it will also be an incredible tool in my future exploration in the Pastoral Epistles in my preaching and teaching!
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews