behavior, such as speaking in a way that violates the husbands headship or contra dicts his prophesying (Davidson 1998:277). Others believe Paul is trying to main tain decorum appropriate to that society by preventing unrestrained babbling that would bring disrepute on Christian worship (Prinz-McMillan 1995:208). Still oth ers focus on 1 Corinthians 14:35 and see interruption as the key, perhaps because wives were calling to husbands across the room or having loud conversations be tween themselves (Evans 1983:98).
Bilezikian suggests a novel interpretation that sees verses 34 and 35 as a quo tation (perhaps from a Corinthian letter) that Paul then repudiates in verse 36. Thus, Paul quotes a prohibition brought in by Judaizers that are seeking to domi nate the worship services by excluding women using Jewish norms. Paul then re bukes the prohibition as against the egalitarian message God has sent through him (Bilezikian 1985:152). In this case the law mentioned in verse 34 would be Jewish oral law. In other instances Paul did quote from the Corinthians letter (as in 6:12 and 13) and then offer rebuttal. However, this would be a very long quotation that was misunderstood from early times (Evans 1983:100). While this interpretation is appealing, it cannot ultimately be proven true. Rather, the contradictory nature of the passage makes it seem best to see its focus to be on the principles of order and propriety in worship rather than on rules for male/female relationships.
Ephesians 5:21-33
In this oft-quoted passage that is part of Paul’s “household codes,” the apostle is describing the husband/wife relationship and comparing it to Christs relationship to the church. Verse 21 is the hinge between the first part of the chapter that gives exhortations to all Christians and the second part that speaks directly to wives and husbands (Bilezikian 1985:153). The mutual submission of verse 21 can only be understood as a preferring and a deferring to the other without rank or hierarchy. In verse 22 the verb is left out, linking it to the previous verse and showing that a wife’s submission is a particular aspect of the mutual submission enjoined of all be lievers. Such submission can only be given, not taken (Evans 1983:74). Again Paul uses kephale (head as source of life) in the husband and wife relationship, compar ing it to Christ’s relationship to the church. Clearly Paul’s focus is on Christ’s self- sacrificing love for the church, thus limiting the husband’s headship to a particular kind. Paul could have pointed to Christ’s rulership but did not, instead pointing to the church as Christ’s body and He its source of life, and calling for a similar rela tionship between husbands and wives (Prinz-McMillan 1995:210).
The head/body relationship is one of reciprocity (Bilezikian 1985:161), which is reinforced in verse 24 by the connecting “but.” “But as the church is subject to Christ, so let wives be subject in everything to their husbands.” Some versions, deferring to the interpretation involving rulership, leave out the “but” (alia), yet it helps to make clear what the apostle is saying (Evans 1983:75). While the husband is the head of the wife and must serve her as Christ serves the church, he cannot be her Savior as Christ is of the church. Nevertheless (“but”), the wife (as enjoined in verse 21) still must be submissive to her husband in everything as befits Christians.
The husbands love for his wife must mirror Christs love for the church (verses 25-30). This is how the husband fulfills the submission of verse 21 (Evans 1983:75). The analogy of Christ and the church with the husband/wife relationship can be carried too far, thus Paul concludes that there is a mystery here. Referring to Gen esis 2:24, Paul says husbands and wives should be one flesh, submitting to each other in love and respect.
Does this passage support a headship of husband over wife in marriage? Again, such a conclusion would seem to say more about us than about the passage. Rather, it seems that Paul is requiring the same thing from both husband and wife—ser- vanthood. Should a Christian wife submit to her husband? Absolutely. Should a Christian husband love his wife sacrificially? Certainly. Does this mean that a wife does not need to love or a husband to submit? O f course not. Edenic oneness can only occur in a marriage based on mutual submission to each other and to Christ (verse 31). That this can occur in a sin-sick world is indeed a mystery of grace.
1 Timothy 2:11-15
Paul in First Timothy gives his younger associate advice on how to have a well- ordered church. Men are admonished to pray with holy hands uplifted and women are advised to dress modestly. In verses 11 and 12 Paul says women must learn in silence and he permits no women to teach or have authority over men. In many set tings these verses have been used to deny women virtually any voice or position in the church. Basing their convictions on these verses, some have even gone so far as to tell Christian women that they should not hold any position or job that requires them to exercise any kind of authority over men (Kroeger 8c Kroeger 1992:11).
The word used for “silence” in verse 11 is the same word translated “quietness” in verse 2. Many scholars believe quietness would be a better translation in verse 11 also. Paul then is not enjoining absolute silence on women but asking them to learn peaceably (Evans 1983:101).
7 5 6
Encountering: God in Life and Mission
The word for authority has a number of possible meanings, which include “au thor” or “originator.” Paul may again be combating proto-Gnostic beliefs that man originated from woman, a view that is supported by his reference to the Genesis creation story in the next verse (Kroeger & Kroeger 1992:101). The passage then becomes, “I permit no woman to teach that she is the originator of man. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.” Paul then goes on to point out that Eve was deceived in the beginning, perhaps intimating that women should beware of being deceived again.
Since the woman, singular, is mentioned, some have thought that Paul is refer ring to a particular woman dominating and disrupting the church (Prinz-McMil- lan 1995:212). Davidson believes Paul is speaking only to husbands and wives, not men and women in general, and thereby reinforcing the headship of the husband and wifely submission (Davidson 1998:280). Evans points out, however, that Paul specifically gave wives certain types of authority over their husbands (1 Cor. 7:4), suggesting that the authority Paul is discussing is directly tied to teaching authority (Evans 1983:103). Several authors conclude that the teaching prohibited here is that of the unlearned usurping authority (as translated in the KJV). Women must first learn in submission before presuming to teach (1983:101). Thus, the content and manner of the teaching is what is under discussion (Kroeger 8c Kroeger 1992:79).
O f particular concern is verse 15, which seems to suggest women will be saved through bearing children. Some have taken this to refer to The Child who alone can save. Others believe it means that women, although sinful, will be spared in their childbearing (Evans 1983:107). If one believes Paul is dealing with incipient Gnosticism, he could be validating the childbearing role and affirming feminin ity against the Gnostic anti-procreation teachings (Kroeger 8c Kroeger 1992:175). Prinz-McMillan believes the intent of the passage is to deal with an abuse of power, whether by men who use force or by women who use dress or sexuality (Prinz- McMillan 1995:215).
Yarbrough believes the “historic” interpretation of this passage should be al lowed to stand because, he asserts, the Bible clearly teaches that certain offices and responsibilities belong only to men (Yarbrough 2005:146). Bacchiocchi calls for Seventh-day Adventists also to maintain the historically rigid separation of gender roles and distinctions (Bacchiocchi 1995:66). Both believe this honors God and is true to the scriptural mandate found in ITimothy 2:8-15.
This is not an easy passage to interpret. Seeing it as attacking proto-Gnostic heresies provides the clearest solution for those who believe Paul is unlikely to be reversing himself on the priesthood of all believers and the giftedness of the
Spirit. The intent of all the Pauline passages under discussion is to provide order and decorum among Christians. Especially is Paul concerned with orderly worship. Sometimes he addresses men directly and sometimes he addresses women direct ly, but generally the admonitions refer to universal principles of peace, deference, submission, teachability, quietness, and unity. These principles apply to all people, regardless of rank or sex. The entire trajectory of the Bible is toward a unity that embraces the “other” as brother and sister, children of the same God who created humanity in His image, not toward a mandate for hierarchy and division.