First of all we as the board of directors want to say thank you to everyone that has contributed to making the Recharge Excellence Conference a huge success over the last six years. As most of you know we had plans to host the sixth annual Recharge Excellence Conference this October in Anaheim, California. Due to some unfortunate events we are unable to host the conference this October.
This means there WILL BE NO RECHARGE EXCELLENCE CONFERENCE THIS OCTOBER 11-14, But…. RECHARGE WILL BE BACK IN THE SPRING!
The great news is that the Recharge Excellence Conference teams is more committed than ever to the vision and core values of what Recharge is all about – Refueling Christians and local churches to do more for Him every single day. This is needed now more than ever.
The team is working earnestly to secure new dates for this spring with the hotel in Anaheim. Unfortunately, our website has been shutdown, but as soon as we are able we will get it back up and running so that we can keep you updated on our website.
The sixth annual Recharge Excellence Conference this spring is going to be THE BEST RECHARGE YET! We look forward to growing with you all at Recharge Excellence Conference in the spring of 2017!
Mark Rutland, Relaunch: How to Stage an Organizational Comeback (Colorado Springs, CO: Cook, 2013), hardback, 206 pages.
A walk in the clearance section (because I hate paying full price) of my local Lifeway Christian bookstore led me to the present volume on leadership. The price, packaging, and presentation of this David C. Cook book persuaded me to purchase it. I am very thankful I did and now I feel I’m playing catch-up on leadership insights from Dr. Mark Rutland.
Dr. Mark Rutland has 13 books under his belt that can be obtained in many formats, and he also maintains an active teaching, humanitarian and blogging presence through his National Institute of Christian Leadership and Global Servants organization. In Relaunch, Rutland provides insights into his ministerial roles as Associate Pastor (Mt. Paran Church of God) and Senior Pastor (Calvary Assembly of God), and his presidential posts (Southeastern University, Oral Roberts University). These experiences serve as a springboard to show his credibility to speak to leaders about the core issues of turnaround leadership in a variety of settings.
ReLaunch: A Survey
ReLaunch is about turnaround leadership. It is comprised of 14 chapters, arranged in three parts followed by an epilogue all wrapped within 206 pages. In Part 1 (chapters 1-4), Rutland casts a common-sense vision for understanding the intangible nature of leadership. Leadership is, in a nutshell, the art and skill to understand an organization’s goal and dream and to connect all its actions into realizing the dream, so that when the leader’s work is “done” the organization is in a better position for the next person to lead. Leadership then is to make the dream a reality by being the everyday “driving force” behind this achievement.[1] Here, Rutland spends some time surveying key experiences within three organizations’ turnarounds (Calvary Assembly of God, Southeastern University, and Oral Roberts University).
In Part 2 (5-11), Rutland articulates and sets forth seven steps that are critical to turnaround leadership within a failing organization. Turnaround leadership, according to Rutland, cannot be accomplished without facing institutional reality and communicating the organization’s vision relentlessly from top to bottom (Steps 1-2). Turnaround leadership must focus on alignment for the organization within the correct niche market, by its message, and through the most effective medium (Step 3). This requires creating an executable strategy by finding which system within your organization that can make the most impact (Step 4). Rutland demonstrates that in a turnaround you must either restore or create the organization’s dream and this is done by shifting its internal culture so that its members can support the organization’s promise to the world (Step 5); moreover, this fuels the need to keep an eye on quality, which is to say it that the organization clearly delivers what it publically promises (Step 6). Finally, Rutland underscores the psychological importance of measuring and celebrating success within a turnaround because these actions promote meaning and value, and generate higher levels of positive energy within the members of the organization as they drive towards turnaround (Step 7).
In Part 3 (12-14), Rutland closes ReLaunch with a section on how to build a turnaround team. I believe these chapters alone would be worth the purchase of the book. The premise of building a turnaround team is to have the proper alignment within the organization. In such a case, adding new members (“hiring”) who fit the goals, vision, and culture of the turnaround is critical because, otherwise, you are starting “the old cycle over again.”[2] This boils down to finding the right person, at the right time, for the right reason (“job”). Rutland spends time developing a system he uses to put the right people in the right roles (his helpful Finder-Binder-Minder-Grinder system). Unfortunately, the changes which take place during a turnaround are hard for the established members (employees, board members, volunteers, etc.) of the organization. Rutland discusses, then, the last resort a turnaround leader must face when preexisting employees can not adjust – he talks about the troubling art of firing. Rutland shows compassionate insight. It is important to clearly promote your new vision and continue to hold everyone accountable to this turnaround goal to recapture the old dream (or create a new one). He counsels, “Some can make the change. Some can be retrained. But not everyone can make the turn.”[3] Finally, Rutland addresses the importance of forming a board and sketches the difference between an emotional (undependable) board, a legalistic (robotic; holds to if-then thinking) board, and a holistic (balances the tensions found in emotional/legalistic thinking) board. Rutland praises those boards which respect their limits, support their leader’s role in the organization, and “empowers” their leader to do their best.
ReLaunch ends with the Epilogue where Rutland speaks to the inner life of the turnaround leader. It is honest, frank, and interwoven with experience of a leader who has “nosedived” and had his own inner turnaround within his life and family. Rutland warns that a leader must keep pushing forward and never fall into the trap that defeat or victory are final experiences. Also, leadership is costly because it is all-consuming: “There is always a cost.”[4] I found a sense of great depth when Rutland discusses “the most important truth” he has learned: to be a healthy leader, “stay free in God’s hand.” In other words, be willing to take the roles you are “called” into, execute its duties faithfully, but understand that you do not need to have it; moreover, learn that you can be “good” (acceptance) if you have to leave that role. Your identity should not be tied to your role, but instead, tied to your God.
Strengths and Weaknesses
ReLaunch is about turnaround leadership and Rutland succeeds in providing the key principles and steps which can deliver what he himself has accomplished and promises – turnaround. Rutland clearly articulates, with a narrator’s voice, addressing the philosophical terrain of turnaround realities. There is no fluff in this book, it is direct honesty, based on real-life examples and personal illustrations. If anything, ReLaunch provides excellent insights on how to point out the turnaround benchmarks when discussing the future of your congregation, school, and organization. This is not a book on theory alone, but practice, and framed by someone who has lived on the front lines. The seven steps are “shovel ready” and await a bold leader to employ them when faced with the need to stage an organizational comeback. ReLaunch is a real book for real leaders.
I found the leadership insight focused as Rutland epitomizes his definition of leadership as tethering all of an organization’s parts to its dream and goals. This is particularly displayed in this compassion and awareness when discussing hiring and firing team members during the turnaround. Also, Rutland’s experience with working with a board demonstrates the common problems felt not only in the business world but also in the church. It illuminates that even within churches elderships (“boards”) may not always embrace a healthy culture (emotional, legalistic). Too many times, we tie such roles with a right to be right, but Rutland shows that boards and elderships may be vulnerable to being imbalanced. Rutland is spot on.
If I had to make a critique regarding ReLaunch it would be in terms of its top-down leadership approach (as assumed in the book) and its application to the leadership model of the church as revealed in the New Testament. Dr. Rutland assumes the equivalent role of pastor and preacher which is common in many circles of Christendom.[5] The New Testament does not make these equivalent roles, instead, a pastor (= elder, overseer) is a distinct responsibility that applies to a very uniquely qualified man, as he serves within a group of other men of equal caliber. This does not apply to the role of preacher or evangelist.[6] This is not to say that mentors cannot shepherd their fellow believers, but in terms of a distinct church role, the terms are not equivalent. Still, this does not undermine the richness and essence of the book, but it does begin the leadership discussion from a different point than the New Testament. Rutland would probably disagree with that assessment.
Of course, Rutland addresses a readership from a broad spectrum. ReLaunch is not specifically a church leadership book, it is a book that may apply to a ministerial context like mine among churches of Christ. Nevertheless, the preacher often finds the need to be the Chief Culture Officer (CCO) of the congregation; consequently, a preacher can within their role help lead an organizational comeback with the cooperative efforts of their overseeing eldership. But, as Ron Clark observes, “few books are written specifically for ministers about our style of ministry” where the pastor and the preacher are distinct ministries in the body of Christ. Clark observes that most church leadership material is based upon church models which are dissimilar to churches of Christ, or based upon business models which have been given a Christian spin.[7] Again, this is not to say the principles are not applicable, nor does this speak to the quality of ReLaunch. The quality of the content of the book exceeded my expectations.
Recommendations
Aside from the exception and critique provided above, Dr. Mark Rutland provides a leadership model that is exceptional. An administrator, board member, president, father and mother, elder, preacher, deacon, and if there is anyone in between can yield a great deal of practical wisdom for a turnaround in their public and professional lives but also in their private lives. The principles in ReLaunch and their capacity to effect meaningful change have broad applications.
I would recommend this book to every leader in any context. I would also recommend ReLaunch to every incoming preacher entering an established church, and to every incoming administrator entering a new organization. I would also recommend this book to every elder and leader who believe their church, ministry, or organization is in decline. The truth is, every organization needs to ReLaunch at times. We must at times create a new dream, but most of the time we must recapture the dream and relaunch it to do so. Jesus even told the church in Ephesus to relaunch, “But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first” (Rev 2:4-5 ESV).[8]
Endnotes
Rutland says, “Some dream well. Some define well. Others may tether well or excel at organizing. The art, though -the great craft of leading others- is the connection between the dream, its proclamation, and making the dream the driving force of everything that is done” (23).
Rutland warns, “You can’t let the people who are devoted to the old ways do the hiring, or else you’ll just start the old cycle over again. You’re cultivating the soil in which your new vision and culture can grow” (161).
Rutland counsels, “when you are honest about your expectations, and your team members are honest about their ability and their commitment, parting ways doesn’t have to be a crisis or a drama. In the end, you have to articulate exactly what you expect from your employees. You have to hold people accountable. If you’re going to turn a ship, there are going to be people who did things a certain way to get them into this mess. Some can make the change. Some can be retrained. But not everybody can make the turn. You need to communicate this to your staff long before it becomes an issue” (174).
Rutland frankly says, “There is always a cost. If we don’t consider it before we begin to lead, then the cost may catch us by surprise midcourse. Emotional and mental exhaustion can lead to a dangerous level of toxicity” (198).
By Christendom I mean to describe all religious groups (denominations, non-denominations, etc.) which historically follow Jesus of Nazareth as God’s Messiah (Christ), and accept the Bible as the revealed word of God. I make a distinction between Christendom and Christianity revealed in the New Testament and supported by the Hebrew Scriptures.
Define value. Dictionary definitions notwithstanding, John Keats (1795-1821) begins his poem, “Endymion,” with the words, “a thing of beauty is a joy forever.” Keats speaks to the power that people —their character and actions— have in retrospect. “That, whether there be shine or gloom o’ercast, They always must be with us, or we die.” The Scriptures show, however, what is “a joy forever”; in a word: godliness. Paul writes, “for bodily exercise is profitable for a little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life which now is, and of that which is to come” (1 Tim 4:8). [All Scripture references are from the American Standard Version unless otherwise noted.]
Nothing is more valuable and potent in this world than “godly seed” (i.e., offspring; Mal 2:15). Humanity, after all, was made to bear the image of God on the earth (Gen 1:26-31): “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” While there is tremendous learning to be gained from understanding the binary nature of humanity (“male and female”), we wish to pursue a study on the value of godly women to the cause of God as it is manifested in the NT church in the past and today.
Godliness is a Matter of Character
Godliness is reflected in the content of a person’s character and conduct. The church is an amazing place full of potential when it reflects the character of its godly women. There is no greater influence in the Lord’s church than godly women. For example, David once said,
know that Jehovah hath set apart for himself [she] that is godly: Jehovah will hear when I call unto [her]. Stand in awe, and sin not: Commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still.[1](Psalm 4:3-4, ASV edited)
The Hebrew word (hāsîd) for “godly” (holy) one implies a “kindness” that extends grace toward others because they have at one point received grace.[2] The word is used with great regularity in the Psalms. Godliness is seen, then, as a matter of character, of piety.
Godliness is fundamental to Christian conduct (2 Pet 1:6-7, 10-11). Paul writes that Christian women are to profess godliness through good works:
that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefastness and sobriety; not with braided hair, and gold or pearls or costly raiment; but (which becometh women professing godliness) through good works. (1 Timothy 2:9-10)
The Greek word (theosébeia) for “godliness” speaks to a reverence for God manifested in a set of beliefs and practices.[2] Christian women are to ground their value in their character and reverence for God (1 Tim 4:7-8; 6:11; 2 Tim 3:12; Tit 1:1, 2:12; eusébeia).[3]
Godly women of such character are of inestimable worth to the church. They leave an indelible mark upon everyone they touch. When they show divine kindness to their neighbor when they extend grace to others because they have experienced it as well, and when godly women focus on the content of their character and faithfulness to God, then the world will understand the value of godly women to the cause of Christ. Any home, company, and the church know the powerful influence of such godly women for they cast a beautiful shadow of faith and devotion, service and evangelism, determination and selflessness. This value is seen at the end of Proverbs 31 (10-31), “a woman that feareth Jehovah, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands; And let her works praise her in the gates” (30-31).
Examples of Godly Women in New Testament
Let us consider a few examples of the value women have to the church. Women disciples have always been a part of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 27:55; Mark 15:41; Luke 10:38-42; John 4:1-26).
Financiers
Luke’s Gospel Account provides a note on some of the financial supporters and companions of Jesus as he and the twelve went throughout cities and villages “preaching and bringing the good tidings of the kingdom of God” (Luke 8:1-3).
Soon afterward he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with him, and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s household manager, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means. (Luke 8:1–3)
Among these many women were named three in particular: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Susanna. They served Jesus and the twelve from their own possessions and property (“their substance”). After being healed from infirmities and evil spirits, they served as continuous financial supporters of Jesus presumably to bring the same “good tidings” into the lives of others.
Disciples
The Gospel accounts reveal that the women disciples of Jesus were the first to witness and share the resurrection event of Jesus with the disciples. Matthew recounts the encounter of Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary who came to Jesus sepulcher and were greeted by the angel who had rolled back the stone of the tomb (28:1-10). Mark adds that the “other” Mary is the mother of James and that a third woman was them – Salome (16:1-8). Luke adds that there was a second angelic man, and several other women including Joanna that were greeted with, “Why seek ye the living among the dead?” (24:1-12). John’s Gospel shows Mary Magdalene confused over the empty tomb, comforted by Jesus himself, and told to say that Jesus would ascend to the Father (20:1-18). At a time when the prevailing cultural theory was that a woman’s testimony was inferior to a man’s, the earliest witnesses to the empty tomb of Jesus are the women disciples of Jesus.
Message Sharing
Luke continues to demonstrate the value and influence of women in the early church. The Acts of the Apostles demonstrates at every turn the value of godly women to the church. Women (including Mary, Jesus’ mother) were among the disciples in the upper room as they waited for the coming of the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus (1:14), and Peter declares the prophetic words of Joel (2:28ff) that “your daughters shall prophesy… and on my handmaidens… will I pour forth of my Spirit” (2:17-18).
And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. (Acts 2:17–18)
Paul himself would abide with Philip the evangelist who “had four virgin daughters, who prophesied” (21:8-9; 1 Cor 11:5).
Doing Good
Luke, by the Spirit, give ample attention to a disciple named Tabitha who “was full of good works and alms deeds” who had fallen ill and died (9:36-37). Peter would be summoned by the church to be with them during this time. Her good works and influence were demonstrated by those who grieved at her death because “all the widows stood by him weeping, and showing the coats and garments” she made “while she was with them” (9:39). Caring for others —particularly widows— has always been an important demonstration of pure religion before God (Jas 1:27). Paul would instruct on the importance of the church and women of faith to care of widows (1 Tim 5:1-17; Acts 6:1-7).
All Encompassing
As the Hebrew writer says (11:32), “for the time will fail me” to continue tell of Christian women who were patrons, fellow workers for the truth, founding members of congregations and “house church” hostesses (Acts 16:11-15). They corrected false teachers (Acts 18:24-28). They raise up godly men to be evangelists (2 Tim 1:3-8, 3:12-17). They loved their husbands and children and demonstrated administrative skill in their homes (1 Tim 5:14; 1 Pet 3:1-6). Finally, Romans 16:1-16 demonstrates that many sisters served in the Lord as servants of God, evangelistic collaborators, teachers and financiers. Christian women ministered the gospel to the first-century world without hindrance.
Godly Women in the Church Today
The Lord-God envisioned an invaluable and elevated place for women in the world. These divine truths hold true today despite the ongoing debate over social gender expectation of men and women. Godly women have tremendous value to the church today, because their roles are still as invaluable as ever. Godly women continue to manage their homes, whether they are a full time stay-at-home wife/mother, work from home, or go to the office. They embrace their domestic role in the home as wife and mother (1 Tim 2:15).
Single women, however, bring a singleness of zeal to the church. Paul says they are “careful for the things of the Lord” (1 Cor 7:34). The breadth of their valuable influence is tremendous. They lead ladies’ Bible classes and workshops, are congregational Bible class teachers, write books and blogs, and contribute to academia. They mentor other disciples.
Our sisters minister to the widows and widowers in senior/assisted living homes, and they comfort the sick in hospitals —some even being/training to be hospital chaplains. Some with a medical background participate in medical-evangelistic campaigns. Others enter the world of missions, focusing their energies on evangelistic pursuits. Many have been brought to Christ due to the teaching efforts of godly women who teach overseas through Bible teaching correspondence courses.
Concluding Thoughts
May the church always embrace the ministries women have in the kingdom of God. This being said I am struck with the climate which often arises in the necessary discussion concerning the ministry of women in the church. I often feel the discussion is filled with much angst and the second guessing of motives when it comes to the reconsideration of my beloved’s sisters’ role in the world. Unfortunately, I think some roadblocks also lie in gender expectations which are culturally driven (“perceived” roles) rather than biblically driven (“biblical” roles). Nevertheless, this brief essay is about extolling the influence of godly women to the church and I believe it has succeeded to reach our goal.
Endnotes
I have replaced the masculine for the feminine in brackets [] simply to express the point of this essay, which is to emphasize the godliness of women.
William Wilson, Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies (repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, n.d.), 196; R. Laird Harris, “hsd,” Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, eds. R. Laird Harris, et al. (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1980), TWOT 1:305-07.
“theosébeia,” BDAG 452.
“eusébeia,” BDAG 412.
This is a reformatted and slightly expanded version of the article which was originally published in The Glendale Gleaner (Newbern, TN: Glendale church of Christ).
Reprinted from the December 2015 issue of Gospel AdvocateMagazine.
When I was a younger preacher looking for opportunities to preach and teach, I helped a congregation which was, to my surprise, exclusively comprised of widows. The “Widows church of Christ” (as I shall call them) taught me a great deal about fidelity to God’s Word in the face of a temptation to do otherwise.
It had never crossed my mind that I would stumble upon an all woman congregation. My assumption that there would always be mix-gender congregations was completely shattered. I’m glad.
My first reaction, I must admit, was arrogant. “Poor brethren, you have no leaders.” I had forgotten that still they had the Lord, the Apostolic Word. They had different talents and skills to be used on behalf of the Lord (1 Cor 12; Rom 12). They still gathered in His name, communed at the table of the Lord, gave of their financial means, offered the fruit of their lips. They were still the blood-bought body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18; Acts 20:28). They still had the responsibility to bring the gospel to the world (Mark 16:15-16; Matt 28:18-20).
I Asked a Question
I asked a sister why they invited male preachers to teach and preach when they could minister the word to themselves. After all, Scripture shows that Christian women prophesied and prayed in New Testament times (1 Cor 11:5; Acts 22:8-9), taught the Word of God accurately (Acts 18:26), and brought people to salvation (2 Tim 1:5; 3:14-15). Christian women also served one another in many diverse ways (1 Tim 5:2; Tit 2:3-5; Acts 9:36-43).
Too, Christian women were patrons, fellow workers for the truth, and “house church” hostesses (Rom 16:1-16), demonstrating that there is not a ministry our sisters cannot participate in (Acts 8). There are many sisters in the Lord mentioned throughout the New Testament as servants of God, evangelistic collaborators, and financiers. To say it in another way, Christian women can minister the gospel to the world without hindrance.
She responded, “Because the men are to lead prayers and preach God’s Word in the assembly.” She further explained, “We do have our own Bible study together as sisters during the week, but on Sundays we plan for visitors. We respect God’s plan for the worship assembly.”
This was a reference to 1 Tim 2:8-15, and the Apostle Paul’s instructions for prayers and teaching in the public assembly. In fact, the phrase, “in every place” (en panti topō 2:8) is a New Testament shorthand for “in every place of assembly.” In the assembly, Paul emphasizes “the preservation of male and female distinctions” by providing a “distinctive sphere” for Christian men and women to operate within.
In this setting, Christian “males” (Grk. andras) are to lead prayers on behalf of the body of Christ (2:8), provided they have a lifestyle consistent with godliness. Christian women are to “likewise” demonstrate godliness when assembled for prayer (2:9-10). Paul, then, adds the command that in the assembly Christian women “must learn in silence in full submission” (2:11). This does not suggest that she should check her brain in at the pew, nor is this a term that requires absolute silence. It simply explains her participation in the assembly as peaceful (2:2).
Paul goes on to explain, however, that a sister’s participation in the assembly is limited (2:12). He affirms, “I do not permit a woman” (1) “to teach” nor (2) “to have authority over a man.” Instead, she is “to be in silence” as an active learner (2:11). This instruction is explained (2:13 “for”) to be connected to the order of creation and the order of the fall along with its consequences (Gen 2-3), and a reminder of her demanding ministry towards her own godliness, her family and household (12-15).
Expanding the Role of Women
Although there is considerable literature centered on expanding the role of Christians sisters in the assembly beyond the above biblical dimensions, it was refreshing to see a group of sisters in Christ concerned with God’s guidelines for the worship assembly – even though they could have worshipped God among themselves.
It was a few years earlier that I had received a letter from a congregation where their elders unanimously offered “a position statement on the expanded role of women” in the congregation where they had oversight. They acknowledged that the “congregation’s thinking on this subject has been evolving for the past several years.” The letter outlines several roles where their sisters had evolved including teaching and co-teaching co-ed adult Bible classes, and Scripture reading in Sunday morning worship.
They further expressed their “intention to, in the near future, begin using women to serve the communion emblems, preside at the communion table and lead public prayers during the regular worship services.” They had not, at that moment, any intention to have “women as elders” and “women as pulpit ministers.”
One of the arguments used to sidestep the words of the Apostle Paul is that the text reads, “I do not permit”; hence, this verse does not represent “God’s law.” Far from it. The argument goes, that since he is “addressing a specific time and place with his statement” then Paul has no concern for providing “a law for all time.”
The question then becomes if the injunction by the Apostle is only valid when addressing the situation Paul is speaking to, and has no permanent place as God’s law for the church, then what about the other logical appendages to his argument? Is quietness a situational matter? Are the issues of holiness, modesty, self-control, learning in quietness merely situational and hence not of any permanent value because Paul writes, “I desire” (2:8) and “I do not permit” (2:12)? Or is it only the prohibitions which are situational (“I do not permit”)? If so, the positive statements in this text demand our sister’s presence in the assembly to be embraced with godliness, modesty and learning in quietness and submission. Or are these situational as well and therefore not God’s law?
The fact of the matter is that Paul ties this entire argument for the when the church assembles “in every place” to the events of creation, the order in which the first humans were made, and the admission of Eve being deceived. The weakness is not in Paul’s argumentation, nor in his use of “I.” The weakness lies with a hermeneutic which circumvents the natural reading of the passage.
Concluding Thoughts
My brief stint with the good sister at The Widows church of Christ was a powerful reminder that we can be faithful to God’s inspired texts regarding our gender roles in the assembly. My good sister showed me that faithfulness in the face of a difficult and complicated ministry was possible. Furthermore, they did not sell their building and go elsewhere; instead, they remained in the town, “because,” as she concluded, “the Lord’s body needs to be here.” God bless our sisters who are convicted to maintain their godly roles in the assembly and participate in so many amazing and unsung ministries.
Jovan Payes preaches for the Highland Church of Christ in Bakersfield, Calif.
“Leaders Stand Up for the Weak (Mark 10:14)” was a part ofThe Master’s Plan for Leadershipseries for the 80th annual Freed-Hardeman University lectures. The 2016 theme was In My Place: The Servant Savior in Mark(Get book).
The Lecture Audio
Lecture Summary
In Mark 10:14, Jesus corrects his disciples for rebuking those that brought children to Jesus. In this kingdom saying, Jesus explains that he and the kingdom are at the disposal of those most vulnerable and often forgotten elements of our society. He sets the stage for a reversal of their rejection by receiving them into his arms (10:16). The passage is a powerful corrective andguidelinefor Christian servant-leaders, focusing on proper discipleship means to be at the disposal of those coming to Jesus, for to such belong the kingdom of God.
The Lecture Presentation Slides
Notes
The chapter for this lecture and the lecture follow different pathways but come to the same conclusion. Please read the essay “Leaders Stand Up for the Weak (Mark 10:14).”
The statement on aphesis/aphiemi in connection with Barabbas is a generalization of one of its meanings but is not technically used (apolūo is) in the passages discussing his release (Mark 15:6-15). Thayer has “release, as from bondage, imprisonment, etc.: Lk 4:18 (19)” (“aphesis,” Greek-English Lexicon, 88). The ESV renders aphesis as “liberty” twice in Luke 4:18 and refers to those liberated (released) from their bondage. Aphesis is quite significantly the term used to describe “forgiveness” in its redemptive sense predominately in the New Testament. The term used in the Barabbas texts is apolūo which more often than not is used in the sense of “release” from incarceration though it can have the sense of forgiveness. I apologize for the inaccurate portrayal on that point.
[Chapter submission for the 80th Annual Freed-Hardeman University Lectureship (2016), Henderson, Tennessee. This was a part of The Master’s Plan for Leadership series. In My Place: The Servant Savior in Mark (Link to book). Listen to the audio lecture as delivered here.]
There are numerous moments in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus is involved in ministry towards children undergoing a variety of problems (5:23, 41; 7:24-30; 9:14-29). But it is in Mark 10:13-16 where one of the most memorable interactions with children take place. Jesus here declares, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God.” [All Scripture references are from the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted.] Left alone, ripped from its context, these words stand as a tender and compassionate invitation to children to experience salvation in the kingdom of God.[1] Is this what the passage addresses? Or, is this passage another corrective to the well-intended but misguided actions of the disciples—the future leaders of the kingdom of God? The answer rests upon the latter.
There is no stated rationale for the disciples’ action of hindering and rebuking those who brought children to Jesus (yet many theories abound). When Jesus addressed his disciples for rebuking and hindering those who brought children to the home where he was (Mark 10:10), he set forth a principle which serves as a guide for servant-leadership in the kingdom of God. In Summary, the episode centers upon Jesus’ rebuke and the two kingdom sayings followed by his tender reception of the children; yet, in 10:14 he teaches that his disciples must not hinder those who are coming to him. Jesus, then, discloses that the rationale for reversing their actions is grounded in the fact that the kingdom is at the disposal of those that come to him (“for to such belongs”). The kingdom of God is, then, at the disposal of those that are willing to come into the presence of Jesus. Disciples must, therefore, realize that there can be no hindrance to that process. The narrative of Mark 10:13-16 sadly demonstrates that well-intended leaders and disciples can become roadblocks to those seeking Jesus. Instead of creating artificial barriers between those who seek Jesus and the Lord, disciples need to provide and create unimpeded access to Jesus and the kingdom of God.
There must be vigilance against good intended actions which may actually hinder those seeking the Jesus and the kingdom of God. To do so, there will be a consideration of Mark 10:14 to explore its exegetical content. Then, a consideration will be given to its implications for Christian service in the kingdom of God.
Exegetical Considerations
First, the broad context. There is general agreement that Mark 10:13-16 is found in the latter part of a broad context (8:26-10:52) concerned with discipleship in the kingdom of God (Stanton 50). Mark 8:34 anticipates the theological frame for discipleship, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” The movements in this section convey a series of tensions between the disciples who seem to never learn, and Jesus who is constant need to correct them. In the process, the “disciples —and the reader—are being taught the full implications of what it means to be a follower Jesus” (Stanton 50). Discipleship, and especially Christian leadership, comes then with the commitment to humility and self-denial, rejection and suffering. This observation is strengthened by the three announcements Jesus makes regarding his betrayal, death and resurrection (8:31; 9:30-31; 10:32-34). His death is a commitment to serve others so that they may benefit from his intercession (10:45; Isa. 53:12). The disciples, then, are often corrected for their misguided dispositions which hinder their service in the kingdom.
Second, the immediate context. Two themes within Mark find strong connecting points with Mark 10:13-16: kingdom of God and reversals in the kingdom. Mark is concerned with connecting the ministry of Jesus to the kingdom of God (basileia tou theou). The phrase is used fifteen times in this connection.[2] After the prologue (1:1-13), Mark begins with the transition to Jesus’ ministry where he announces that the kingdom of God “is at hand” (1:15). In general, kingdom in the teaching of Jesus is not a reference to a political system (its natural meaning), but instead, kingdom of God (Heaven) is “what the world would be if God were directly and immediately in charge” (Crossan 55). The ministry of Jesus demonstrates in profound ways the practical, transformative nature of the kingdom of God (Rochester 313-15). This plays an important role in understanding the Lord’s use of this phrase (10:14-15).
The kingdom of God is not only “at hand” (1:15), but it is “coming” soon (9:1), and is something one may “enter” (10:23-24), and be received (10:15). This demonstration of God’s sovereign presence brings about a series of reversals in Mark. Consider, for example, the disenfranchised leper who is returned to life within Israel (1:40-45), the dependent paralytic is made independent (2:1-12), the endowed apostles are powerless exorcists due to a lack of piety (9:14-29), the greatest among Jesus’ disciples are to be servants of all (9:33-37), the maxim of it being “better” to be crippled, blind, or missing a limb upon arrival into the kingdom, than to be completely healthy but lost (9:42-50), and the blind Bartimaeus can see the true identity of Jesus as the son of David (10:46-52). These reversals showcase the power of God’s kingdom.
Finally, the threefold literary flow of the episode where Jesus blesses the children (Mark 10:13-16). The first (10:13-14a) and the last (10:16) movements comprise the narrative framework which Mark was inspired to write. The second movement sets forth the Lord’s corrective teaching in two “kingdom of God” sayings (10:14b-15). The passage is lightning fast. The flashpoints are driven by Jesus’ anger (Spitaler 430-34), an emotion which runs deeper than indignation (ayanáktesen; Spicq 1:6-7). There is tension, correction, and resolution. The disciples hinder and rebuke. Jesus is furious, then rebukes and teaches them. Jesus undoes the actions of his disciples by embracing the children in his arms. If the disciples cannot receive children like Jesus wants them to, then they will be hard pressed to receive the kingdom or enter it (10:15). The rationale appears not to be about the quality of the children which one must take on, but upon one’s capacity to receive the kingdom “as though the kingdom were a child” (Eubanks 403).[3]
Leadership Considerations
Christian leaders must always consider their responsibility to represent Jesus, his interests, and his ethics. This requires at times a challenge to conventional ways of thinking. The early church struggled with realizing the global nature of the gospel until Peter broke through the conventional thinking about Jewish-Gentile relations with divine revelation (Acts 10:1-11:18; 15:6-11). It would be a gross neglect to ignore that Mark 10:14 points to a social component in Jesus’ challenge regarding children. The challenge of Mark 10:14 will give Christian leaders the proper vision to lead God’s people in healthy ways to receive all those who would come to Jesus and the kingdom of God.
It must be pointed out, that children in the ancient Mediterranean world were esteemed quite lowly in many places. Instead of romanticized for their naivety, in most circles of the ancient world children were treated as “nobodies” until their father accepted them into the family (Crossan 62-64). As an example, an extant letter from a worker named Hilarion writes to his pregnant wife on June 17 in 1 B.C., “Above all, if you bear a child and it is male, let it be; if it is female, cast it out [to die]” (P.Oxy 4.744).[4] There was a tendency in Roman and Greek culture to practice the exposure of children if they did not provide advancement for the family (Bell 241).
There is no place for a bureaucratic barrier to those seeking Jesus and the kingdom of God.
Moreover, the word Mark uses for “children” (paidion) can extend to children from birth onwards (cf. Luke’s use of brephos), but it was also used as a term for “slave” (Moulton and Milligan 474). For example, “see that the slaves [ta paidia] give attention to the sowing of our private land.” A note requests that a “little slave” (to mikron paidion) named Artemidorus be placed under pledge. The word choice in Mark 10:13-16 is no accident. Jesus had previous affirmed, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant [diakonos] of all” (9:35). To illustrate this point of being “a waiting man” Liddell 189), Jesus embraces a child (paidion, 9:36-37). Likewise, in Mark 10:14, Jesus means to call attention to the most vulnerable, easily rejected and dismissed, an element of society who are often taken for granted—children/servant. Yet, they have a place in the presence of Jesus and the kingdom of God. The reversing power of the kingdom of God is again manifested in how Jesus receives the children.
Christian leaders must learn from the intention of those who brought the children to Jesus, not the disciples. First, there were some who brought children so that Jesus would touch them. Christian leaders must realize that Jesus is accessible to all those that seek an audience with him. Jesus clearly affirms that “the kingdom of God is for the benefit of such ones” (Mark 10:14b; author’s translation). There is no place for a bureaucratic barrier to those seeking Jesus and the kingdom of God. Good intentions which create bad barriers to blessings are not kingdom. Second, after Jesus rebuked and corrected the disciples’ behavior, he took them into the fold of his arms. Christian leaders must accept that servant-leadership in the kingdom is a hands- on flesh and blood ministry. Mark demonstrates that Jesus touched people in his ministry regardless of their condition, gender, or background. If hurting and vulnerable people cannot come to God’s people so that they may bring them to Jesus, the problem most likely does not reside with the seeker.
Third, it is within the arms of Jesus that he blesses the children. Jesus demonstrates that servant-leaders provide unfettered access to the transformative experience in the kingdom of God. The flow of Mark 10:16 demonstrates that Jesus was busy blessing the children. Those seeking Jesus should receive the benefits of finding Jesus no matter who they are, where they have been, or what they have done. Finally, Jesus lays his hands on them. Only Mark records this symbolic demonstration of his teaching. Christian leaders have an opportunity to show those coming to Jesus that, in a world gone wrong, Jesus can make things right again in his kingdom.
Conclusion
There is an irony to the story for had it not been for the misguided actions of the disciples such a lesson could have been lost. Mark 10:14 raises considerable questions at the practical level for how the church creates unfettered access to those who are seeking Jesus. How does the church receive those seeking the kingdom of God? Only the church can answer that question. Regardless, Jesus’ double command still stands: “allow the children to come to me” and “stop hindering them” (author’s translation).
On a personal note, I was sitting on my couch watching television when my youngest child Noah sat on my lap and cradled himself into the fold of my arm. Immediately, to use a Markan phrase, I asked myself, “am I receiving the kingdom of God as I have embraced my son?” Am I at the disposal of my children’s need for care, and if so, then I might just know how to be at the disposal of others seeking Jesus and the kingdom of God.
Endnotes
Mark 10:14 is a launching point for many to promote infant baptism. Richard Lenksi argues for the baptism of infants. He imports Luke’s use of brephe, emphasizes the “bringing” of the little ones, Jesus’ “double command,” and the rationale “for to such belongs the kingdom of God” (425-28). Contextually, the problem is ultimately about the disciples’ danger of missing the kingdom due to their attitude. Others have argued there is an embedded baptismal tradition found in the use of koluein. However, Jack P. Lewis has ably demonstrated that such argumentations “readily lapse into fallacy” (129-34).
Larry Eubanks observes, “Jesus does not call on the disciples to become children or to take on the qualities of children; he simply says that they must be willing to welcome children” in their circle (403; Spitaler 425). The view taken here is that paidion in 10:15 as an accusative of apposition with ten basileian makes the best sense of the grammar and expectations of Jesus.
There is a considerable body of research and literature available to discuss 1 Tim 2:11-15 which is one of the key New Testament passages discussing gender roles in worship and ministry of the church. This paper can only hope to provide introductory insight to the issues and difficulties of bringing the words of Paul from Greek into English so that the church can apply these apostolic words in the twenty-first century. In fact, Ann L. Bowman, a complementarian, summarizes the difficulties every exegete must face when sifting through the various grains of this passage.[1] In spite of these difficulties, a satisfactory translation of 1 Tim 2:11-15 can be rendered into English, the epistolary pericope can be analyzed syntactically, and the results from this analysis can be helpful in providing guideposts for application in the worship and ministry of the Lord’s body.
Textual Observations
The textual basis for this translation of 1 Tim 2:11-15 is the fifth revised edition of The Greek New Testament (UBS5), supplemented by the 28th revised edition Novum Testamentum Graece (NA28).[2] There are only two textual matters of interest, the first being a textual variant in 2:14 and other focuses upon whether “the faithful saying” (3:1a) concludes the paragraph at 2:15. A third issue is the way certain words can or should be translated, especially the hapax legomenon authentéō. In the first case, the NA28 critical apparatus shows a variant in 2:14. Instead of the eksapatētheîsa (“having been thoroughly deceived”) found in the main text, late manuscript evidence has apatētheîsa (“having been deceived”). Clearly, the manuscript evidence for eksapatētheîsa is earlier (4th to 6th centuries) and stronger (Aleph*, A, D*), than the late (7th-9th centuries) and weaker evidence for apatētheîsa (Aleph2, D1). The late reading most likely is a result of late editorial harmonization of the apatáō verbs in 2:14.
Second, the paragraph structure in UBS5 and NA28 are in agreement the “faithful saying” of 3:1a conclude the paragraph. introduce the “saying” regarding guardians (3:1b). A. T. Robertson, for example, affirms this “phrase points to the preceding words (not like 1:15) and should close the preceding paragraph.”[3] However, the “faithful saying” can be viewed as introducing the protasis, “if someone aspires…,” in the present simple conditional clause of 3:1b.[4] Third, certain constructions and verbals were significantly difficult to translate with precision. The prepositional phrase en hēsuchía in 2:11, 12 may be translated as the act of “silence,” or “quietness, gentleness” as a quality of behavior. The perfective compound aorist passive participle eksapatētheîsa “when she was fully deceived in transgression”[5] in balance with the force of historic use of the perfect active indicative gégonen is unsatisfactorily rendered into English as “was.”[6] Two more substantial problems for translation and interpretation are the verbs authentéō (2:12) and sōzō (2:15a).
A Translation of 1 Timothy 2:11-15
The tentative translation which follows is presented based on the analysis and considerations and interpretive decisions as explained later in this paper.
11 Let a woman learn in silence in full submission; 12 and I do not permit a woman to teach nor to have authority over a man, but to be in quietness. 13 For Adam was formed first, afterwards Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but as for the woman, she was when she was fully deceived in transgression; 15 but she shall be delivered by bearing children, if they continue in faith and love and consecration with sound judgment. (Author's Translation)
One of the concerns this translation intends to address is to express, as clear as possible, that the domestic realm is where submissive women find non-soteriological “deliverance.”
Context and Exegetical Analysis
It is important to observe that 1 Tim 2:11-15 is a part of larger context specifically dealing with the connection of Christian women and the assembly of the church.[7] This topic begins in 2:9, although an argument can be made that the theme begins in 2:8 since it establishes the location where Paul’s instructions are to take place with the phrase en pantì tópō (“in every place”). This locative expression appears to be a shorthand for “in every place of assembly.”[8] It is in this context that the third movement of desired conduct “in every assembly” of the church is argued (2:8, 9-10, 11-15). First, godly Christian men are to lead prayer in the place of assembly (2:8). Second, Christian women are to profess godliness through good works (2:9-10). Thirdly, as an extension of 2:9-10, Christian women are instructed to exhibit submissiveness in the assembly by being learners, not instructors (2:11-15).
The overall structure of 1 Tim 2:11-15 may be subdivided into two groups marked by Paul’s imperatival command, manthanétō (11-12), followed by the explanatory gàr (13-15) which directs his reader(s) to the rationale for this command. Each group is bound structurally with the postpositive dè, marking their internal connection and transitions. This then provides a structural framework toward from: 11 dè 12, gàr 13 kaì 14 dè, dè 15. This does not remove the complexity of the passage as a whole, but the grouping does allow the exegete to focus on the syntax of these two movements.
In the first group, for example, the subject of the present active imperative manthanétō could have been supplied from 2:9-10 (gunaîkas, gunaiksin), but the word order of 2:11 begins with an anarthrous nominative gunē.[9] Its repetition along with the verb can be viewed as an important “topic marker or shifter” (295);[10] hence, the command “let a woman learn” shifts toward a new topic from 2:9-10.[11] Paul places “a requirement” upon the “woman” in the assembly[12] which he expects to be followed in “an ongoing process.”[13] The manner of learning in the assembly is defined by the two dative prepositional phrases (en hēsuchía and en pásē hupotagē). The meaning for hēsuchía pivots between “silence” and “quietness, rest,”[14] but uses of the prepositional phrase en hēsuchía in non-biblical Greek (Philo and Ignatius)[15] meaning “in silence” provides some insight here and in verse 12.[16] The manner (action or circumstance) under consideration, then, is probably “in silence.” Likewise, the silence is en pásē hupotagē (instrumental of manner), “in full submission” anticipates further nuance in verse 12.
1 Tim 2:12 nuances the prohibition with a list of three complementary infinitives[17]and the gnomic present active indicative[18] verb epitrépō. The postpositive dè marks this connection and transition. Furthermore, if S. E. Porter is right, placing the infinitival didáskein first in its clause marks it as the “most important element” in its clause.[19] The prohibition’s main concern then is didáskein gunaikì (“to teach by a woman”) and its counterpart authenteîn andrós (“to have authority over a man”). Paul specifically prohibits (ouk) theses activities within the assembly. Despite some difficulty in ascertaining the precise contextual meaning of authenteîn (taken here as “to have authority over”),[20]oudè joins these two infinitives to “explains what sort, or what manner, of teaching is prohibited to women.”[21] The contrastive alla is brought in to provide a strong contrast to the prohibition by setting up the “permission” eînai en hēsuchía (“to be in quietness”). The implied helper verb epitrépō reinforces, as an exhortation, the positive command in 2:11 to “learn in silence in full submission.” This second use of the instrumental of manner en hēsuchía gives strength to the view that verses 11-12 solidifies submission and quietness as the hallmarks of Christian women receiving instruction in the assembly.[22]
The second group of verses (2:13-15) is marked by an explanatory gàr providing insight into the prohibition of 2:11-12. The explanation in 2:13 does not stem from any noticeable wordplay within the context; instead, a logical appeal is made to biblical texts outside of 1 Tim. The argument and explanation is derived from Genesis 2-3 in the LXX, and it serves as the foundation for the boundaries of Christian women in the church assembly.[23] The aorist passive indicative verb eplásethē is constative in force and views the formation (the creation) of Adam and Eve as completed.[24] The emphasis is laid upon the order of creation marked by the use of the adjectival use of prôtos, which suggest “first of several” in order to provide clarity to the substantive it modifies.[25] Thus, the prôtos and adverbial eîta have the chronological force of, “Adam, the first one, was formed, next Eve was.”[26]
Paul extends his thought with kaì, adding a “second fact” to his argument.[27] He begins the clause with a subject and its predicate (2:14). The first clause takes Adam and the aorist passive constative ouk ēpatēthē (“Adam was not deceived”);[28] in the second clause, dè calls “attention to the singularity” of the woman being “deceived in transgression”;[29] hence, the translation, “but as for the woman, she was [deceived].”[30] The perfect active indicative verb (gégonen) takes on the historic emphasis calling dramatic attention to the act of “being” deceived. In addition, the compound anarthrous nominative aorist passive participle eksapatētheîsa is perhaps perfective[31] in that ek intensifies the verb (“fully deceived”). Following hē gunē argues for it to be read adjectivally, and places the adjectival participle in the predicate position; asserting, that it is “the woman who was fully deceived.” It is this large subject which is modified by the dative of reference en parabásei “with reference to transgression.” The subject and its modifiers are viewed historically (gégonen), and echoes Eve’s confession, “The woman [hē gunē ] said, ‘the serpent deceived [ēpátēsén] me” (Gen 3:13).[32] “Paul bases his arguments,” observes egalitarian T. C. Geer, “on the creation stories in Genesis.”[33]
As in verse 12, the dè in 2:15 marks the sustained continuity from 2:13-14 which serve as the logical basis for Paul’s command in 2:11 and prohibition in 2:12. 1 Timothy 2:15 concludes the argument with an inverted third class conditional statement.[34] While there are several important “exegetical cruxes” in 2:15,[35] this is the overarching grammatical crux since it is the verse’s organizing principle. First, conditional sentences are comprised of two clauses, the “if” clause (protasis) and the “then” clause (apodosis). In general, the first clause contains the contingency under consideration; meanwhile, the second clause is a statement (the portrayal) about what will happen, or not happen, should the contingent action occur. There may be, however, other relationships at work besides a cause and effect one, and context must inform the exegete.[36] Second, contrary to a usual “if-then” structure, the apodosis is introduced first followed by the protasis (“then-if”). This can be done since the apodosis is “grammatically independent,” but it is still “semantically dependent” upon the protasis for understanding its fulfillment (Matt 4:9; Heb 6:3).[37]
1 Timothy 2:15, then, begins with the fulfillment clause sōthēsetai (apodosis), and concludes with the condition clause eàn meínōsin (protasis). The first clause, then, portrays the future expectation (portrayal) of “being saved” by means (ablative) of “bearing children” (dià tēs teknogonías). Arranging the apodosis first connects the future active indicative third person verb sōthēsetai to the nominative feminine singular hē gunē “the woman will be saved” (2:14).[38] The verb sōthēsetai is future passive indicative (“will be saved”) and serves to “grammaticalize,” as Porter observes, “a projection or expectation, not an assertion, about reality.”[39] The question, here, concerns the portrayed future meaning of sōzō, a verb which has a wide lexical range.[40] In what way will she be saved? The context must provide the answer.[41] Its use in 2:15, however, is connected to the transgression (parabásei) of Eve (2:14), so the natural “Christian” sense of salvation is certainly possible as component of lives which profess godliness (5:14, teknogoneîn).[42] This expectation, however, only has a probability of occurring “when the conditions stated in the protasis are met.”[43]
The second clause (2:15b) marks the protasis of the third class condition, eàn with the aorist active subjunctive. The protasis, eàn meínōsin (“if they continue”), points to the woman’s salvation (2:15a) rather than the subjects of the third person plural verb here (2:15b).[44] Knight sees this “as a fact assumed to be true”;[45] hence, the sense, may very well be, “it is assumed to be true that if they continue.” The nearest antecedent to meínōsin (“if they continue”) is perhaps implied by teknogonías (2:15a), which is children.[46] Alternatively, however, “woman” is the subject of the entire pericope[47] and this is most likely the implied semantic subject for meínōsin. Consequently, the verb refers to Christian women who “continue in faith and love and consecration with sound judgment.” This is the condition of the protasis. If Christian women continue a life of godliness and faith, then they will be saved by means of their reception of their domestic role.
Ralph Gilmore once observed, “it is easier to show what the biblical principles involved are than to apply them in specific instances.”[48] The implications of this evaluation of the syntax of 1 Tim 2:11-15 are not easily summarized, but a few suggested guideposts can be suggested. The passage does divide into two main lines of thought (11-12 and 13-15).
The occasional nature of the problem, however, does not undermine the truth which it teaches. The guidelines may have emerged from a need to address heresy; however, heresy is corrected by truth. In 1 Tim 2:4, Paul made it clear that God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of truth.” This instruction then is to provide the truth regarding the contours of gender responsibilities in the assembly and outside of the assembly. This instruction can be difficult to digest, but that is a modern problem of application. It perhaps reflects a contemporary bias rather than an internal problem of the text itself. Moreover, Paul introduces the foundation for the command and prohibitions of 2:11-12 in the next verses (2:13-15).
First, 2:11-12 represents the second main injunction upon women in the assembly (2:8). It is first introduced as a command and then nuanced by two prohibitions, and finally balanced by an exhortation towards “quietness.” Despite some difficulty in the proper meaning of en hēsuchia, the fact that the phrase brackets the internal works of Paul’s command, prohibition, and exhortation, would suggest that the content defines how Paul used the phrase. In other words, having a focus on receiving biblical instruction (learn), while refraining from giving instruction in the assembly (not to teach) and having (therefore using) authority over a man, serve as explaining en hēsuchia . An attitude of gentleness which manifests itself in silence and full submission. This does perhaps imply that there was a serious breach in the Pauline protocol for women in the assembly which required instruction.
Second, 2:13-15 is a clear explanation that the command and prohibitions are logically connected to the creation narrative of Adam and Eve, and the narrative of the serpents deception of Eve and the willful participation to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen 2-3). Despite the literary mountain of literature designed to reconstruct the religious and philosophical world of Ephesus which may or may not provide insight into the internal problems of heresy in 1 Tim, the appeal to Gen 2-3 demonstrates that these “scriptures are not tied to culture. They are tied to creation.”[49] This is a significant commitment to the words of Paul. If the argument stems from Gen, then matters such as the order of creation, headship, Eve as a complement to Adam, Eve’s role in the fall by being deceived, Adam’s role in the fall void of deception, and the Divine punishments upon Adam, Eve, and the serpent are all integral parts of the theological foundation for 2:11-12.
Christian men and Christian women are to understand their identity and roles in this world from Scripture. Three particular issues are brought up to shape Paul’s readers understanding of gender roles in the assembly and when not assembled. First, Adam was formed first. When Adam was formed, it was not good that man should be alone so God “constructed” Eve out of his rib. Eve as a complement to Adam demonstrates a joint purpose and companionship; however, the fact remains Adam was formed first. There is an inherent position of responsibility and privilege for the first born males of a family in the Old Testament. This implies a standing expectation or responsibility on the part of men; however, this does not diminish women nor provide a reason to abdicate any responsibility or authority she may have.
Second, Eve was deceived and transgressed God’s command. When Paul quotes and alludes from Gen 3, he provides a window into Eve’s plight. Why did the serpent focus upon Eve? Speculations abound. The fact is she was full deceived in transgression. Gen 3 piers into Eve’s mind, “the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise” (Gen 3:6 ESV). What is interesting is the LXX arranges the verb in the aorist active indicative “he deceived/enticed me”; however, in 1 Tim 2 Paul places the verbs in the aorist passive “he was formed/she was deceived.” Eve alone concedes to being deceived (Gen 3:16). In all of this, it must be remembered that regardless of the order of creation, regardless of the deception, regardless of the transgression, the woman as a profound role in the framework of God saving the world through Jesus.
Third, the limitations which exist when the church is assembled is not a reflection on her salvation. The true measure of the salvation which she longs to have is found in “child bearing/bearing children,” the unique capacity and role to be, like Eve, the mother of all the living (Gen 3:20). In fact, the “renaming” of Eve in LXX into Zoe following the Hebrew text, demonstrate that even outside of Eden, in the shadow of the garden there was still a profound role Eve played. The mirror image, or type and antitype, is seen in the profound role of continuing on in a manner consistent with faith, love, and sanctification with sound judgment. The implications from this study no doubt raises many questions to our “modern” ears.
Conclusion
Bruce Morton summarizes well our understanding of the text in the face of negative reactions. He writes,
In a time filled with male and female ability and confidence, the teaching swims against a strong current. But the apostle is not saying that women should avoid teaching the Word. Instead, he is announcing the purposes and roles within church assemblies.[50]
Deceiving Winds: Christians Navigating the Storm of Mysticism, Leadership Struggles and Sensational Worship (21st Century Christian, 2009)
1 Timothy 2:11-15 is as profound as it is complicated, but if one focuses on the flow of the syntax the exegete can eliminate some biases, whether they be complementarian or egalitarian. Personally, I have no vested interest in either point of view; what matters is how the syntax and the internal logic of the passage develops. The most difficult problem I see in applying 1 Tim 2:11-15 is that “the assembly” of first-century churches was vastly different than contemporary assemblies. This factor alone causes some the majority of the problems with concepts such as “having authority” and being “in silence/quietness.” In the end, churches and leaders always need to reassess their practices by what the text says, and here the boundaries of women participating in the assembly are based on creation and its principles not upon culture.
Endnotes
Ann L. Bowman points to the difficulty of “unusual vocabulary … awkward grammar … references to the Old Testament … significant theological issues … and a flow of thought that is not so clear as it may seem at first glance.” See “Women in Ministry: An Exegetical Study of 1 Timothy 2:11-15,” BSac 149.594 (April-June 1992): 193.
Barbara Aland, et al., eds., The Greek New Testament, 5th rev. ed. (Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2014); Eberhard Nestle and Erwin Nestle, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th rev. ed., eds. Barbara Aland, et al. (Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012).
Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (1931; repr. Nashville, TN: Broadman, n.d.), 4:572.
James A. Brooks and Carlton L. Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek (Langham, MD: University Press of America, 1979), 146.
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 578-79.
See George W. Knight, III, The Pastoral Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2013), 130-49.
Everett Ferguson, “Tópos in 1 Timothy 2:8,” ResQ 33.2 (1991): 65-73. Ferguson disputes the entry in “topos,” BAGD, as “everywhere that Christian people or Christians live” (822). To this Ferguson affirms, “This is inadequate, for a stronger statement may be made to the effect that among Jews ‘place’ acquired in some contexts a technical reference to the ‘place of worship’” (66). The force of Ferguson’s contribution did not affect, unfortunately, the entry of the third edition (“topos,” BDAG 1011).
Stanley E. Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, 2d ed. (1992; repr., Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2005). Porter describes this word order structure as “Subject-predicate” which is a very basic pattern, but it does point to gune as the expressed subject (294-95). It is grammatically legitimate for manthaneto to find its subject in 2:9 (gunaikas), so the repetition (the “expressed subject”) is important as a “form of topic marker or shifter” (295).
Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, 295.
As a caveat, this is not a prohibition, which “forbids an action,” for it lacks the customary structural mē. This also dispels any notion to view the phrase as a suggestion or an option. See Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 486-87.
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 486.
Robertson and Hersey remind that “all imperatives are future in idea” which underscores the anticipation of obedience. See, Archibald T. Robertson and W. Hersey Davis, A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament, 10th ed. (New York, NY: Harper & Brothers, 1933; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1979), 165. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 485. Chamberlain reminds that “the present imperative may have any of the characteristic ideas of linear action.” William D. Chamberlain, An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1941; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981), 86.
“hēsuchia,” BDAG 440.
Philo, On Dreams 2.263, and Ignatius Eph 19.1; see “hēsuchia,” BDAG 440.
Jack P. Lewis, “Quietness or Silence?” Gospel Advocate 130.7 (July 1988): 11-12. Lewis writes, “That silence from sound is an undisputed meaning of hēsuchia, plus the parallels to the prepositional phrase en hēsuchia, which we have cited, creates the presupposition that that is the proper meaning of 1 Timothy 2:11, 12. I would be glad to see a linguistic demonstration to the contrary” (12).
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 598-99. Wallace cites epitrepo as a “helper verb” which requires an infinite to supplement and complete its meaning.
Brooks and Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek, 86-87. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 525. Wallace argues extensively as to why epitrepo should be taken as a gnomic present over descriptive (progressive) present. Three points in particular were persuasive. There are no temporal indicators, the present tense is used with a generic object (gunaiki), and the exhortation is tied to creation.
Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, 296.
Barclay M. Newman, “authenteo,” A Concise Greek-English Dictionary to the New Testament, rev. ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2010), 29; The meaning of this New Testament hapax is the subject of considerable study and debate and beyond the scope of this paper. In BDAG it falls under the basic category “to assume a stance of independent authority” such as “to give orders to, dictate to” (150); however, semantically, L&N have “to control in a domineering manner” (37.21). For opposing views, see Richard Clark Kroeger and Catherine Clark Kroeger, 1 Suffer not a Woman: Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1992; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2001), 87-98; Andreas J. Köstenberger and Thomas R. Schreiner, eds., Women in the Church: An Analysis and Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005).
Kroeger and Kroeger, I Suffer not a Woman, 83-84.
Some see a chiastic structure in 11-12 with en hēsuchia marking this group as a unit. (A) gunē en hēsuchia manthaneto en pasē hupotagē· (B) didaskein de gunaiki ouk epitrepo (B’) oude authentein andros, (A’) all’ einai en hēsuchia (Bowmann, “Women in Ministry,” 202-03).
This citation to the Greek Genesis record reveals that there are corresponding verbs and nouns demonstrating an intentional recapitulation of the events in Eden in order to provide the rationale for the gender roles played out “in every place of assembly” (2:8-15).
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 557-58.
“protos,” BDAG 725. George Benedict Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, 7th ed. enl. and impr. ed., ed. Joseph H. Thayer, trans. Gottlieb Lünemann (Andover: Draper, 1886), 464.
Whereas Paul uses aorist passive indicative third person singular form, eplasthē, the LXX employs aorist active indicative third person singular, eplasen, four times in Gen 2 each time as a reference to God’s formation of Adam (7, 8, 15, 19). Moreover, a different word is used to describe the construction of Eve in Gen 2:19: okodomesen kurios ho theos ten pleuran … eis gunaika.
R. C. H. Lenski writes, “kai adds the second fact to the first. This is not done because a second is needed; yet Paul lets two witnesses speak.” The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus, and to Philemon (Lutheran Book Concern, 1937; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2001), 567.
Albrecht Oepke, “apatáō, eksapatáō, apátē,” TDNT 1:384-85. Oepke demonstrates briefly that the LXX use of the verb is seen commonly “to deceive” or “entice,” but only provides one tentative example of eksapatáō in the second century A.D. by Jewish translator Theodotion (Sus 56). The Old Greek version uses apatáō. In this passage, either verb attempts to offer a distortion (to entice, deceive).
“de,” BDAG 212.
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 578-79.
Bruce M. Metzger, Lexical Aids for Students of New Testament Greek, 3rd ed. (Princeton, NJ: Theological Book Agency, 1969; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002), 79, 82. Knight does not place too much emphasis on the compound verb, but keeps this point open (The Pastoral Epistles,144).
eîpen hēgunēHoóphis ēpátēsén me (Gen 3:13 LXX).
Thomas C. Geer, Jr., “Admonitions to Women in 1 Tim. 2:8-15,” in vol. 1 of Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity. ed. Carroll D. Osburn (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993; repr., Joplin, MO: College Press, 1995), 295. Geer is right that the order of creation does not point to male “superiority” and that it is a reminder of complement Eve is to Adam, but he ignores that the Old Testament does give a voice to “the first born” as a pecking order for authority, responsibility, and privileges (Bowman, “Women in Ministry,” 204-05).
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 696-97. Dana and Mantey observe, that the contingency implies a certain level of “uncertainty,” yet it carries a tone of being “hopeful but hesitant.” Harvey E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (1927; repr., New York, NY: Macmillan, 1957), 290.
Knight, The Pastoral Epistles, 144-49.
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 682-87. Wallace points out that some conditional relationships may have a semantic force such as “evidence-inference” or even “equivalence” (687).
Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 684. Wallace goes on to say that the protasis is “grammatically dependent, but semantically independent.” The apodosis can form a complete thought, but the protasis inherently cannot.
Making this connection does not resolve the difficulty of coming to a conclusion as to the meaning of sōthēsetai.
Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, 262.
Newman, “sōzō,” A Concise Greek-English Dictionary to the New Testament. Newman has the following glosses: “save (of Christian salvation); save, rescue, deliver; keep safe, preserve; cure, make well” (179).
In 1 Tim the use of the verb (1:15, 2:4, 4:16) shows connection to eternal life (1:15-16), arrive at gospel truth (2:4), and the result of remaining in the teaching (4:16).
Werner Foerster, “sōzō, sōtēria,” TDNT 7:995. Foerster, observes, such a view “cannot be ruled out at” grammatically. Bowman surveys six possible interpretations and argues that an “interpretation that satisfies the grammatical and lexical problems and that also fit the larger context is … women will enter into eschatological salvation, with its accompanying rewards, through faithfulness to their proper role, exemplified in motherhood and in godly living generally” (“Women in Ministry,” 208).
Brooks and Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek, 183.
Carl Spain, The Letters of Paul to Timothy and Titus (Austin, TX: Sweet Co., 1970), 52.
Knight, The Pastoral Epistles, 148.
Spain, The Letters of Paul to Timothy and Titus, 52.
Knight, The Pastoral Epistles, 148. Knight makes an excellent point, “The concept of ‘remaining’ or ‘continuing’ would also seem to tie the subject of this verb to the subject of the previous clause (gunēγ); one does not talk about ‘continuing’ with a new subject but with a continuation of the previous subject.”
Robert Randolph, et al., Gender and Ministry: The Role of the Women in the Work and Worship of the Church (Huntsville, AL: Publishing Designs, 1990), 77.
Randolph, Gender and Ministry, 57.
Bruce Morton, Deceiving Winds: Christians Navigating the Storm of Mysticism, Leadership Struggles and Sensational Worship (Nashville, TN: 21st Century Christian, 2009), 135.
biblicalfaith.online 