Women preaching and teaching, there has been no other topic that has caused more division in the church. Why and where does it come from? Is it as Biblical as some want to think? I want to be honest with you all, this is a topic that I have struggled with. I guess it comes from my brethren background!
Why do I feel uncomfortable dealing with such a topic? I don't know, it doesn't at all question or put in jeopardy my salvation (or that of others). Yet when the topic is raised good friends become enemies! So why am I dealing with it? Because I feel there is need for me to. As a pastor I'm tired of people only seeing one side and not taking the Bible as a whole.
Ok where to start... 1 Timothy 2:12:
"I do not let women teach men or have authority over..." (NLT)
This is the first one. It's hard to deal with because the words are black and white. I had a discussion with a friend of mine who says this is the crux of it. And at face value I agree. But can we take all that the Bible says at face value? I don't believe so. When Paul, a few verses later, says in v.15:
"But women will be saved through child-bearing, and by continuing to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty". (NLT)
Can we truly believe that women can only be saved through child-bearing!? What do we do with those words that are so "black and white"? However we want to take it, one thing is for sure, most, if not all Biblical commentators (including myself) firmly believe that this verse is NOT saying women may be saved only if they experience child birth. Men and Women are saved by grace alone, not by any work. So what does v.15 say? We need to understand how the grammar and words are functioning, how it fits with the theology and theme of the entire letter. In fact, we need to compare and understand it theological compared to the bible as a whole. It's not "black and white"! So in light of this, what makes v.12 so different to v.15.
Also, taking it a few verses back, in v.9, Paul says women should not wear jewelry. Do we take that seriously today? Well, (the response I've heard too many times), that is cultural and the command for women not teaching is not. How do you know? Does that mean we don't have to dress modestly anymore (v.9 & 15). Can we truly dissect a paragraph and say that one verse is cultural while the next is not. What exegetical method is that? Either you take it all as cultural or not.
Also it is important to note v.15 is a personal comment from Paul, he specifically says that HE does not permit women teaching, it is not God that does not permit!
Ok next one, Titus 2:4
"These older women must train the younger women to love their husbands and their children..." (NLT)
This verse is used to back 1 Tim 2:12. But is it imperative? I mean, does it solely mean that women should train younger women and ONLY younger women? Paul does not say ONLY younger women!There is nothing said by Paul about older men training younger men, so what does that mean? Only Timothy is given the charge.
God has used women throughout the Bible as leaders, when challenged with those women, men like to respond that there were no men worthy enough to stand up as leaders, and that this was a great travesty. But where in the Bible is that said?? (For example: nothing is said about Deborah!!! In fact she works together with other men leading Israel!). Some say that Jesus only chose men as apostles! Ok, fair enough. But why did He do that? Simple, culture dictated it. Also it would have been inappropriate for Him, a single man, to be fraternizing so closely with women. He was already scrutinized for having women friends.
The more we look into it the more it does not warrant the amount of hard lined, conservative attention it gets. It baffles me why some people would consider it heresy if a women were to preach in church based on verses that really fall apart with just some simple Biblical exegesis. So why the hype? You tell me!