There are many changes underway, but perhaps none with more momentum than the women's movements.  Some of these movements seek to place women in roles that are contrary to the teaching of the scriptures.  The following exchange was precipitated by a female Christian who was debating male preachers on different Internet lists.  The exchange examines more than just a woman debating a man.  If you have not already done so, please read, "The Truth about Woman" before studying this exchange.  There is also a sermon outline in the Sermon Outline section of Bible Truths titled, "The Role of Women in the Church" that would also be good for you to consider. 

Don Martin to the list:

Darlene Ward wrote:

This is my first rebuttal on proposition #2 of the debate in progress on …… (name of list) concerning Christians going to war. Several of you are on that debate list and I thought I would post my rebuttal here. If anyone wants to comment....feel free.

Don comments:

Do not think that I have anything personally against Darlene. In fact, I have dealt with Darlene in different situations (not in a debate forum, I have refused) and I have found her generally amicable and, at times, funny. My question is, am I the only one on the planet that does not think a female Christian should be debating a male Christian? (I Tim. 2: 8-12.)

Is there a substantial difference between debating on a debate list and in a church building? May a female assume the position of teacher in an Internet forum involving men and women and that be acceptable? I would like to see if I am the only one with the weird idea that I Timothy 2: 12-15 applies in principle to a debate list (the very nature of a debate involves two combatants in an assertive and aggressive exchange, not just a situation of questions and answers).

Let me inject the following: We can comment on this without loosing control, assigning motives, and threatening fellowship. There should be no party loyalty involved in any comment to my question.

Thank you for any contribution you make regarding my question (I have discussed such with Darlene in the past).

Cordially,
Don Martin

Don Martin to Darlene Ward and the list:

I asked about a female Christian debating a male Christian in a previous post. Thus far, I have only seen three posts. One from Jake Wilson that said such is not mentioned in the scriptures. Using the modern day hermeneutics, I suppose this justifies it (I am not sure what Jake is saying, if he is for or against it).

Allison Collins said a female Christian debating a man is not scriptural and goes against I Timothy 2: 12-15 (I believe I am correctly representing Allison). Allison expressed my sentiment exactly. If Darlene is wrong (I believe she is) then those who are involved in such debating are also wrong. If not, why not? (Dare we make application of scripture?)

Darlene responded (the third reply) to my post apparently not agreeing with me. I must now be careful or I will end up debating Darlene about debating. I shall simply, in the third person, review Darlene's post. I would suggest that if Darlene wants to see this matter discussed, she find a capable male to post to me. Perhaps those on the debate list would accommodate Darlene.

Darlene wrote:

You have refused? I don't remember asking you to, Don.

Don comments:

I could be mistaken (probably a shock to some), but I thought Darlene challenged me to a debate on a list the first of this year. Perhaps she did not (if she says she did not, then I trust her memory).

Darlene provides a very needed lesson for many of us on … (name of list). She exhibits the art of equivocation and ambiguity (double use of words and lack of clarity).

Darlene wrote:

Now lets see. What is debating? It is simply the presenting of two sides of an issue.

Don comments:

I have had countless debates and a debate is a structured presentation involving two antithetical views with each disputant attempting to prove "his" basic premise or proposition AND disprove "his" opponent's view. No, a debate, normally considered, is not "simply the presenting of two sides of an issue."

Darlene asked:

Are you saying a woman cannot present something to a man? I won't go into all the scriptures that say otherwise. Now take this post I sent. Did you read it? Are you reading this one? If so, you sinned because you read something from a woman...horrors.

Don comments:

Notice how Darlene defines her own terms, assigns a consequent concept, and then proceeds to address it. A woman does have the right to "present something to a man." This is not the issue. It is apparent from the grammar (should I wash out my mouth because I mentioned grammar?) of Acts 18: 26 and the associated context that Priscilla took part in the teaching of Apollos. However, she was not in the pulpit or in some debating forum made up of men and women, seeking to prove her view and disprove the teaching of Apollos!

Darlene continued:

Are you reading this one? If so, you sinned because you read something from a woman...horrors.

Don remarks:

Again, we have equivocation and deflection. Up to this point, I do not believe Darlene and I are debating a female debating a male. However, this discussion could very easily turn into a debate between Darlene and me (if I am not careful) and I would then be doing the very thing I am condemning.

Darlene asked:

Do you ever read anything from a woman? Do you read what women write on this list? Do you ever discuss anything spiritual with a woman?

Don answers:

The above is what I see so often, missing the point, creating a straw man, and attempting to examine and place the spotlight on the irrelevant straw man.

Darlene also asked:

By the way, soon Jeff Wallace and I will have a debate on the Institution that engulfs the children of God. I take it you will not read it?

Don replies:

I cannot endorse or promote a female Christian debating a male Christian in a church building, secular building, one on one without an audience, or on a debate Internet list. Such a debate posture places the female in the position of flagrantly violating: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence...." (I Tim. 2: 11, 12).

I shall make some general comments in my next post (third for the day).

Don Martin to the list:

I have been asking questions about the practice of a female debating a male on a debate Internet list. Such greatly, I do not mind telling you, troubles me. I have asked for posts commenting on this practice. Have Imissed something, I have asked myself, or are we drifting and not applying scripture?

I do know this: There is a strong movement underway in denominationalism and in churches of Christ to place woman in a position to which God has not assigned her, a position that is contrary to the scriptures. Consider the applicable teaching of the scriptures:

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence...." (I Tim. 2: 11, 12).

We have often re-defined worship. "If it is not in a church building, then it is permissible," some reason. Hence, a female Christian can formally debate a male Christian outside the church building. I have asked elders who arrange for a female speaker to address those whom they oversee for scripture for such. "She is not a preacher, preaching in an atmosphere of worship, she is simply a lecturer providing a lecture on religious matters."

I am not attempting to "pick a fight," but just cause us to THINK. I cannot imagine a female Christian debating a male Christian. Moreover, I cannot conceive of Christians providing a list, offering the opportunity, and providing regulation for a female Christian to debate a male Christian. Have I become so radical that I am imagining problems and scriptural violations where there are none? Am I paranoid because I not only see the female Christian debating the male Christian as opposed to the scriptures, but also having the dialectic consequence of positioning woman in a posture to assume additional roles to which God has only assigned males?

I know I am viewed as "a trouble-maker." However, I assure you that my motives are pure. Let me hear from you, are Tina Collins and I the only two on this planet that have problems with a female debating a male on an Internet list? (Thank you in advance for keeping the discussion clean and for simply seeking to determine scriptural principles and make consistent applications of the same.

Don Martin to the list:

I have presented a couple probing posts about women debating men. I have referred to Darlene Ward both to offer prove of this being done and as an example of what I mean by a "woman formally debating men." Still, there has been misunderstanding as to what I mean by debating. I began by saying what I meant by debating:

"A debate is a structured presentation involving two antithetical views with each disputant attempting to prove 'his' basic premise or proposition AND disprove 'his' opponent's view. No, a debate, normally considered, is not 'simply the presenting of two sides of an issue.'"

From the negative, I do not use the word debate to mean:

1). A woman cannot on an Internet list having men and women make a post.

2). A woman cannot on an Internet list pose a question to a male.

3). I am not even saying that there are no circumstances in which a woman on an Internet list cannot simply say to a male, "Sir, I must respectfully disagree with your teaching." (There could also be additional nuances.)

How about it, is it scriptural for a woman to debate a man on an Internet list? If so, why not in a secular building and if this is permissible, why not in a church building?

After I made my posts regarding a woman debating a men, I noticed that Darlene Ward had another post in which she is using …(name of list) to advertise still another debate with a man she has scheduled. As I have said, I have nothing personally against Darlene. However, I believe that she and brethren who are involved in her debates are in violation of I Timothy 2: 11-15 (let me hear from you regarding this matter):

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence...."

Don Martin to the list:

Frank Thompson wrote:

In fact, we need to make sure that articles by women do not appear in magazines for a mixed audience. Strangely, however, magazines like Gospel Truths allow this.

Don comments:

I think we have had some good responsive comments on a woman, any woman, formally debating men. It is evident from some of these posts that a diversity of beliefs prevail. For instance, a woman may formally debate a man if it is outside the congregation where she is a member; since the scriptures do not contain an example against such, it is allowed; we may only condemn such under the heading of our tradition, etc. What I am seeing based on my exposures, the stage is set for the introduction of new roles for women within churches of Christ. I have told you that a church of Christ within a few miles of where I preach is now working on installing a woman to the eldership. I have been told, "brother Martin, you cannot say anything against this since you are not a member of this local church!"

In the case of a woman debating men, it is evident a good study, recall, and application of I Timothy 2: 11-15 is needed. Paul wrote:

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence...."

Regarding the above quoted post, J. T. Smith was very concerned in how he used a woman in Gospel Truths. He evidently asked a number about what they thought, including me. I told him that I had no serious problem with a woman having a teaching page designed and addressed to the female readers. I did tell J. T. that I had problems with a female writer in such a publication as Gospel Truths addressing the general readership.

I suppose that Frank is not aware of the fact that at the top of this page in which J. T.'s wife regularly writes there are the words horizontally positioned: "The Older Women Behave...That They Admonish The Younger Women." Appearing vertically on the left side of this page each time are the words: "Woman's Page."

I am seeing, however, some editor's using women as contributors. There are no efforts made to make it a "woman's section." Where will all this stop unless it is the actual pulpit. Again I ask, what is the serious difference between a woman debating men on an Internet list and in the church building?

Don Martin to the list:

Thank you for following the theme of "a woman debating men." Darlene Ward has just made a revealing post, a post that shows Darlene's thinking regarding the position of the woman relative to the man. Since I do not believe in debating a woman or placing a woman in a position of violating I Timothy 2: 11, 12, I shall simply comment on some of Darlene's statements without directly challenging her.

Darlene wrote:

Also, let us keep in mind that we are all people of God. When I heard a preacher make the statement, "I AM A MAN OF GOD," it is scary because that person surely must believe he is special to God while others are somewhat less special. It must surely mean God is a respecter of persons. Let me stress.....we are ALL men and women of God.

Don remarks:

Under general circumstances, I probably would not think twice about the above statement. However, these words are manifestly anticipatory (read on).

Darlene continues:

Preachers, many times, believe they are special to God. But what I don't understand is the attitude of some on this list (and other lists) as they spend the week being caustic, sarcastic and arrogant as they flaunt themselves on Bible discussion lists. Then this morning they will walk upon the wooden pulpit, step behind the wooden pulpit stand, in their pious way, and speak for God. They stand there for up to one hour without anyone being able to comment or question something said. No wonder they believe they are "men of God." This idea is never found in scripture.

Don comments:

Still, I am not sure what Darlene is saying or where she is travelling. I do know, though, that faithful preachers are special to God, "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things" (Rom. 10: 15). Two Sunday nights ago, I was preaching and a visitor raised his hand. I simply said that we have no provision for a question/answer at this time, but I will be glad to talk with you later. I have preached where we made arrangements to take questions. The point, though, is that "Let all things be done decently and in order" (I Cor. 14: 40). I also know that the preachers addressed in Romans 10: 15 are male (I Tim. 2: 11, 12). So often, people reject the whole of a matter by mentioning an abuse. It seems Darlene is doing just this, but let us read more and make sure.

Darlene stated:

I wonder what would happen this morning if someone stood up and made a comment or asked a question while the preacher was giving his opinion on what the scriptures say. This is called a sermon, which by the way is not a word found in scripture.

Don responds:

Darlene's statements are replete with prejudice, resentment, and bitterness, it seems to me. Darlene makes a big deal over "sermon."

Darlene begins to build and progress:

That is only one point of my post. The other point is the belief in the minds of men that women are like children...someone for them to control. Never mind God said in the kingdom, "There is neither male nor female." Never mind the scripture says "submit to one another." Never mind that men and women are to humble themselves before the mighty hand of God.

Don remarks:

My prompting post about a woman debating men has resulted in a discussion on another list. A female member of that list just made a post that is very similar to Darlene's. The simple fact of the matter is that God has assigned a role to the male and to the female. They are not the same role. Man is ideally suited to fulfill his God assigned role and woman is designed to execute her God assigned her. Man is placed in the position of being the leader in matters religious and woman is placed in a subservient role (I Tim. 2: 8-15). This role assignment by God has nothing really to do with, "the belief in the minds of men that women are like children." Notwithstanding Paul's teaching, Darlene goes on to say, "We know that pride will keep someone out of heaven. We also know power pollutes. Men who believe they have power over women (or over anyone) are simply polluting themselves."

Darlene's use of Galatians 3: 28:

Most women who are pushing for a new role in the church, a role that places them in situations "over men," end up using or, I should say, misusing Galatians 3: 28, which reads. "...there is neither male nor female." In the context of Darlene's writing, it appears she is saying that there are no role distinctions. Yet, role distinction is clearly taught (I Tim. 2: 11-15). Concerned readers, this mindset is the precise mindset that is the impetus for the women serving as elders and preaching in the pulpit movement.

Darlene reaches her conclusion:

The only way women can usurp authority over men is if he is hog-tied and MADE to listen to her. If a woman is teaching a class and a man wishes to sit in and learn from her, is she teaching "over him?" Of course not! Is she usurping HIS authority? Certainly not! Now if he sits in the class and the door is locked where he can't leave.....then that is another matter.

Don concludes:

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence...."

Is Paul presenting a case of the man being "hog-tied and MADE to listen to her?" Notice that the woman is to "learn in silence with all subjection." Regarding the male, the woman is not the teacher and she is not to usurp authority over the man, "but to be in silence." If I can make a statement without offering a full exegesis of the text of I Timothy 2: 11, 12, I believe there is a general submissiveness taught (cp. I Cor. 11: 3, 4).

I invite you to look at Darlene, Darlene the debater of men. Examine her attitudes and her beliefs about the role of men and women. I believe it is clear that Darlene thinks as do so many modern women, women that would subvert and mock the God ordained roles of men and women. Again, I do not have anything personally against Darlene (she and I have pleasantly corresponded in the past). However, Darlene is out of place in debating men! Darlene is also in error regarding her attitudes of men and women in the Kingdom.

Don Martin to the list:

Key to an understanding of the role of woman in her relationship to man is a study of I Timothy 2: 8-15. The text reads as follows:

8: I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9: In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10: But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11: Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12: But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13: For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14: And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15: Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety (I Tim. 2).

Let us now examine the main words found in the text to determine exactly what is being taught and the setting in which it is being taught.

Verse eight: "Men pray every where." The word translated "men" is the Greek aner. Aner is not used as a generic word for mankind, inclusive of women. W. E. Vine states regarding aner, "Is never used of the female sex" (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words). Is Paul commanding that men only pray? Yes, but we must appreciate the circumstances. The circumstance of the "men only to pray" command involves the public worship where men and women have assembled together to worship God (vs. 8ff.). The men are to lead in the prayers, indicated by "lifting up holy hands" (an apparent custom in which the man leading the public prayer would lift up his hands to heaven as an indication of recognition and dependence on God to whom the prayer was directed).

Verse nine: The woman in public worship does not have a leadership role, her role is that of attempting to not attract attention to herself. Her dress, therefore, is urgently important. Her dress is to be the result of a sense of shame, appropriate for the occasion, sober and well thought out, and lacking pretension that would divert attention from the solemn occasion of worship.

Verse ten: In contrast to the secular and sensual emphasis on simple physical femininity that can be accented by dress, the female is to "professing godliness with good works."

Verse eleven: In this public worship scenario involving both men and women, the woman has a passive role, a position of student as opposed to teacher. The terms "silence" (hesuchia) and "subjection" (huphotage) indicate her posture. It will be appreciated that Paul does not use the Greek sigao (silence, to not utter a sound) as he used in I Corinthians 14: 34 because he is addressing a different nuance. In I Corinthians 14: 34 there was to be the utter lack of sound as opposed to any sound (questions) that was conducive to public confusion or disorder (see context of I Cor. 14: 34). In the setting of I Timothy 2, "silence" (hesuchia) is used to connote the passive as opposed to active and student in contrast to teacher behavior of the female Christian in a circumstance of public worship involving man. As opposed to leader or the public teacher, her position is that of "subjection."

Verse twelve: Verse twelve commences with the idea of contrast ("but to teach," didaskein de). Again, the contrast is with the "silence" and "subjection" of verse eleven. The circumstance of the negation must be continually realized (the circumstance of public worship, involving men and women). In other circumstances, Paul commanded certain women to teach, the older women are to be teachers of the younger women (Tit. 2: 3, 4). In the situation of women and men, Paul said "I do not permit a woman to teach" (ouk ephitrepho yunaiki de didaskein). She is not to assume the function of public instructor or preacher/teacher.

Paul then states, "nor to usurp authority over the man...." The word of negation "nor" (oude) has been variously understood. Oude is a disjunction conjunction, "but not." However, Thayer points out regarding the use of oude in scripture, "...generally, however, its oppositive force being lost, it serves to continue a negation" (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, pg. 461). After all is said, the bottom line is does "nor" (oude) simply explain what "I suffer not a woman to teach" means or does it add to the injunction. Some argue that "nor" means that the woman can assume the posture of public teacher as long as she does it in the right way, not "usurp authority over the man." Others contend that "nor" does not serve appositionally but rather "nor" adds a related but additional negation. In some ways, it is hard to distinguish between these two positions. I say this because Titus 2: 15 indicates in the expression, "with all authority" (meta phases ephitages) that "authority" is residual in scriptural teaching and preaching. When the woman exercises the position of public teacher, she automatically assumes certain authority; hence, the expression, "usurp authority over the man" (authentein andros). "One thing is certain, the expression "But I suffer not a women to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man" precludes the female from being a public teacher in the presence of men.

Again, the opposite helps us to determine what, "But I suffer not a women to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man" means: "...but to be in silence" (einai en hesuchia). The woman cannot "be in silence" and assume the status of public teacher.

Verses thirteen through fifteen: The reason for the prohibition restricting woman from being a public teacher is stated in these verses. The reason is not cultural or dispensational, the reason goes back to Adam and Eve. First, there is the reason involving priority, "Adam was first formed, not Eve" (vs. 13). Second, Eve was deceived, not Adam (vs. 14). Instead of being a leader in the religious setting, the woman has the assignment of domesticity (vs. 15).

While the text of I Timothy 2: 11-15 pertains to the public worship setting, the male in general is over the female (I Cor. 11: 3). Therefore, in conduct and circumstances, there should be behavior that is expressive of this God put in place order. A "meek and quiet spirit" compliments any woman (I Pet. 3: 4). We must also realize that worship to God is not limited to a "church building."

Don Martin to the list:

In another post, I presented what I believe to be a sound exegesis of I Timothy 2: 11-15. I shall be watching for responsive posts containing comments and perhaps disagreements with my exposition. I know this, in order to clear the way for a new role for women, a role that places women in a position of leadership relative to men in religion, men (and women) must explain away the text of I Timothy 2: 11-15.

Back to a woman debating men on an Internet list: Does I Timothy 2: 11-15 have any pertinence to the scenario of a woman going on an Internet list and debating men? While the Internet list circumstance is not in a "church building," it is still in a religious setting and in a general sense constitutes worship (studying and teaching the word of God). Is not a woman who assumes the posture of a religious debater also placing herself in a position of teaching men and "usurping authority over the man"? (I Tim. 2: 12.)

I have refused to debate Darlene. I have not even addressed her in dialogue. In my last post involving Darlene, I reviewed her post. I have called attention to "Darlene, the debater of men." I submit that there is a necessary posture that is assumed in the scenario of debate that places the female debater in conflict with I Timothy 2: 11, 12.

Darlene said: "It looks as if Don is insisting that he and I debate." I might again inject that I am not debating Darlene. The fact that I refer to her attitudes and teaching does not necessarily mean that I am debating her. I have even refused direct dialogue with Darlene.

Consider the style of Darlene and her language:

"Good grief, Don....You are not inspired, Don. You had no biblical right to do what you did. What a terrible example you set for those in the audience and for that visitor. How old are you, Don? Did you feel uncomfortable having someone question what you are saying? Do you think one of the apostles would have done what you did?....And you need to repent, Don, because you have misrepresented as you slander me as one who 'subverts and mock the God ordained roles of men and women.' This is pitiful reasoning, Don...."

Keep in mind that Darlene is saying the above in the climate of what she calls a debate and before many others.

Darlene has defined debate in a very limited fashion. Hear her: "Now lets see. What is debating? It is simply the presenting of two sides of an issue." Even if this were all a debate is, does this not involve a woman in on an Internet list "debating" men in conflict with I Timothy 2: 11, 12? ("Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence....") I have thus defined debate:

"A debate is a structured presentation involving two antithetical views with each disputant attempting to prove 'his' basic premise or proposition AND disprove 'his' opponent's view. No, a debate, normally considered, is not 'simply the presenting of two sides of an issue.'"

The female debating the male not only places the woman in the posture of teacher, but it positions her as certainly "usurping authority over the man."

A woman, any woman, has no place debating men on an Internet list, in a secular building, one on one, or in a church building. There is the violation of basic biblical teaching and principles when this is done. The God assigned role of woman is not that of religious leader, teacher, elder, or debater, but, in contrast, her assignment is "...learn in silence with all subjection...but to be in silence" (I Tim. 2: 11, 12).

I am not a misogynist. I have nothing against women, as I have said, I married one. However, women are assuming positions that are not for them. I receive a number of emails from female visitors regarding my material on women found in Bible Truths. "You are opposed to women," "you are out of touch with the times," "you view women as dumb and lacking ability," I am told. No, such matters are irrelevant. The relevant truth is that God has placed men as the leaders in religious circumstances (there is also a general headship order, cp. I Cor. 11: 3) and woman in a passive position and a place of domesticity (I Tim. 2: 11-15). God fearing women respect this placement; rebellious women vociferously complain and attempt to force their way into places to which they have no right, such as debating men on Internet lists.

Don Martin to the list:

I have mentioned that the text of I Timothy 2: 8-15 is critical regarding the role of women in matters religious, especially as the subject pertains to woman's relationship to man. Please revisit the text:

8: I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9: In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10: But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11: Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12: But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13: For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14: And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15: Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety (I Tim. 2).

I published my exegesis on I Timothy 2: 8-15 to several Internet lists and the response has been good. There have been some good questions raised that I thought I would share with you. Again, this whole study has been prompted by Darlene Ward mentioning on an Internet list that she is debating different men on another list. I have maintained that such conduct on the part of Darlene and those who are allowing her to debate is spiritually unacceptable and in violation of I Timothy 2: 8-15. Let us now focus on these questions and in so doing, we should also achieve a greater understanding of I Timothy 2: 8-15.

Question: Why exactly do you believe that public worship is the setting for the teaching found in I Timothy 2: 11-15?

Answer: First, Paul begins this section by mentioning what men are to do: "Men are to pray every where" (vs. 8, cp. vs. 1, 2). The word translated "men" is the Greek aner. Aner is not used as a generic word for mankind, inclusive of women. W. E. Vine states regarding aner, "Is never used of the female sex" (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words). Why would Paul be excluding women in the matter of prayer unless Paul has in mind the public worship consisting of men and women? The prayers offered by only men are the public prayers in which the men, not women, lead. "...Pray every where" does not preclude this understanding as the reference appears simply to be when Christians, men and women, worship. The "lifting up of holy hands" is believed by many scholars to have been a custom involving the leader of the public prayer lifting up his hands before the assembly. There are other reasons for believing the climate of I Timothy 2: 8-15 to be public worship but verse eight is the most influential.

Question: Could it simply be that while the Greek aner means men only that in this case Paul is using the word aner without its exclusive of women ability?

Answer: I understand the science and reality of semantics, however, after saying "men (aner) are to pray" in verse eight, he immediately presents the contrasting situation of women. Men are to pray and women are to cloth themselves in a certain way (vs. 8, 9). In view of the immediate introduction of women, the standard use of aner is reinforced, men only.

Question: Do you believe the teaching of I Timothy 2: 8-15 is limited to the circumstance of public worship?

Answer: No. The principles I believe are contextually applied to the situation of public worship, but they are general as well. For instance, women are to modestly, soberly, and with a sense of shame cloth themselves in circumstances other than the matter of public worship (vs. 9). Good works are to also be characteristic of the godly woman in her various circumstances (vs. 10). In view of the man being the head of the woman, there should be deportment on the part of the woman at all times that bespeaks of her awareness of general subservience (vs. 11, 12, I Cor. 11:
3).

Question: Why cannot "nor" in verse 12 simply be explaining the kind of prohibited teaching mentioned in the first negation of verse 12?

Answer: As I addressed in my exegesis, some argue that oude (nor) is explaining the kind of teaching the woman is not to do. Hence, they believe the woman is not forbidden in general to teach in a mixed assembly, to assume the position of public instructor in the presence of men. As we have noticed, though, the expressions, "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection" and "but to be in silence" certainly restrict the woman from occupying the role of public teacher in the discussed circumstances (vs. 11, 12).

Question: What do you think of the view that "usurp authority over the man" simply refers to the autocratic manner of the teaching and not to the fact of the teaching?

Answer: Question four is a re-wording of question three. Often when people cannot find a way to achieve their goal in one area, they will keep trying. The expression, "nor to usurp authority over the man" is from oude authentein andros. Authentein is rendered, "to exercise authority" by Marshall in Nestle's Greek-English Interlinear. Andros is the word for man (andros, of (over), Marshall). The idea of "over" or "of" is basically inferred from the posture and position of the words in view of the context. As we have noted, the man who scripturally teaches the word of God does so "with all authority" (meta phases ephitages, Tit. 2: 15). When the woman assumes the position and role of public teacher in the presence of man, she is, then, "exercising authority of/over the man." Paul said in no uncertain terms, "I do not permit a woman to teach" (ouk ephitrepho yunaiki de didaskein).

Question: Does not "let your women keep silent in the churches" clearly prohibit female teachers from addressing a mixed audience?

Answer: Many scholars do believe I Corinthians 14: 34 is a companion verse to I Timothy 2: 11, 12. However, Paul does not use the Greek sigao (silence, to not utter a sound) as he used in I Corinthians 14: 34 because he is addressing a different nuance in I Timothy 2: 11, 12. In I Corinthians 14: 34, there was to be the utter lack of sound (meaning of sigao) as opposed to any sound that was conducive to public confusion or disorder (see context of I Cor. 14: 34).  In the setting of I Timothy 2, "silence" (hesuchia) is used to connote the passive as opposed to active and student in contrast to teacher behavior of the female Christian in a circumstance of public worship involving man. As opposed to leader or the public teacher, her position is that of "subjection." I, therefore, believe two different situations are being discussed in the circumstance of I Corinthians 14: 34 and I Timothy 2: 8-15.

Question: Is it wrong for a woman to address women from the pulpit?

Answer: The simple answer is, "no." The problem being considered in I Timothy 2: 8-12 pivots around the presence of men.

Question: How about a woman serving as a treasurer, fulfilling a non-speaking place around the Lord's table, and being able to confess her sin to the church?

Answer: There is presently much impetus being directed to integrate women into public positions in the work of the church. We once had a member, he is now a full-time preacher, who pushed for women being publicly used. He started by arguing that a woman confessing sin should be allowed to address the audience and make "a speech." "If she may do this, surely she may help with the Lord's Supper, as long as she does not lead a public prayer," reasoned he. Let me be blunt, these efforts to move the woman into positions of leadership are patently in violation of I Timothy 2: 8-15. The teaching, "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection" and "but to be in silence" means that the woman's position IS NOT LEADERSHIP but passive and submissive. Efforts to place the woman in a position other than "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection" and "but to be in silence" must be challenged.

Question: Is it wrong for a woman to ask a question of the male teacher in a class?

Answer: The simple asking of a question by a woman in the audience is not "exercising authority of/over" the male teacher. A while back I was travelling and stopped in to worship on a Sunday evening. My wife and I entered the front doors of the auditorium and there was a class taking place. What made it worse, it was a "ladies class" and the female teacher spoke to us and said, "come in and sit down and take part in the class, you might just learn something." Was she out of place, you better know it (more of the transition of the role of women in churches of Christ taking place). I do believe, I might add, that a woman in the audience can "exercise authority of/over" the male teacher. I preached at a place where there was a female member who dominated the classes (at least for the first three months that I was there). She taught the class from her pew and constantly said things such as, "teacher, I do not like the way you teach" and she delighted in, "you are wrong" offer trivial, inconsequential matters. She did not have a "meek and quiet spirit" (cp. I Pet. 3: 4).

Question: How do you reconcile I Corinthians 11 and I Timothy 2?

Answer: Some view I Corinthians 11: 3-16 and I Timothy 2: 8-15 as forming a contradiction. It must be understood that the women of I Corinthians 11 were special women, doing special things. They were "prophetesses." Verses four and five make it certain that what the prophets were doing, the female counterparts were also doing and they were thus acting under the miraculous influence of the Holy Spirit. Even in this special set of circumstances, these women were to have "'a sign of' authority on her head" as a statement that she understood the prophet was her head (I Cor. 11: 10, ASV, 3, 4). This "authority" was in addition to her natural covering and appears to have involved the veil (vs. 6, ASV). God has exceptionally used a few women, however, this does not negate the norm, "I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man." (see Deborah and Anna, Judg. 4; 5, Lk. 2: 36-38). In view of the absence of spiritual gifts today, the prophetess circumstances is not possible (I Cor. 13: 8-10).

Question: What is your understanding of the work of Phebe?

Answer: We read in Romans 16: 1, "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea." Based on this statement, some believe that Phebe was a preacher who preached for the church at Cenchrea, in the pulpit and addressed mixed audiences. One must have an active imagination to arrive at such an understanding of "servant of the church." We are not told what Phebe specifically did, however, there is no reason to view her as a public teacher exercising authority of and over men.

Question: What do you see as to the future of churches of Christ regarding the re-definition of women in the church?

Answer: I see many changes on the horizon. I predict we shall hear more, "let women help with the Lord's table" sort of thing. The pressures from denominationalism and society are mounting. There was a time and may yet come when I thought there would be more lawsuits against local churches in view of them restricting the public use of women. Female song leaders and women leading in public prayer will probably be happening more within the not too distant future in more churches of Christ.

The foregoing are just a few questions that are being asked regarding the role of women in the church. Preachers need to start preaching on God's placement of women in the church and drawing attention to some of the movements and trends within churches of Christ. We commend women who are godly and fulfilled and men who take the lead. Alas, some churches that have women ruling the church seriously lack male leadership capability. Some churches that have male elders really have female elders in the background telling the men what decisions to make. Paul's following teaching is applicable today and cannot be successfully circumvented: "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" (I Tim. 2: 11, 12).