And Eve Is Relevant . . Why?

We left off yesterday with Paul’s introduction of his theological argument against women teaching in the church. He has stated his rule, and now he launches into a rationale: “[Gar] , first Adam was formed, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman . . .”(1 Tim 2:13).

How this applies depends on the function of the transitional word gar. If gar means “for” or “because,” then Paul is saying “women are not allowed to teach be­cause Eve was created second; and because Eve was deceived, not Adam.”  That is, Eve’s cre­ation after Adam and her sinning before he did are reasons why women may not teach.  We will not dispute the fact that Eve was created after Adam.  As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:8, “man is not from woman, but woman is from man; and indeed the man was not created for the wom­an’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.”  However, this does not imply that the woman is infe­rior to or even subordinate to the man.  Together they reflect the image of God (Genesis 1:27). Together they stand in need of God’s grace.   In his 1 Corinthians 11 passage, Paul goes on to say (lest he be misunderstood) that, in the Lord, men and women are not independent of each other, “for as the woman originates from man, so also the man has his birth through the woman, and all things originate in God” (1 Corinthians 11:12).  Based on the development of Paul’s thought in this passage, it is inadequate to explain 1 Timothy 2:13 simply as a proof text (i.e. a causal association).  He must have intended something else.  We will pick up this point in a mo­ment.

 Let’s ponder for a moment Paul’s observation (1 Timothy 2:14) that Adam was not deceived, but Eve was led astray.  At face value, this would indicate that Eve’s part in the Fall was symptomatic of her moral weakness.  The fact remains, however, that Adam sinned also since “he was with her” (Genesis 3:6b).  Paul tells us this himself in Romans 5:14, “Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s offense . . .”  In 1 Corinthians 15:22 he says, “for as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.”  If Paul attributes the Fall to Adam everywhere else in his letters, what is his point in 1 Timothy in attributing the Fall to Eve?  If we insist upon reading 2:13-14 as proof to support his not allowing women to teach, we must surmise that Paul would forbid men to teach as well.  He clearly is not going to do that (look at his letters). So that requires us to go back a step, and consider the second option for the function of gar, that is, to translate it “furthermore.”

In this case, the verses about Adam and Eve continue the progression started at the begin­ning of the paragraph.  Remember that the controlling purpose of the letter is to encourage Timo­thy to stand firm against false doctrine.  Paul wants to stop the spread of false teaching, some of which is done by women.

“Furthermore, Adam was created, then Eve” is, to my mind, a neutral assertion underscoring woman’s roots in the man.  Whereas in creation, Eve was taken out of man, now in Christ the knowledge of her redemption will be transmitted through men who are opening the doors of sal­vation to her.  Her need for instruction is evident, because ill-informed women are causing havoc in the church.  Paul highlights Eve’s transgression here to give the women in Ephesus an exam­ple of how easy it is for one to be deceived.  Paul does not use a male example, but as a good preacher would, he uses the analogy of Eve, another female with whom they would more readily relate.  We must give Paul credit for making his teaching as clear as possible!  He is not so concerned to prove that ei­ther Adam or Eve brought sin into the world. He knows both were guilty.  But under the present circumstances, it serves his purpose well to use Eve as his example.  The verb tense of exapatetheisa (having been deceived) offers a warning.  One is deceived by another agent.  Beware lest ye fall, or cause others to fall through your false testimony!

Assurance that all hope is not lost for womankind follows.  Paul goes on, “But she shall be saved by the childbearing, if they remain in faith and love and holiness with discretion.”  Some interesting grammatical problems appear in this verse.  But she (singular, we assume a feminine subject, implying “womankind”) shall be saved by tes teknogonias, rendered “childbearing,” “the childbearing,” or “the bearing of the Child” (i.e. the Messiah).  We can do several things with this:  Womankind can be redeemed by Mary’s bearing of the Messiah (an interesting paral­lel:  in Adam all die, in Christ all are made alive; vs. in Eve all die, by Mary’s childbearing all are made alive . . .) or simply, “Womankind shall be saved if they (women in general) settle down and conduct their day-to-day activities (like raising children) faithfully—they don’t have to preach or teach in order to assure their salvation.”  We reject the Mormon interpretation of sal­vation dependent upon marrying and having children, a doctrine which finds its roots in this verse.  “ . . . if they remain in faith, love and holiness with discretion.”  This is a universal exhor­tation.  Paul uses these very words in many general contexts to instruct both men and women.  The goal of every believer should be to remain in faith, love and holiness with discretion.

In conclusion, Paul was not allowing women to teach in Ephesus, because they were exhibit­ing ignorance and doctrinal error.  He says, “Let the women learn . . .” and in the meantime they are to remain quietly in submission to their teachers.  This does not mean that Paul would not allow any women to teach at any time.  By his own practice, to some women (notably Phoebe and Priscilla) he gave positions of authority, but to others he did not.  The deciding factor was not their sex, but rather their spiritual gifts, their doctrinal understanding, and their education in the Word of God.

And so it is with us in the Presbyterian church. We ordain men and women who are prepared, proven to be orthodox, and gifted and called to serve. We are not permitted to give the teaching office to people who are ill-prepared, who are not committed to orthodoxy, or who do not have the gifts for ministry. We seem able to judge preparedness and giftedness, but we’ve lost our bearings on evaluating the doctrinal orthodoxy of our candidates, since “the essential tenets of the Reformed faith” are now amorphous and up to the definition of individual presbyteries.