1 Tim 2:11-15 and 1 Cor 14:34-35 are often cited as sexist verses in the bible that require women to be silent in church. However, proper examination of the original language and context of this letter reveals that it’s not like that. First of all, if women weren’t allowed to speak at all, then why does Paul instruct them on how to pray and prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11:5, both of which require speaking? Women who were prophets in the Bible can be found in Exodus 15:20, Judges 4:4-5, Luke 2:36, Acts 2:17, and Acts 21:9.
1 Tim 2:12 (NLT) I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. 13 For God made Adam first, and afterward, he made Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing, assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty.
1 Cor 14:34 Women should be silent during church meetings. It is not proper for them to speak. They should be submissive, just as the law says. 35 If they have any questions, they should ask their husbands at home, for it is improper for women to speak in church meetings
Remember, Paul’s letters typically address specific issues that particular churches are facing. Paul was addressing the issue of disorder in the church, in chapters 11-14 of 1 Corinthians, this is summed up in 1 Cor 14:40. In fact, the entire letter is about keeping order on different issues like the division caused by the favoritism of specific preachers (ch. 1-4), sexual immorality and marriage (ch. 5-7), and eating idol meats (ch.8-10). Meanwhile, both letters to Timothy were written to help him deal with an uprising of false teachers in the Ephesian church. These false teachers, Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus (these are the ones Paul names) were not women, but they were influencing or being influenced by some specific women.
All believers are commissioned to speak the gospel, and this includes women, as stated by Paul in Galatians 3:23-29, and Peter, who quotes the prophet Joel about the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:16-21 (Joel 2:28-32).
The words guné (γυνή) and anér (ἀνήρ) can be translated as wife or woman, and male, man, or husband, respectively. So the New Testament context must be used to determine which meaning. In the case of “the head of the woman is the man” (in 1 Cor 11:3), it’s the husbands who are the head of their wives. Men are not the head of every woman in the church, but it can be translated from either ‘man’ to ‘woman’ or ‘husband’ to ‘wife’. It was customary in the ancient Greek world for only married women to cover their hair. In 1 Corinthians 11:5, it says a woman who prays or prophesies uncovered dishonors their head (about husbands from verse 3). It dishonors their husbands, but not God, meaning that all of this was because of the social marriage custom. Ephesians 5:21 instructs husbands and wives to submit to one another, not to other men and women. In 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, Paul appeals to people to follow the customs of the day for the sake of Christianity’s cultural standing. However, in verse 16, he makes it clear that it is not a legalistic law from God but rather a customary thing that women should cover their heads in that culture and region.
1 Cor 11:16 But if anyone wants to argue about this, I simply say that we have no other custom than this, and neither do God’s other churches.
Early Christian Gentiles followed Jewish rules because the first Christians were often Messianic Jews, even if these rules were deemed unnecessary for Gentiles. For example, circumcision was considered excessive by Paul for Gentiles since it was not given to Adam or even Noah. It was only given to Abraham and his descendants (1 Cor 7:19, Gal 5:2-12, Col 2:11). However, even today, many non-Jewish Christians still practice circumcision. It is not required by law for non-Abrahamic people, but it is done as a custom by Gentile believers because Christianity came from Judaism.
In modern synagogues, women and men are separate, but in the 1st century, they sat together. However, back then, in that culture, women weren’t allowed to read the scripture publicly. This custom was likely based on the Jewish Aggadah. There are rules in the Talmud (Shevuot 30a) and the Mishnah (Shevuot 4:1) that prohibit women from testifying as witnesses. However, Jewish rabbinical literature, such as the Talmud, often taught things not stated in the Torah. Jesus rejected some of the rules in the Talmud and other rabbinic teachings from the 1st century for this reason. For example, in Matthew 15:1-9, he rejects the practice of Netilat Yadayim (ritual hand washing) among the Pharisees. In his sermon on the mount in Matthew 5, Jesus rejects the various divorce clauses that allow men to divorce their wives for stupid reasons in the Talmud. So, since the Messiah Jesus rejects alternative laws, that means for Christians, they are invalid. One can conclude that, just like with the head covering custom, Paul was appealing to the social norms of the day; however, these were not absolute laws, especially when considering the Aggadah, which even Jesus didn’t submit to, as he only recognized the Tanakh (Old Testament) as authoritative.
On the issue of women keeping silent (1 Tim 2:11-15 and 1 Cor 14:34-35). In that era, synagogue services functioned like a classroom so that people could ask questions. Often, Jesus taught in the synagogue and was asked questions by the Pharisees, to which he responded and asked them questions in return (Matt 12:9-14, Matt 21:23-46). He also received comments and questions when he taught outside of the synagogue (Luke 12:13) and even in the Temple (Matt 21:23-46). With the new Jesus movement, Gentile women were now a part of these originally Jewish religious activities and were not as educated in Jewish customs. Back then, young Jewish women were not allowed to pursue education, so it was up to their husbands to teach them, and they were not in a position to teach. So it makes sense that if most women are uneducated in the study of the Torah, then they shouldn’t be teaching it; this was the framework of the Jewish culture back then (and in some Orthodox communities today). Since women and men were all gathered in the same place in this new Christian meeting setup, women could now ask questions. However, it was less likely for a woman, especially a poorer woman, to be literate. So if women couldn’t read, they would ask basic questions that could be answered by simply reading the Bible. This could become disruptive to the sermons if women were constantly asking questions that had simple resolutions.
Additionally, some women were following new social trends set by wealthy women who would dress like Hetarai (high-end prostitutes) and debate with men over philosophy. This was likely a byproduct of new Roman laws that allowed women to keep the money that they made. These women took things further and started pushing boundaries in other areas. They weren’t afraid to challenge the hypocritical and biased adultery laws (husbands were legally allowed to commit adultery under certain conditions). They rebelled against traditional marital expectations of modesty and submission, becoming loud and obnoxious and engaging in extramarital affairs. They often would interrupt the speakers with loud comments. So Paul’s solution in 1 Corinthians 14:35 is for the women with questions to ask their husbands at home. The husbands were supposed to be teaching their wives the basics. This is a sacrifice of time and commitment that the man should make for his wife. Paul says for men to love their wives like Christ (who sacrificed for the church) loved the church, and cherish/nourish them as they do their bodies in Eph 5:25-30.
There are specific social issues addressed in the book of Timothy. Some wealthy women are treating church meetings as a fashion show to showcase their social status. As mentioned earlier, this was a new form of rebellion among wealthy women in Roman culture. They were educated and learned philosophy with their brothers. They thought that meant they could dominate men and usurp authority, in addition to being disrespectful and looking down on others who were less fortunate with haughty eyes. In the normal course of society, women of their status would never be caught dead around poor people, orphans, and slaves, yet this is what the Kingdom of Heaven looks like.
Additionally, some young, wealthy widows idled away their days gossiping and causing strife (1 Tim 5:11-15). Moreover, wealthy widows were taking food from the widow food distribution program, so Paul had to set some boundaries in 1 Timothy 5. Paul concludes that widows who were old, poor, and destitute (no adult children) could receive food, and even then, they had to be active members of the church, helping other members. Paul didn’t have a problem with women learning, but their behavior was obnoxious and disruptive to the service.
Furthermore, Ephesus, where the letter to Timothy was written, was the home to the cult of Diana (Artemis in Greek). This is a Greek goddess of hunting and the wilderness, and she was also associated with chastity. The gnostic false teachers that Paul mentions in the letter (Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus) were likely teaching syncretism with pagan ideas. Paul mentions that some forbade meat and marriage in 1 Timothy 4:1-3, women from that cult would have been anti-marriage because they believed that virginity some spiritual power superior to Christians. Also, many religions like Buddhism teach that eating meat is an act of lower spirituality, so forsaking meat and marriage was being taught as an ascetic practice that made one more enlightened, which is in contrast to the need for Faith in Christ to be saved. Idol makers who made money manufacturing statues of Diana/Artemis in this same city were angry at Paul and started a riot to have him killed in Acts 19:23-41. So there are women from this cult bringing outside doctrine to the Ephesian church, and Timothy was sent to correct that.
The comment on Adam and Eve in 1 Tim 2:12, in this view, draws a comparison to Eve’s sin, which resulted from deception. Similarly, some Jewish women may have been corrupted by false teachers (Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus) who deceived them with pagan philosophies. Timothy was sent to guide them out of this deception. Paul says these women need to be taught how to behave and to follow the way of the Holy Spirit.
Lastly, if Paul had a problem with women teaching in general, then why did he endorse Priscilla’s involvement in teaching Apollos (Acts 18:24-28)? In Acts 18, Paul meets Priscilla and her husband Aquila in Corinth (Achaia). They are refugees from Rome who fled because of an expulsion of Jews by Claudius Caesar. They become believers in Christ and assist Paul in preaching. They followed Paul from Corinth to Ephesus and settled there. While there, a newly converted Messianic Jewish Egyptian named Apollos had just arrived in Ephesus. He was a good preacher, but there were things he didn’t know, so Priscilla and Aquila helped refine his knowledge and encouraged him to go to Corinth, where he won many debates against the Jews in Achaia. It’s possible that, since Priscilla was from Rome and not Judea, she had the opportunity to study the Bible, despite being a woman, which would have put her in a position above other Jewish women in more conservative communities. Priscilla and Aquila were also leaders of the house church in Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:19, 2 Tim. 4:19), and Paul even says they risked their lives for him at one point (Rom. 16:2-4). Priscilla was educated and in a position to aid Paul in evangelism; if she were just a passive wife and not a minister, then the text would have just mentioned Aquila. We don’t even know Peter’s wife’s name in Scripture; all we know is that Jesus healed his mother-in-law. Yet Priscilla’s role in spreading the gospel was significant enough to merit mention in Paul’s story in Acts and in three of his letters.
One thing to keep in mind is that modern Bibles are translations of translations, and sometimes, later translators interpret specific passages differently based on their own beliefs. Oftentimes, like with any language, there are a few different ways to translate one word or another. Sometimes, the definitions chosen may not always take into account the cultural and historical context of the original script or may be influenced by the culture of the period in which the translation is made. This is all in addition to the pagan cultural baggage that comes with various languages used by pagans.
Here is an example regarding Phoebe, the “deacon”:
Romans 16:1 (KJV) I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:
1 Timothy 3:12 (KJV) Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
The word diakonos (διάκονος) in Greek means servant. The same word in 1 Timothy 3:12, translated as “deacon,” is translated as “servant” in Romans 16:1 in most translations, even the KJV. In Timothy, Paul discusses the qualifications for deacons, saying that deacons must be the husband of one wife and rule their households well. This statement is about deacons being monogamous and responsible in managing their homes, not about it being exclusive to men. If the KJV translated the word deacon from 1 Timothy 3:12 the same way it is translated in Romans 16:1, it would simply say, “Let the servants be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.” Or we could leave the word servant in its transliterated form, “deacon” in Romans 16:1, and it would say, “I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a deacon of the church which is at Cenchrea:”
Translators have inserted their own doctrinal views into their translation philosophy, which is why there are so many translations. The KJV is no exception, so I used the KJV translation on this point just to showcase this. A Quaker woman named Margaret Fell wrote a book while in prison for preaching called Women Speaking Justified in 1666 (55 years after the KJV was published). She points out some of these inconsistencies with the doctrine of women being silent.
Quakers were one of the few denominations that allowed women to speak, that is, before Pentecostalism went mainstream in the early 20th century, at the Azusa Street Revival. Both Quakers and Methodists focused on the anointing of the person, not their gender, so John Wesley (founder of Methodism) let women speak, but the Methodists often called it “tesifying”.
Resources:
Greek words for men and women:
Artemis Greek Goddess
Women guné (γυνή)
Man anér (ἀνήρ)
Serveant (diakonos)
A sermon on the Subject of Women keeping silent in the church
Women in Ancient Rome
Women in 1st Century Synagogues
More on women and head coverings