1 Timothy chapter 3

Not being a conservative evangelical, I don't believe that the Bible is an infallible, authoritative rule book for our life. 1 Timothy was a letter written, probably sometime late in the first century, probably by someone from a church with historical associations with Paul who used Paul's name to give his letter authority, and it gives his view of leadership at that time. I don't see it as normative for us today.

Pastor Melissa Scott teaching on Women Speaking in the Church Part 1 - Husbands Wives and Silence

Pastor Melissa Scott teaching on Women Speaking in the Church Part 1 - Husbands Wives and Silence - YouTube

This clip is about 7 minutes long, but the whole message was an hour long.

I find it amusing that a WOMAN was preaching on the topic of women preaching.

Personally, I've always thought that Paul had nothing to do with the writing of 1 Timothy anyway, and it reflects a much later church tradition claiming Pauline authority for itself.

I certainly think it's pretty irrelevant as the world has changed a lot since Paul's day.

If Paul's point is that male leaders need to be monogamous, isn't it taking him out of context to make it say leaders have to be male? It isn't what he was talking about. We can see this even more clearly in verse 12 where Paul say deacons must be the husband of one wife, yet Romans 16:1 tells us that Phoebe was a deacon in Cenchreae. Being a deacon wasn't restricted to men, and husband of one wife wasn't talking about deacons having to be men.

You can also see Paul talking about women deacons in 1Tim 3:11, right in the middle of his discussion about deacons Paul gives the qualification for women
1Tim 3:8 NASB Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain, 9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 These men must also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. 11 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. 12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. 13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
Unfortunately, most most of our bible translations go for 'wives' rather than 'women', though this seems to be based on the idea he couldn't possibly have mean women in positions of leadership. But the Greek is better translated women. Woman and wife are the same word in Greek, so if you wanted to specify a wife or wives rather than woman or women, you needed to show the relationship, 'their women' or a woman's 'own man'. Paul doesn't he just says women. Interestingly, Paul starts talking about the women with a 'likewise' the same way he followed on from bishops with 'likewise deacons'.

But It think Priscilla is the clearest example showing us that husband of one wife was talking about the need for monogamy, not that bishops and deacons need to be men.

Judy02 said:

^ Yeah, I think at first I was still wondering though, as it seemed to only talk about "the husband of but one wife" when talking about overseers. Their women or wives is only mentionned when talking about deacons. Good and thoughtful post though.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that overseers should just be men though. I never have been convinced that all this sexism in the church is right.

Click to expand...

Paul does start off the chapter saying 1Tim3:1 whoever desires the office of a bishop desires a good thing. The Greek is ei tis, 'if anyone' which of course out bible translations turn into 'any man' or 'he desires'. But Paul says 'anyone' and doesn't say bishops have to be men.

I think you need to be careful reading things into the passage Paul isn't saying, he mentions women deacons but not women bishops so bishops should be men. That isn't what Paul actually said. Remember the context Paul is writing a letter to Timothy with advice, probably dictating the letter, so this isn't a list of the exact qualification of each office, but Paul talking to his amanuensis, saying the things he thinks are important as he thinks of them, which is why Paul's letters are full of digressions. When Paul was talking about deacons he though it important to say something about the women, but you can't read into it that because he didn't mention women bishops, that there simply weren't any, or that he was excluding them from the role.