Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Timothy 2:12
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
12. The direction is made more emphatic by the position of the verb ‘to teach’ (according to the better supported reading) at the beginning of the clause: But teaching I permit not to a woman.
to usurp authority ] The verb does not go so far as this in later Greek, only to the extent of the R.V. to have dominion over. From authentikos ‘from first authority’ we get our ‘authentic’ in its proper meaning (Trench’s Select Glossary, p. 15; Cic. ad Att. x. 9) of ‘coming from the pen of the writer to whom a work is attributed.’ ‘The Turkish “effendi” (lord) is from the same word.’ Wordsworth.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
But I suffer not a woman to teach – see the notes on 1Co 14:34.
Nor to usurp authority over the man – notes, 1Co 11:3.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 12. Nor to usurp authority] A woman should attempt nothing, either in public or private, that belongs to man as his peculiar function. This was prohibited by the Roman laws: In multis juris nostri articulis deterior est conditio foeminarum quam masculorun,; l. 9, PAP. LIB. 31, QUAEST. Foeminoe ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt; et ideo nec judicis esse possunt, nec magistratum gerere, nec postulare, nec pro alio invenire, nec procuratores existere; l. 2, de Reg. Juris. ULP. LIB. i. AD SAB.-Vid. POTH. Pand. Justin., vol. i. p. 13.
“In our laws the condition of women is, in many respects, worse than that of men. Women are precluded from all public offices; therefore they cannot be judges, nor execute the function of magistrates; they cannot sue, plead, nor act in any case, as proxies. They were under many other disabilities, which may be seen in different places of the Pandects.
But to be in silence.] It was lawful for men in public assemblies to ask questions, or even interrupt the speaker when there was any matter in his speech which they did not understand; but this liberty was not granted to women. See the note on 1Co 14:34; 1Co 14:35.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
But I suffer not a woman to teach; not to teach in the public congregation, except she be a prophetess, endued with extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, as Mary, and Anna, and Huldah, and Deborah, and some women in the primitive church, concerning whom we read, 1Co 11:5, that they prophesied.
Nor to usurp authority over the man: ordinary teaching of the woman was a usurpation of authority over the man, who is the head, which the apostle also forbade in 1Co 11:3, and here repeateth. It is probable that the speaking of some women in the church who had extraordinary revelations, imboldened others also to aim at the like, which the apostle here directs his speech against. Nevertheless women may, and it is their duty to instruct their children and families at home, especially in the absence of their husbands.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
12. usurp authority“tolord it over the man” [ALFORD],literally, “to be an autocrat.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
But I suffer not a woman to teach, c,] They may teach in private, in their own houses and families they are to be teachers of good things, Tit 2:3. They are to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; nor is the law or doctrine of a mother to be forsaken, any more than the instruction of a father; see Pr 1:8. Timothy, no doubt, received much advantage, from the private teachings and instructions of his mother Eunice, and grandmother Lois; but then women are not to teach in the church; for that is an act of power and authority, and supposes the persons that teach to be of a superior degree, and in a superior office, and to have superior abilities to those who are taught by them:
nor to usurp authority over the man; as not in civil and political things, or in things relating to civil government; and in things domestic, or the affairs of the family; so not in things ecclesiastical, or what relate to the church and government of it; for one part of rule is to feed the church with knowledge and understanding; and for a woman to take upon her to do this, is to usurp an authority over the man: this therefore she ought not to do,
but to be in silence; to sit and hear quietly and silently, and learn, and not teach, as in 1Ti 2:11.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
I permit not ( ). Old word , to permit, to allow (1Co 16:7). Paul speaks authoritatively.
To teach (). In the public meeting clearly. And yet all modern Christians allow women to teach Sunday school classes. One feels somehow that something is not expressed here to make it all clear.
Nor to have dominion over a man ( ). The word is now cleared up by Kretschmer (Glotta, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary. See also Nageli, Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus and Deissmann, Light, etc., pp. 88f. was the literary word for playing the master while was the vernacular term. It comes from –, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive , master, verb , to domineer, adjective , authoritative, “authentic”). Modern Greek has = Effendi = “Mr.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Suffer [] . Lit. turn over to; thence, permit. See 1Co 14:34.
Usurp authority [] . N. T. o. o LXX, o Class. It occurs in late ecclesiastical writers. The kindred noun aujqenthv one who does a thing with his own hand, Wisd. 12 6, and also in Herodotus, Euripides, and Thucyelides. Auqentia right, 3 Macc. 2 29. The verb means to do a thing one’s self; hence, to exercise authority. The A. V. usurp authority is a mistake. Rend. to have or exercise dominion over.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “But I suffer not a woman” (de gunaike ouk epitrepo) “Indeed I do not permit a woman,” Paul used the men of the churches primarily as teachers in public. This was his will and judgment, though no divine law was given to govern such, 1Ti 2:8. Her teaching is directed, Tit 2:3-5.
2) “To teach, nor to usurp authority over the man” (didaskein oude authentein andros) “To teach, nor indeed to exercise authority of (over) a man.” This refers to public teaching or teaching in any capacity that would usurp authority of (over) or generally given over to man, in the sense that he is God’s first rank or order of humanity.
3) “But to be in silence.” (all’ einai en esuchia) “But to be in quietness. Adam’s better judgment was influenced by his wife, to his own fall, Gen 3:17. Hence the wife, in matters of teaching judgment, is instructed to be in quietness, not boisterous, contentious for a point.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach. Not that he takes from them the charge of instructing their family, but only excludes them from the office of teaching, which God has committed to men only. On this subject we have explained our views in the exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. (39) If any one bring forward, by way of objection, Deborah (Jud 4:4) and others of the same class, of whom we read that they were at one time appointed by the command of God to govern the people, the answer is easy. Extraordinary acts done by God do not overturn the ordinary rules of government, by which he intended that we should be bound. Accordingly, if women at one time held the office of prophets and teachers, and that too when they were supernaturally called to it by the Spirit of God, He who is above all law might do this; but, being a peculiar case, (40) this is not opposed to the constant and ordinary system of government.
He adds — what is closely allied to the office of teaching — and not to assume authority over the man; for the very reason, why they are forbidden to teach, is, that it is not permitted by their condition. They are subject, and to teach implies the rank of power or authority. Yet it may be thought that there is no great force in this argument; because even prophets and teachers are subject to kings and to other magistrates. I reply, there is no absurdity in the same person commanding and likewise obeying, when viewed in different relations. But this does not apply to the case of woman, who by nature (that is, by the ordinary law of God) is formed to obey; for γυναικοκρατία (the government of women) has always been regarded by all wise persons as a monstrous thing; and, therefore, so to speak, it will be a mingling of heaven and earth, if women usurp the right to teach. Accordingly, he bids them be “quiet,” that is, keep within their own rank. (41)
(39) See Commentary on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians, vol. 1, p. 467.
(40) “ Pource que e’est un cas particulier et extraordinaire.” — “Because it is a peculiar and extraordinary case.”
(41) “ Il commande done qu’elles demeurent en silence; c’est a dire, qu’elles se contiennent dedans leurs limites, et la condition de leur sexe.” — “He therefore commands them to remain in silence; that is, to keep within their limits and the condition of their sex.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(12) But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.The whole purpose of these weighty admonitions of the great founder of the Gentile Churches relegates Christian women to their own legitimate sphere of action and influencethe quiet of their own homes. St. Paul caught well the spirit of his Master here. He raised once and for ever the women of Christ out of the position of degradation and intellectual inferiority they had occupied in the various pagan systems of the East and West, and taught with all the weight of an Apostleof an accredited teacher of divine wisdomthat woman was a fellow-heir with man of the glories of the kingdom,where sex would exist no longer; but while teaching this great and elevating truth, St. Paul shows what is the only proper sphere in which woman should work, and in which she should exercise her influence and power; while mans work and duties lay in the busy world without, womans work was exclusively confined to the quiet stillness of home. The Apostle then proceeds to ground these injunctions respecting the duties in public and private of the two sexes upon the original order of creation, and upon the circumstances which attended the fall.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
12. Teach The apostle does not prohibit to pray or prophesy, but to teach, as that would be to usurp authority. These rules are founded in nature as in grace, and apply to all but the gifted, or those “moved by the Holy Ghost” to “prophesy” or “pray.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.’
It is quite clear that this does not mean that a woman cannot teach any others the Scriptures, for Paul will specifically cater for older women to teach younger women (Tit 2:4). But it is noticeable that the emphasis there is on the teaching of good Scriptural behaviour, rather than of Christian doctrine. It would appear also that Priscilla (with Paul’s approval) helped her husband Aquila in his private teaching of others, even with so important a man as Apollos, and was possibly even the major player (Act 18:6), while Paul took it for granted that women would ‘prophesy’ (1Co 11:5), although we are not told in what kind of meeting. The daughters of Philip the evangelist were prophetesses (Act 21:9). The thought here must therefore be of authoritative public teaching, especially when authority was being exercised over men.
As the Christian church grew it rightly exercised careful authority over who could teach. Only those duly authorised would normally be allowed to do so, although that could include a recognised travelling prophet who had a letter of introduction. Thus it is probable that Paul’s guidance here has in mind teaching in the main assembly of the church. Moreover we must recognise that many men in those days, as is true in parts of the world today, would have been offended if a woman had preached to them, especially those men who like Paul had been brought up as Pharisees (Pharisees prayed daily, ‘I thank you that you have not made me a woman’). Paul was certainly free of that bias, otherwise he could not have written Gal 3:28. But many of his compatriots were not. However, while that may have been a factor, we must not lay too much emphasis on it, for it is not the reason that Paul gives.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Part To Be Played By God’s Special Reserve. Christian Women Are Not To Strive To Be Teachers Or Leaders, But To Ensure That They Are Good Mothers And Evangelists Of Their Children, Bringing Them Up In A Godly Environment As Their Part In The Outworking Of Salvation ( 1Ti 2:12-15 ).
As we enter what is today dangerous territory (we might almost say No Man’s Land) we can see why Paul has been emphasising godliness, peace and tranquillity, and avoidance of disputation. It is as though he had seen ahead to what was to happen in the future. All we can hope to do is present as honestly as we can what it seems to us that Paul is teaching, and trust that God will guide each heart into his truth, whatever that might be, remembering that it is so easy to dismiss or misinterpret the word of God because it does not please us.
Certainly it is right that we recognise that Paul is speaking to a church lacking the New Testament, and the great advances in education in the modern day. On the other hand we must also recognise that the church would have had a solid basis of Apostolic tradition, delivered to it both orally and in writing, and that though times may change, the psychological make up of the sexes does not necessarily do so, and we will do well to consider what the Scriptures say about that.
The thought of women at prayer leads Paul on to consider the Scriptural view of the prime function of women. He would have experienced the excitability of Ephesian women when he had seen their behaviour in the Ephesian Riot (Act 19:29-41), and he had no doubt often come across situations where powerful women used their influence to the detriment of God’s people (e.g. Act 13:50). Furthermore he was an observant man and well versed in the Scriptures, and he believed that ultimately both men and women were equal in importance and standing before God (Gal 3:28). He therefore wished to ensure that women played an active role in the church while at the same time behaving with modesty and decency, and accomplishing the purpose that God had for them. He did not want bodies of wealthy women (Act 13:50) gaining overriding influence in the church, or vociferous women swaying the church’s decisions or marring their assemblies. Nor did he want the intuitiveness of a woman’s brain, as revealed at its worst in the Garden of Eden, to override the more rationally minded slant of men’s brains when it came to doctrine, for in the Garden it was the woman who had proved how easily she could be deceived and go astray in her views about God. He considered, as he thought about these matters before God, that it would be dangerous therefore for women to have authority over the teaching of the church. They would rather do better by concentrating their efforts on what the Scriptures had appointed for them, being a good mother to their children, thereby maintaining the very core of the church.
Analysis.
a
b But I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness (1Ti 2:12).
c For Adam was first formed, then Eve (1Ti 2:13).
b And Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled has fallen into transgression (1Ti 2:14).
a But she will be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety (1Ti 2:15).
Note that in ‘a’ the woman’s manner of life is laid out, and the same applies in the parallel. In ‘b’ she is not to teach or have dominion over a man, and in the parallel the reason for this is explained. Centrally in ‘c’ Adam’s priority is stressed.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Ti 2:12. I suffer not a woman to teach, The apostle must be understood as limiting this restraint to public assemblies. See 1Co 14:35.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Ver. 12. Nor to usurp authority ] As they will easily do if suffered to preach, , to have what she will. Preachers are rulers, guides, captains,Heb 13:7Heb 13:7 ; Heb 13:17 . If the hen be suffered to crow once, &c. A prudent wife commands her husband by obeying him, as Sarah, Livia.
But to be in silence ] Video, taceo, I see and say nothing, was Queen Elizabeth’s motto. Where should the tongue be but in the head?
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Ti 2:12 . : This refers of course only to public teaching, or to a wife’s teaching her husband. In Tit 2:3 St. Paul indicates the natural sphere for woman’s teaching. In 1 Cor. women are forbidden in the Church. The choice of terms is appropriate in each case.
: dominari in virum, to have dominion over (R.V.). “The adj. is very well established in the vernacular. See Ngeli, p. 49 the Atticist warns his pupil to use because was vulgar ( ) is properly one who acts on his own authority, hence in this context an autocrat” (Moulton and Milligan, Expositor , vii., vi. 374).
: dependent on some such verb as implied, as opposed to .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
nor. Greek. oude,
usurp authority. Greek. authenteo. Only here.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1Ti 2:12. ) I do not commit to the charge of the woman [suffer]; i.e. I cannot commit or entrust it. Litotes (see Append.).- ) to use authority in respect to [over] the man, viz. by teaching, by speaking, for example, in prayer.-, in respect to [over] the man) This implies not merely a husband, but the whole race of men.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Ti 2:12
But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.-The point guarded against here is womans assuming authority over man. It is not wrong for her to teach the word of God, but wrong for her to teach it in a way that assumes authority or superiority over man. (Tit 2:5.) This is the only reason given in the Scriptures why it is wrong.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Reciprocal: Gen 3:16 – rule Est 1:22 – that every man 1Co 11:3 – and the head of the 1Co 14:34 – women Eph 5:22 – submit Col 3:18 – submit Tit 2:5 – obedient 1Pe 3:1 – ye
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ti 2:12. This verse very properly follows immediately after the preceding one, since the outstanding thought in that place is the subject of authority as it pertains to the relation between men and women. I suffer not a woman to teach. I am quoting this much of the verse only for the present, because it is the part that is usually relied upon by the extremists on the “woman question,” to prove their notion on the subject. These same disciples will condemn the denominational world for taking a part of the scripture out of its connection in order to make a point. But for the sake of the widespread argument, let us consider this so-called prooftext as it is quoted, which makes no exception or provision for one. It is an established principle that an explanation of a passage that makes it contradict another passagee, is bound to be wrong since the Bible does not contradict itself. Well, the extremists’ use of this clause makes it contradict Col 3:16 where we know the women are included, and the verse says for them to teach one another,, and the same Greek word is used in both passages. It is true that “everybody” joins in the singing, even those wno are not members. That is no valid argument since two wrongs do not make one right. Furthermore, if the underscored clause is to be taken generally, then the women members of the congregation should be forbidden to participate in the singing, also the people of the world should be informed not to sing, in the same manner that we notify the audiences that only faithful members have any right to the Lord’s supper. The foregoing remarks would be appropriate even though the italicized clause had been written with regard to the public assembly only, which would be impossible to prove. So then, since “what proves too much proves nothing,” it follows that the words marked do not prove that women are entirely prohibited from teaching. Now let us give this subject fair treatment and see what else the apostle has to say about it. The next word is nor and it is properly translated. It is from the Greek word OUDE which Thayer defines, “and not,” and he explains by saying “continuing a negation” [something denied or forbidden]. Webster defines the word nor as follows: “Likewise not: and not.: or not,” so that what is said of the words preceding nor is on the same proviso as what follows the next negation, namely, usurp authority over the man. If a woman presumes to teach over the man and hence act in an authoritative way, she violates this verse, whether it be in the public assembly or in the social circle. The case in Acts 18:2426 is in point here. A preacher of the Gospel was in error on an item and they (both the man and the woman) took him unto themselves and expounded or taught him in the way of the Lord more perfectly. Thus a woman helped to teach a preacher in the doctrine of the Gospel. But nothing indicates that she assumed an authoritative attitude, in desregard for the authority of her husband or ,the presence of the other man. Had she done so she would have violated the teaching of this passage. Silence is the same in the original as in verse 11, explained at that verse which the reader should see.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Ti 2:12. To teach. Obviously, as limited by the context, the reference is to public teaching. The question meets us whether the precept is of permanent obligation. And as far as the foregoing arguments go, it can hardly be said that they give a permanent ground. The appeal is to a standard of what is becoming, and this may vary with the habits of society, and may therefore, if recognised and regulated, involve no usurpation of authority. It was perhaps with a consciousness that something more was needed that St. Paul fell back upon the argument that follows.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
1Ti 2:12 “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
Paul says he does not permit a woman to teach, or usurp authority over the man. The term translated man is – “ondrous” – mature as opposed to a boy.
A quote may help: “The Gospel elevated the woman and gave her a position of spiritual equality with the man before God, but it does not remove the original position of subordination that God ordained for the woman.” (First Timothy; D. Edmond Hiebert; Moody Press; Chicago; 1957, p 60)
I’m not sure this quote is all together true. I think she had equality before. There is nothing to suggest woman is less than man spiritually. They are the same, however there is an order of creation and an element of subordination in life.
The thought of equality before God is very Biblical as well as the thought that during her earthly time she is also to her husband and while in church to the male leadership.
Don’t tar me and feather me, but allow me to literally view the scriptures in the plain easy way of understanding them. If Paul tells me that a woman is not to teach men then I believe that she is not to teach men. If Paul says that women are not to usurp authority over men then I believe that women should not usurp authority over men.
“but to be in silence”
This quote came from a Sunday school lesson book some years ago.
“In public worship the ladies must assume the attitude of a learner; they must sit quietly and listen to instruction `with all subjection’ (verse 1Ti 2:11). Modern movements to achieve an imagined emancipation and independence of women are both unbiblical and unnatural. Such attempts are a revolt against a woman’s divinely constituted being and role.”
“It is absolutely a disgrace for any man to sit in public at the feet of his wife or any other woman while she presumes to expound Scripture. By subjecting himself to her authority, he virtually betrays his trust as `head of the woman..’ The teaching of Christian doctrine in the public assembly is reserved exclusively for the men (verse 1Ti 2:12). Shortages in the pulpits of the land can never justify the unscriptural practice of ordaining women or permitting them to preach.” (Keeping the Faith; Baptist Pub.; Denver; 1971; Adult teacher SS Quarterly, p16)
I might add that this is quite humorous when you relate it to the fact that the same company published adult Sunday school literature written by a woman!
A woman writing material is not only teaching the man teacher, but she is also influencing the men that he might teach.
A number of years ago I ordered some adult Sunday school materials from a publisher. The material came and it was written by a woman. I returned them with a nice letter stating that I did not care to use materials written by a woman.
I received back a very curt letter from the editor telling me what for. His thinking was that there are only a few good Sunday school material writers and that he would use any that he wanted – male or female.
I sent a letter to him and explained this text to him and told him that he was free to use women writers and that I was free not to use women writers based on the Word.
I received another letter from him that was very nice. He admitted that I was right and that he would try to refrain from using women writers again.
In the Women’s Liberation movement most reject the Bible. Some say the Bible teaches Women’s Lib. God is She. I say anyone that says that is blaspheming God’s name. You ask why. God is the Father of Jesus, Mary was Jesus mother. If God be a She then God is a homosexual and a freak of nature that can produce a child unnaturally without a father. I reject, as the height of false teaching and ignorance, this line of thinking.
WHY SHOULD A WOMAN NOT TEACH? Not because I said it. Not because Paul said it. Because it reverses the roles set by the creation and the fall — Woman was to be a helpmeet not a boss and she was the one easily deceived.
Some theologians that desire to allow for the women’s lib movement have come up with a view that allows the person to give lip service to belief in what Paul states about the woman teaching men, yet allows women to teach men.
They hold that the woman is not to teach men unless the man gives the woman permission to teach men. That is not in the verse, nor can you draw it as a principle from this verse!
Others state that the pastor can give authority to the woman to teach. She through the pastor usurps authority of men sitting in the congregation – in my opinion.
Jimmy Carter when asked about this text stated that this is one area in which he disagreed with Paul. ON NATIONAL TELEVISION HE OUTWARDLY DISAGREED WITH GOD’S WORD.
In many churches across the country women are teaching men in things concerning the Word. This is not to be.
I must admit that some of the women teachers I have heard in adult classes are as good if not better than some of the men, however that is not the criterion. Scripture is our criterion and the Lord says that women should not teach men. I tolerate it once in awhile because we are invited into the situation.
We filled the pulpit in a little church in Wyoming and the adult teacher was a woman. The woman admitted she didn’t like it but none of the men would do it so she decided to go ahead – my question is, if she hadn’t taken the position would a man have assumed it even though he felt inadequate? Again I have to admit that she was an excellent teacher and understood the Word better than many men I have sat under.
The good women teachers ought to be teaching the other women of the church as we will see if we get to Titus in our study. Tit 2:3-5 if you want to look at it on your own.
The pastor and leaders must screen the materials used in their church and be able to assure themselves as well as their congregation that the materials are of sufficient quality. They are also responsible for assuring proper teachers both in gender and qualifications.
SO! Just what place does a woman have in a class or service? I believe that a good application of this verse would run along the following lines:
a. A woman can enter into discussions as long as she does not become argumentative with the men in the class. If she indeed, feels that she is correct and the men are wrong, she should not push for vindication, but go home and seek information from her husband and if she is correct, a visit with the teacher and the couple for some good discussion IN LOVE to see if things can be cleared up would be in order. I think if the leader is spiritual at all he will correct his thinking and correct things in class. I know of no one in the ministry that is really interested in teaching false doctrine.
b. Women should check things that they believe with their husbands if they find that their belief is counter to the usual teaching of the church.
c. They should be very careful what they listen to on radio and television. They should also compare what they hear with Scripture and then discuss it with their husband. This would also include the myriads of books on the market.
This is not to say that women should not teach! They should be teaching. They should teach other women as well as children.
It is my personal preference to see women teach no higher than 6th graders. The older young people need the man to teach if at all possible. A lady teaching the girls could be very good as well. At the same time, I am not saying that only women can teach children either. I, again personally would rather see the children’s classes manned by men as well.
Now let’s move on to the why of this limitation.
II. WOMAN’S PROBLEM
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, {8} nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
(8) The first argument, why it is not lawful for women to teach in the congregation, because by this means they would be placed above men, for they would be their masters: and this is against God’s ordinance.