Does I Tim 2:12 Mean A Woman Cannot Teach A Man In Any Sense?

Some say I Tim 2:12 (“And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence” – NKJV) proves a woman cannot “teach” a man under any circumstance (but they don’t really believe that). Their argument is the phrase “over a man” only modifies grammatically the phrase “have authority” and not the word “teach.” Usually, this argument is made to forbid a woman asking a question in mixed Bible classes at the church building (leading to the no Bible class at the church building position for some), but if their argument were sound it would also forbid my wife teaching me in casual conversation while we are driving down the road in our minivan.

It is true the phrase “over the man” does not modify “teach” grammatically, but it does modify it contextually. Compare to Acts 4:18 (“And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus”). There everybody can see the phrase “in the name of Jesus” does not modify “speak” grammatically, but it does contextually. I Tim 2:12 is just like Acts 4:18 in that respect.

Consider also Isa 59:3a (“For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity”). Think about how the word “defiled” must be added (in our heads) to the second part of Isa 59:3a. Everybody agrees the sense is that our fingers should not be “defiled” with iniquity. But the justification for why “defiled” goes with both phrases is contextual not grammatical.

So the correct sense of I Tim 2:12 is that God does “not permit a woman to teach over a man nor to have authority over a man.” Therefore it is okay for her to ask a question in a Bible class that has men in it, since she is not teaching “over a man” by doing so. Now if she were leading that same class, that would be a different matter altogether.

hear Bible Crossfire Sundays at 8:00 pm central on SiriusXM national radio Family Talk 131 & 62 local stations across America or at www.BibleDebates.info