# Is it "SIN" for women to teach men?



## psycheives

As a woman who wants to become a teacher, I am looking for real answers to this question. I'm not asking what your church does or your church's rules. I'm asking "what is sin" and what isn't sin? 1 Tim and 1 Cor 14

- What does the bible mean by "teaching" and "authority" and in what context?
- Is it SIN for a woman to be "a teacher" of men in ANY setting: bible study, college, work, trainings, etc? Why?
- Is it SIN for a woman to "a teacher" of anything spiritual only in ANY setting? bible study, missions, etc?
- Is it SIN only for a woman to be a Pastor/Elder because "GOD called men to these only"?
- Is it SIN for a woman to teach a bible study even if the church has appointed and approved her to teach? What if it's at her home?
- Must Christians get "permission" from their church to teach Bible study at their home? Is it is sin?
- Is it a SIN for a woman to teach her own son Christianity? What if the husband died? Will it become a "sin" when he "becomes a man?" So one day it will be good for a mother to teach her son but the day he becomes a man (which may be unknown), she suddenly sins?
- It is NOT a sin to?
- Why do some Reformers say it is SIN for a woman to be a manager, boss, in government or any position of "authority" in secular world too? Then women will be stuck on low paying jobs forever and unable to make much of a living. What about us unmarried women or single women raising 5 kids on our own? So a woman can't even be an assistant manager at Starbucks?
- Some say it is SIN for a woman to be a teacher of any sort, claiming she is then in a position of "authority." Must authority be God-given or man-given or just a position without any authority (such as a bible study).
- What does "authority" mean? 

Please explain your answers biblically or with quotes from reputable Reformed authors. Thank you


----------



## SinnerSavedByChrist

After filling out this poll, I must confess that I need to read the Scriptures left to right over and over and over again... I know the passages in 1 Timothy 2-3, 5; Titus 2, 1 Peter 3.... then there are the passages on supposed "Women deacons" which Brother Timothy Keller will use... 

Great questions and I'm going to have to do a lot more reading!!! Thanks


----------



## KevinInReno

Ugh... I answered this poll reading haphazardly... I was tired and didn't see the secular aspect in the 3rd poll option. Because it also has a secular qualifier... ignore one yes vote there.

Ultimately any position of Elder/Pastor, unbiblical and sin in all cases.

In a household likely enjoyed by most on this forum, for a woman to be head, unbiblical and sin. I do think there are environments though where the woman would need to subvert the man's authority if he was a danger to her or her children, or of course abusive, etc. I wouldn't say she should divorce him (I believe in the permanence view) but I do think she should and could leave the household in certain circumstances as ministry. Any woman doing so though, should quickly look to her church leadership for help through those waters.

Most will disagree with me, but I do think women can be a leader in "care ministries" aka deaconess. I do not consider deacons to be a teaching position, or a position of authority and discipline. So because of that I would have no problem with women in those roles.

As for women leading bible studies with men in them, etc. I disagree with that, due to it once again being a teaching position over men within the church. I would state Children's ministries because there are no men in them is fine in my opinion, though I do think an elder is preferable, and should be the first option.

As for a secular workplace I don't see restrictions as applying.


----------



## Logan

I venture very cautiously into this discussion. Sometimes we lose the principles in the "do this, don't do that" mentality. So I can't really answer the poll because there are some categories that I think are sometimes correct and sometimes incorrect.

The general principle here, as I understand it, is not to usurp the authority of the men in the church. 

God has intended the men to be the leaders and the women to show respect and submission and to be a help to them. If a man is dying and the only person there to share the gospel is a woman, it would be sin to remain silent. We have examples such as Timothy's mother and grandmother teaching him, and Aquila and Priscilla teaching Apollos. The latter one is a good example because Priscilla certainly did help, but it apparently was under the authority of her husband. I love it when my wife joins me in discussions with other men and offers insight and instruction, but she does it respectfully under the umbrella of my authority. 

Calvin on 1 Cor 14:34


> What connection has the object that he has in view with the subjection under which the law places women? “For what is there,” some one will say, “to hinder their being in subjection, and yet at the same time teaching?” I answer, that the office of teaching is a superiority in the Church, and is, consequently, inconsistent with subjection. For how unseemly a thing it were, that one who is under subjection to one of the members, should preside over the entire body! It is therefore an argument from things inconsistent — If the woman is under subjection, she is, consequently, prohibited from authority to teach in public.



And on 1 Tim 2:12


> Not that he takes from them the charge of instructing their family, but only excludes them from the office of teaching, which God has committed to men only....He adds — what is closely allied to the office of teaching — and not to assume authority over the man; for the very reason, why they are forbidden to teach, is, that it is not permitted by their condition. They are subject, and to teach implies the rank of power or authority. Yet it may be thought that there is no great force in this argument; because even prophets and teachers are subject to kings and to other magistrates. I reply, there is no absurdity in the same person commanding and likewise obeying, when viewed in different relations. But this does not apply to the case of woman, who by nature (that is, by the ordinary law of God) is formed to obey



Now Calvin also adds in both places that he believes government (even secular) by women is against nature, it is unclear to me if he believes it is against God's law. Poole talks exclusively of the church, assuming a woman will teach her family at home. Trapp sees this as a command not to usurp the men's authority in the church.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

psycheives said:


> Please explain your answers biblically or with quotes from reputable Reformed authors. Thank yo


Egalitarianism is not what I see taught in Scripture on this matter. The matter of concern is the proper roles of women and men as ordained by God in accordance with His good and perfect will. Even before the Fall, man was established as head and _authority over_ all creation, including the woman made to be his helper, and so named by him. God called this arrangement of authority of the man and the role of woman, "good". After the Fall, it is clear the arrangement and relationship is strained, wherein the woman is now more subject to the man. The headship ("_authority over_") of man is declared in the NT (e.g., 1 Corinthians 11:3, 14:35; Ephesians 5:22-24; 1 Pet. 3:1-5, Col. 3:18). Then there is 1 Timothy 3, which I do not find within any warrant for female office leadership within the church. This should come as no surprise given the didactic nature of 1 Timothy 2:12-13--note also that Paul here refers back to Genesis. As for your comments earlier about women pastor/elders, how can anyone argue that a woman, who is to be subject to her husband’s authority, can be lawfully ordained to any church office and thereby have authority over him? This would be an act of rebellion against God.

Since you asked, here is a quote from Calvin on the passage from Genesis which aligns with my comments:



John Calvin said:


> The second punishment which he exacts is _subjection_. For this form of speech, "Thy desire shall be unto thy husband," is of the same force as if he had said that she should not be free and at her own command, but subject to the authority of her husband and dependent upon his will; or as if he had said, 'Thou shalt desire nothing but what thy husband wishes.' As it is declared afterwards, Unto thee shall be his desire, (Gen. 4:7) Thus the woman, who had perversely exceeded her proper bounds, is forced back to her own position. She had, indeed, previously been subject to her husband, but that was a liberal and gentle subjection; now, however, she is cast into servitude.


----------



## SRoper

The questions are really confusing. Some say "It is SIN..." while others do not. I thought at first that the ones that didn't were the ones that are acceptable until I got to "Teach a bible study with men at church (even if appointed)" since the parenthetical phrase doesn't make sense with that assumption. I'm guessing that we should take "It is a SIN for a woman to:" as a part of each statement even though it is redundant in many of them.

I'm a bit uncomfortable with the "it is a sin" language as it suggests that it is the woman who is necessarily sinning in all the cases mentioned. I think some cases, like Deborah's leadership, are results of sinful situations but not indicative of sin on the part of the woman involved. Perhaps "not in good order" is better. 

I'll only answer as far as scope. I don't see how Paul's teaching in 1 Tim. 2 can only be limited to the church. The principle he builds on is nature, so it has nature as its scope. If he meant to only argue for the church then his argument proves too much.


----------



## SRoper

By the way, I like the calibrating question of "It is a SIN for anyone unappointed by the church to lead a Bible study even in their own home."


----------



## lynnie

You might enjoy reading this piece: Moore to the Point &ndash; Women, Stop Submitting to Men.

( I offer it as one who believes wives are to wear head coverings in church, so I'm definitely complementarian)


----------



## JBaldwin

I think it is important to differentiate between teaching and authority and to define "teaching". If you mean authoritative teaching, I would agree that it is wrong for a woman to teach a man. To 'teach' in the sense of sharing what God has taught her with the understanding that it is not necessarily authoritative for the church is another thing all together. Authoritative teaching is left for the men in the church and in the home. I would highly recommend reading John Piper's book on the subject "Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood". As I spent a lot of my time in the church in a position of leadership under the direction and authority of the elders, this was a very touchy matter for me, and one that took me a long time to come to grips with.


----------



## Jack K

JBaldwin said:


> I think it is important to differentiate between teaching and authority and to define "teaching". If you mean authoritative teaching, I would agree that it is wrong for a woman to teach a man. To 'teach' in the sense of sharing what God has taught her with the understanding that it is not necessarily authoritative for the church is another thing all together.



Well put. This is the key distinction that needs to be kept in mind. Some situations aren't quite clear-cut enough to give a simple yes/no response to a poll question. The details of the specific situation and often the attitudes/approaches of the men and women involved have to be taken into account.


----------



## jandrusk

What I have found in the past is that it usually comes down to the definition of "church". Some think it's OK as soon as your outside of the church building, but I do not think this is an accurate definition of the church. I would reference the WSC Chapter 25 Section 2: "The visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."

So if we take the context of teaching in the seminary and the teacher and the students are members of the visible church, then the same prohibitions would be in effect as far as only men having the authority to teach. 

I think there are circumstances in which this would not apply; such as a married couple where the wife is a believer and the husband is not. The wife should be teaching and instructing her children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. 

I think the main reason why this question is even brought up in this day and age is the failure of Christian men to take the leadership role that God has called them to, and therefore the woman are left to fill in the gaps in a number of cases.


----------



## ZackF

Would you cancel out the poll and rewrite it more clearly?
Totally lost here.


----------



## THE W

It's not a sin for a women to teach a man how to make pancakes..

I didnt answer the pole. A little to cut and dry.

1 cor 14:34-35 and 1 tim 2:11-12 are pretty clear. In the context of church, women are not to teach MEN, have authority over MEN, and their various questions and inquiries regarding teaching or authority should be saved for when they get home.

I would see the question then being, when should boys be considered men? 

Puberty?

I also question whether women should be gainfully employed but that's a whole other thread.


----------



## a mere housewife

Psyche, I think embracing our role, and learning in context of it, enriches what we are able to say to men. I am not sure that all the particular situations listed will be the same in every circumstance, but am more comfortable with the concept of women teaching other women and children in more formal situations in the realm of the church.

Yet we are all to be teaching one another and I am afraid that a man who is averse to learning anything from a woman is also much diminished. Nabal could not take Abigail's advice and David could -- Nabal seems an apt example then of the 'fool' (a word I use quite timidly, considering Matthew 5, but in this instance I'm just repeating a wise woman): wisdom in Proverbs is feminine. I wouldn't want to base too much on such a point, but it is suggestive to me, placed next to the passages about a woman's created place and what that means in the family and the church. The feminine is, not apart from but somehow in keeping with that submissive role, an apt vehicle for the personification of treasures of knowledge that a man is enjoined to seek. (I'm sure I'm not saying this very well: it is more of a suggestive thought to me at this time than something I quite know how to express; but I certainly don't mean that all women are wiser than all men, etc. I wonder if it has a relation to the submissive role of Christ, our Wisdom, and His submission to the Father as an aspect of that Wisdom He is to us.)

PS. I returned to clarify that I am not sure that I would call it 'sin' for a woman to do some things I might still consider 'unwise'. But while I am at it, please forgive the tortuous phrasing of this post.  I am under a tortuous phrasing spell lately.


----------



## psycheives

SRoper said:


> The questions are really confusing. Some say "It is SIN..." while others do not. I thought at first that the ones that didn't were the ones that are acceptable until I got to "Teach a bible study with men at church (even if appointed)" since the parenthetical phrase doesn't make sense with that assumption. I'm guessing that we should take "It is a SIN for a woman to:" as a part of each statement even though it is redundant in many of them.



Thank you all for your replies. I have a lot to consider here. The reason I wrote "It is a SIN" is because people keep saying "A woman can't..." by who's command? Mans? Then it doesn't count unless he is her husband, pastor, etc. If God's command, then it is "a sin" to disobey. I wanted to use "SIN" to filter all out claims that "a woman can't because... I don't like it... my church doesn't like it..." and get to what God says a woman can and can't do "because it is a SIN." So, yes, Scott, the poll is meant to be taken as "It is a SIN for a woman to:" do each of the poll questions. (The poll limited me in characters so I had to cut it out of each poll question ).

It seems most of the disagreement lies about "the context" = is it to "the church", "the home", "the secular environment" or a combo or all them. 

It also seems there is great disagreement with what constitutes "authority over a man". Dictionary terms nearly always demonstrate that "having authority" requires there be a way to enforce, correct, punish, or enforce some sort of consequences. In a home bible study where a woman leads as 1) a teacher OR 2) as the facilitator in a discussion group, does she have "any authority" over the 10 adults who attend? I don't think so, but some seem to think so. What can she do if someone disagrees or leaves or is late?

I appreciate your thoughts. I have assignments due so I might not be able to reply right away.  Thank you all!


----------



## Mushroom

> 1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.


Does this mean to teach WITH authority, or does it mean to teach OR exercise authority - is it one thing forbidden, or two? Anybody have a grip on the Greek that can clarify that for us?


----------



## JP Wallace

1 Tim 2: 12 διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ’ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ.


Literally: but to teach (infinitive) a woman (dative -ἐπιτρέπω always takes dative direct object) I do not permit, nor to govern/excercise authority over (infinitive) a man (genitive), but to be in silence.

So I think it is two things. οὐδὲ means not, not even, and not, neither.


----------



## Scott1

While it was a valiant effort, I can't navigate through the poll choices with the care necessary to answer this broad kind of question....

Biblically, the pattern of creation is what is looked to first, then the explicit and implicit commands and normative patterns in specific Scripture passages. God created man, then woman from man.

Hopefully, it is beyond needing to say to a Bible believing Christian that does not mean either gender is in any way inferior, not talented, etc. Both are of great worth, and need one another, according to plan. It is a beautiful thing when men and women work together according to God's plan, especially in the church! (Our world while increasingly promising 'equality' is more and more bearing the fruit of discord between the genders, perversion of them, while hypocritically claiming tolerance).

"Serving" (as Phoebe in Romans) is not to be confused with church office, e.g. Deacons are qualified as being husband of one wife, not wife of one husband (though some will read their own opinion into the word, a form of idolatry), etc.

Women are not given to ecclesiastical teaching of adult men or mixed audiences. It is not normal and is a reflection of all sorts of things being out of order from the (obvious) creation pattern, as well as the specific Scripture texts.

Generally, and this is less clear to me at this time from a Scriptural basis,
women can lead in business, politics and other realms (but as with all, home and worship priorities must be in place). Women may teach young children. Older women ought be teaching younger women, especially. I think that even means more mature, it can be taken in that sense. 

But no church offices, except there is a servant widow type office particularly described in Scripture in I Timothy 5, not to be confused with the I Timothy 3 office of deacon, certainly not of elder, bishop or apostle.

Remember, serving does not require a title. Much of the Christian life is about serving, quietly, out of sight, out of mind, maybe with little or no recognition, not feeling "appreciated." Those who understand this, men and women will gain a steadfast assurance of their faith and great reward in the life to come.

Teaching their children, this has become something of a lost concern in this generation, and we are reaping the whirlwind for it.

Keep that in mind when asking these kinds of questions.


----------



## jandrusk

psycheives said:


> SRoper said:
> 
> 
> 
> The questions are really confusing. Some say "It is SIN..." while others do not. I thought at first that the ones that didn't were the ones that are acceptable until I got to "Teach a bible study with men at church (even if appointed)" since the parenthetical phrase doesn't make sense with that assumption. I'm guessing that we should take "It is a SIN for a woman to:" as a part of each statement even though it is redundant in many of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you all for your replies. I have a lot to consider here. The reason I wrote "It is a SIN" is because people keep saying "A woman can't..." by who's command? Mans? Then it doesn't count unless he is her husband, pastor, etc. If God's command, then it is "a sin" to disobey. I wanted to use "SIN" to filter all out claims that "a woman can't because... I don't like it... my church doesn't like it..." and get to what God says a woman can and can't do "because it is a SIN." So, yes, Scott, the poll is meant to be taken as "It is a SIN for a woman to:" do each of the poll questions. (The poll limited me in characters so I had to cut it out of each poll question ).
> 
> It seems most of the disagreement lies about "the context" = is it to "the church", "the home", "the secular environment" or a combo or all them.
> 
> It also seems there is great disagreement with what constitutes "authority over a man". Dictionary terms nearly always demonstrate that "having authority" requires there be a way to enforce, correct, punish, or enforce some sort of consequences. In a home bible study where a woman leads as 1) a teacher OR 2) as the facilitator in a discussion group, does she have "any authority" over the 10 adults who attend? I don't think so, but some seem to think so. What can she do if someone disagrees or leaves or is late?
> 
> I appreciate your thoughts. I have assignments due so I might not be able to reply right away.  Thank you all!
Click to expand...


As to the question on the SIN question if it's man's command or God's, if it's in the Scriptures then it's God's command unless specifically qualified. An example would be in 1 Corinthians when Paul is talking about marriage when he qualifies it with "...me and not the Lord...". If a man is attempting to defend this position without the using the Bible as the foundation then of course he is in error.


----------



## JP Wallace

jandrusk said:


> An example would be in 1 Corinthians when Paul is talking about marriage when he qualifies it with "...me and not the Lord...".



Off topic (kind of) but I'd say Paul's command still comes with divine authority because (as you say later) it is in Scripture. It seems to me Paul must be saying 'I have not got a specific instruction from the risen Lord on this matter', yet he still writes as the Holy Spirit inspired author. Thus we are to understand verse 10 as being Paul's citation of Jesus earthly teaching on divorce, and verse 12 as his (Paul's) inspired teaching. Both however are God-breathed Scripture and have divine authority.

1 Corinthians 7:10-12 10 To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her.


----------



## Loopie

jandrusk said:


> As to the question on the SIN question if it's man's command or God's, if it's in the Scriptures then it's God's command unless specifically qualified. An example would be in 1 Corinthians when Paul is talking about marriage when he qualifies it with "...me and not the Lord...". If a man is attempting to defend this position without the using the Bible as the foundation then of course he is in error.



With all respect, I have always been taught that when Paul says "me and not the Lord" he is not saying that this command is less authoritative, or should not be considered to be divinely inspired. I understand it to be that Paul is simply differentiating between what Jesus himself had said during his ministry (which the Corinthians should have been familiar with), and the additional teaching given by Paul. Jesus never addressed the situation of an unbeliever being willing to stay married to a believer within the context of marriage. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7:12-16, was simply giving additional instructions regarding a situation that Jesus had not previously addressed. So when Paul says "I, not the Lord" he is simply telling the Corinthians that this is a new instruction, and is not something that Jesus addressed during his ministry. It is just as equally authoritative, since Paul is certainly writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and is, as an Apostle, giving instructions and commands to the Church. Thoughts?


----------



## JP Wallace

Loopie said:


> Thoughts?



See above  I agree!


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

If a woman wasn't allowed to teach in any situation then these excellent works would be out of bounds. And they are excellent. 


http://reformedlafayette.com/home/w...Revelation/JF OT Q1 - Creation to Abraham.pdf


http://www.reformedfellowship.net/i...hap-pdfs/Grade-6-Gods-Unfolding-Prom-3-16.pdf


Of course the above works are meant for the training of Children. But those young in the faith would greatly benefit from them as some people who don't have much of a theological background would also. 


Some of the best instruction I have gained has been from women. Heidi Zwartman has been used of God in excellent ways for me as she has posted on the Westminster Confession of Faith and other historical things. Especially when I was moderating another theological forum that was prone to have a tendency towards aberrant theology in the Confessional Church. She never assumed a place of authority but did gently guide me a lot and expose the truth behind our Confessional heritage. I praise God for her. I also believe that her note concerning Abigail's appeal and instruction to Nabal / King David should be noted. Men would be negligent of the gift God has given to us through women if we didn't listen to their counsel in many situations. We will also be held accountable for not listening to them and considering what they might bring us from God's word. This is not to say that it isn't sin for a woman to teach and hold authority over men in situations that St. Paul is referring to. 

Don't forget St. Paul's admonition to teat the older women as mothers. I have greatly appreciated the older woman who have put me in my place a few times. 

1Ti 5:2    The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.


----------



## JOwen

My wife teaches me constantly about piety, godliness, unconditional love, and the simplicity of the gospel. She is a Sunday school teacher, VBS teacher, and teacher of her pastor. Where would I be without her? She would never teach another man on purpose, but children, and younger women, all the time. She will never be a deacon, elder, or pastor as she well understands. But be it far from me not to learn of one so well taught of the Spirit.


----------



## jogri17

None of them. It is a sin for a woman to be ordained to the office of Elder or Minister, but I do not believe you need to be ordained in the office of Elder or Teacher to be able to teach in any of the situations in the poll.


----------



## Afterthought

With regards to the passage in Titus, I found this thread quite helpful in understanding not only that, but the concept of "teaching" too: http://www.puritanboard.com/f45/titus-2-about-familial-ecclesiastical-relations-75979/


----------



## jandrusk

PuritanCovenanter said:


> If a woman wasn't allowed to teach in any situation then these excellent works would be out of bounds. And they are excellent.
> 
> 
> http://reformedlafayette.com/home/w...Revelation/JF OT Q1 - Creation to Abraham.pdf
> 
> 
> http://www.reformedfellowship.net/i...hap-pdfs/Grade-6-Gods-Unfolding-Prom-3-16.pdf
> 
> 
> Of course the above works are meant for the training of Children. But those young in the faith would greatly benefit from them as some people who don't have much of a theological background would also.
> 
> 
> Some of the best instruction I have gained has been from women. Heidi Zwartman has been used of God in excellent ways for me as she has posted on the Westminster Confession of Faith and other historical things. Especially when I was moderating another theological forum that was prone to have a tendency towards aberrant theology in the Confessional Church. She never assumed a place of authority but did gently guide me a lot and expose the truth behind our Confessional heritage. I praise God for her. I also believe that her note concerning Abigail's appeal and instruction to Nabal / King David should be noted. Men would be negligent of the gift God has given to us through women if we didn't listen to their counsel in many situations. We will also be held accountable for not listening to them and considering what they might bring us from God's word. This is not to say that it isn't sin for a woman to teach and hold authority over men in situations that St. Paul is referring to.
> 
> Don't forget St. Paul's admonition to teat the older women as mothers. I have greatly appreciated the older woman who have put me in my place a few times.
> 
> 1Ti 5:2    The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.



Well said we need to pay attention to whom the directive around authority is given. It's given to men with the assumption that there are men around who are educated in the doctrines of God. As long as a woman is not teaching in place of a man in the context given we need to accept it at that.


----------



## One Little Nail

In a Church,Kirk,Assembly,Congregation call it what you will, Women are not to Teach,
nor to exercise Authority over a Man but are to remain in Silence which also means they
are not to Read the Scriptures nor Offer Prayer out Loud as part of the Formal 
Congregational Worship of God.


----------



## Eoghan

Sin is too strong. It is wrong for women to preach - I would not remain in a service where the preacher was a woman. I was uncomfortable at London Bible College with female lecturers (never really sorted that one out) but could not bring myself to attend worship when women were preaching. To my knowledge I was the only one who held that opinion.

When "the weekly bible study" becomes "all female" through a dearth of men, should the women discourage men from attending because they feel inhibited from speaking?


----------



## Eoghan

*Call me a hypocrite ...*



Eoghan said:


> Sin is too strong. It is wrong for women to preach - I would not remain in a service where the preacher was a woman. I was uncomfortable at London Bible College with female lecturers (never really sorted that one out) but could not bring myself to attend worship when women were preaching. To my knowledge I was the only one who held that opinion.
> 
> When "the weekly bible study" becomes "all female" through a dearth of men, should the women discourage men from attending because they feel inhibited from speaking?



Ironically one of the speakers I really want to hear at the Strange Fire Conference is Joni Eareckson-Tada. Call me a hypocrite if you want but I do notice her contribution is labelled "testimony".


----------



## Stratiotes

I believe scripture is very clear on this issue. Eve was created to be a help meet for Adam. Man is the glory of God, and woman is the glory of man. We know this because God created man from dust, then He took from man to create woman. Just as Christ was submissive to God the Father, men are to be submissive to Christ, as He is the head of the of the church. Wives in the same way should submit to their husbands. Scripture is very clear on this issue in my opinion.


----------



## Stratiotes

So for a woman to teach in anything in church is sin. The older women should teach the younger women how to love their husbands. Anyone who teaches should be the head of their house, and have their house in order. This automatically disqualifies a women teacher. A woman teaching anything in church is not right, in my opinion.


----------



## Loopie

Dan Kratz Jr. said:


> So for a woman to teach in anything in church is sin. The older women should teach the younger women how to love their husbands. Anyone who teaches should be the head of their house, and have their house in order. This automatically disqualifies a women teacher. A woman teaching anything in church is not right, in my opinion.



So even if there is a separate area for young children (infants and toddlers), a woman is not to teach them, even though it is within the context of 'church'? I am just curious as to the full understanding of your position.


----------



## psycheives

Dan Kratz Jr. said:


> So for a woman to teach in anything in church is sin. The older women should teach the younger women how to love their husbands. Anyone who teaches should be the head of their house, and have their house in order. This automatically disqualifies a women teacher. A woman teaching anything in church is not right, in my opinion.



Dan, I think most all agree it is sin for a woman to teach/authority (as pastor or elder) in the church over men based on those bible verses. But what about outside church? I think this is the main concern. People are taking the bible verses into the "outside the church" context and to the "anything spiritual" context. Thanks for your thoughts on what is sin and not sin.  Not "we prefer not" but "is it sin for a woman to lead a bible study in her home"? And if a man wants to join, should she refuse him?


----------



## Mushroom

psycheives said:


> Not "we prefer not" but "is it sin for a woman to lead a bible study in her home"?


No


psycheives said:


> And if a man wants to join, should she refuse him?


Yes.

My view, anyway.


----------



## jgilberAZ

I fail to understand how a woman providing a commentary/exposition/application of the Word in a *Study* Bible is not considered "teaching."

How is that not, in effect, leading a Bible study?

If only women read the notes written by women in this Bible, then there is no issue, in my opinion. 
Otherwise, there is a problem, in my opinion.


----------



## ZackF

jgilberAZ said:


> I fail to understand how a woman providing a commentary/exposition/application of the Word in a *Study* Bible is not considered "teaching."
> 
> How is that not, in effect, leading a Bible study?
> 
> If only women read the notes written by women in this Bible, then there is no issue, in my opinion.
> Otherwise, there is a problem, in my opinion.



So as I man exercising headship if I happen to read those notes because I want to make sure what my wife is learning is solid then the author or me is sinning especially if I happen to learn something?


----------



## ZackF

PuritanCovenanter said:


> If a woman wasn't allowed to teach in any situation then these excellent works would be out of bounds. And they are excellent.
> 
> 
> http://reformedlafayette.com/home/w...Revelation/JF OT Q1 - Creation to Abraham.pdf
> 
> 
> http://www.reformedfellowship.net/i...hap-pdfs/Grade-6-Gods-Unfolding-Prom-3-16.pdf
> 
> 
> Of course the above works are meant for the training of Children. But those young in the faith would greatly benefit from them as some people who don't have much of a theological background would also.
> 
> 
> Some of the best instruction I have gained has been from women. Heidi Zwartman has been used of God in excellent ways for me as she has posted on the Westminster Confession of Faith and other historical things. Especially when I was moderating another theological forum that was prone to have a tendency towards aberrant theology in the Confessional Church. She never assumed a place of authority but did gently guide me a lot and expose the truth behind our Confessional heritage. I praise God for her. I also believe that her note concerning Abigail's appeal and instruction to Nabal / King David should be noted. Men would be negligent of the gift God has given to us through women if we didn't listen to their counsel in many situations. We will also be held accountable for not listening to them and considering what they might bring us from God's word. This is not to say that it isn't sin for a woman to teach and hold authority over men in situations that St. Paul is referring to.
> 
> Don't forget St. Paul's admonition to teat the older women as mothers. I have greatly appreciated the older woman who have put me in my place a few times.
> 
> 1Ti 5:2    The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.



I too have learned a ton from Heidi over the years though I haven't recognized her contributions like you have other than the occasional "excellent point" or "amen" and I don't even know her. Furthermore I don't think she is sinning her nor are we from learning from her. I suppose some distinctions are important between teaching in the Church and parachurch. This board qualifies as the latter does it not? If so, can women teach men in parachurch situations like a seminary without it necessarily being sinful whether or not it is prudent?


----------



## psycheives

KS_Presby said:


> I too have learned a ton from Heidi over the years though I haven't recognized her contributions like you have other than the occasional "excellent point" or "amen" and I don't even know her. Furthermore I don't think she is sinning her nor are we from learning from her. I suppose some distinctions are important between teaching in the Church and parachurch. This board qualifies as the latter does it not? If so, can women teach men in parachurch situations like a seminary without it necessarily being sinful whether or not it is prudent?



Great point, Zack. Seminary IS NOT church. Bible study also is NOT church. 

If a woman can be a teacher in the secular world over men (which can relate to spiritual life in some ways in the subjects of philosophy, law, ethics, etc), what about in the seminary teaching biblical languages, philosophy, history and yes, theology? (Not advocating women be hired to teach practical theology for pastors - woman have no experience and so should be unqualified to be hired in a subject they don't know about). But women GO to seminary. So this isn't "for pastors only". So my concern is "IS IT SIN"? If it's not sin, then leave it up to each individual seminary to decide if they wish to restrict it by ordained teachers or not, etc. But is it sin?


----------



## Stratiotes

First of all Eric I would like to thank you for serving our country. I meant that a woman shouldn't preach from the pulpit is all. Teaching children is fine in my opinion. I do not believe that a woman should lead a bible study with men in it.


----------



## Andres

psycheives said:


> But women GO to seminary. So this isn't "for pastors only".



Yes, women do go to seminary, but at most confessionally reformed seminaries, women are not permitted to enroll in MDiv programs.


----------



## KevinInReno

Andres said:


> psycheives said:
> 
> 
> 
> But women GO to seminary. So this isn't "for pastors only".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, women do go to seminary, but at most confessionally reformed seminaries, women are not permitted to enroll in MDiv programs.
Click to expand...


Just to piggy back, for instance Covenant Seminary in St Louis first off encourages the wives to take courses. In addition there is a healthy dose of women there for counseling degrees, both single and wives. Westminster West I believe does the same.


----------



## kodos

Sister, what do your elders think about this? You are firstly under their authority. 

Personally, I think for a woman to exercise any authority over a man in spiritual matters is wrong. Would you allow a child to have spiritual authority over a man? That would be just as wrong.

Isaiah 3:12 - 
As for My people, children are their oppressors, 
And women rule over them. 
O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err, 
And destroy the way of your paths.” 

I believe wholeheartedly that when women are in positions of authority over a man in spiritual matters then the church rapidly falls into error ( see Isaiah above ).

I do think the sin is primarily on the portion of the men who allow this to happen. The elders of the church for not providing the spiritual instruction that their sheep require. Otherwise the women would probably be content and not see a need to step in. 

Certainly for a woman to be educating grown men to be would be pastors in theology seems horribly out of whack. What has happened here?


----------



## Free Christian

I left a church that has a woman elder as most here will know. The minster there even agreed that is was wrong but still allowed it! Sad but true fact that many men today are not stepping up in the churches to fill the roles that should be filled by them. I once went to a church and then out came the women preacher, I got up and left. My sister once taught religious instruction to primary school children. She is a good Christian and knows the truth, which she taught to them. No-one else would do it in the small country area she lives in. They were taught soundly by her. It was good to know those children were taught well and heard the truth rather than some of the wish wash that abounds these days.


----------



## KevinInReno

kodos said:


> Sister, what do your elders think about this? You are firstly under their authority.
> 
> Personally, I think for a woman to exercise any authority over a man in spiritual matters is wrong. Would you allow a child to have spiritual authority over a man? That would be just as wrong.
> 
> Isaiah 3:12 -
> As for My people, children are their oppressors,
> And women rule over them.
> O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err,
> And destroy the way of your paths.”
> 
> I believe wholeheartedly that when women are in positions of authority over a man in spiritual matters then the church rapidly falls into error ( see Isaiah above ).
> 
> I do think the sin is primarily on the portion of the men who allow this to happen. The elders of the church for not providing the spiritual instruction that their sheep require. Otherwise the women would probably be content and not see a need to step in.
> 
> Certainly for a woman to be educating grown men to be would be pastors in theology seems horribly out of whack. What has happened here?



With your last comment I wanted to provide further clarity if you thought that I was saying women were teaching future Pastors... I was referring solely to women enrolled in those seminaries, for certain degrees. There are no women on the faculty of any of the reformed seminaries in the US that I know of.

(maybe you were referencing someone elses comment however.)

I would immediately leave any church polity that allowed for a woman to become an elder. It would be the canary in the coal mine moment for me.


----------



## jandrusk

Per Chapter 25 of the WCF, the visible church is made up of all members of the body of Christ who profess the true religion(to paraphrase). So the only way you get outside of the church would be to teach those that are not members of the visible church, which I don't think would make sense in relation to the context of this discussion.


----------



## kodos

I wasn't referencing your comment at all 



KevinInReno said:


> kodos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sister, what do your elders think about this? You are firstly under their authority.
> 
> Personally, I think for a woman to exercise any authority over a man in spiritual matters is wrong. Would you allow a child to have spiritual authority over a man? That would be just as wrong.
> 
> Isaiah 3:12 -
> As for My people, children are their oppressors,
> And women rule over them.
> O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err,
> And destroy the way of your paths.”
> 
> I believe wholeheartedly that when women are in positions of authority over a man in spiritual matters then the church rapidly falls into error ( see Isaiah above ).
> 
> I do think the sin is primarily on the portion of the men who allow this to happen. The elders of the church for not providing the spiritual instruction that their sheep require. Otherwise the women would probably be content and not see a need to step in.
> 
> Certainly for a woman to be educating grown men to be would be pastors in theology seems horribly out of whack. What has happened here?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With your last comment I wanted to provide further clarity if you thought that I was saying women were teaching future Pastors... I was referring solely to women enrolled in those seminaries, for certain degrees. There are no women on the faculty of any of the reformed seminaries in the US that I know of.
> 
> (maybe you were referencing someone elses comment however.)
> 
> I would immediately leave any church polity that allowed for a woman to become an elder. It would be the canary in the coal mine moment for me.
Click to expand...


----------



## jgilberAZ

Would this be a correct summary?

It's not okay for a woman to teach men in a Bible Study.
But, it is okay for a woman to teach men in a Study Bible.

Is that what I'm "hearing?"


----------



## JoannaV

KevinInReno said:


> With your last comment I wanted to provide further clarity if you thought that I was saying women were teaching future Pastors... I was referring solely to women enrolled in those seminaries, for certain degrees. There are no women on the faculty of any of the reformed seminaries in the US that I know of.



WTS has one woman lecturing in Old Testament. There was an old PB thread about it: http://www.puritanboard.com/f116/reformed-seminaries-female-teachers-78061/


----------



## SinnerSavedByChrist

jandrusk said:


> Per Chapter 25 of the WCF, the visible church is made up of all members of the body of Christ who profess the true religion(to paraphrase). So the only way you get outside of the church would be to teach those that are not members of the visible church, which I don't think would make sense in relation to the context of this discussion.


 Indeed I would encourage all women to share their faith with both men and women, old and young, white or asian. Obviously there is wisdom in this matter... the sister needs to guard her heart and be wary of her safety. But she is called, just like EVERY single believer, to tell from the rooftops the goodnews to anyone who would hear.

And inevitably, she will "Teach" the scriptures in some manner or form to unbelievers as she explains the Glorious gospel of our blessed God to lost males.

But once a man is converted and part of a local church - it would be most wise for her to immediately stop teaching him, but recommend this new believer to discipleship by faithful Men of the church.


----------



## Mushroom

People are gonna do what they want to do. But as Luther said somewhere, God changes our 'wanter'...


----------



## sevenzedek

Eoghan said:


> Eoghan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sin is too strong. It is wrong for women to preach - I would not remain in a service where the preacher was a woman. I was uncomfortable at London Bible College with female lecturers (never really sorted that one out) but could not bring myself to attend worship when women were preaching. To my knowledge I was the only one who held that opinion.
> 
> When "the weekly bible study" becomes "all female" through a dearth of men, should the women discourage men from attending because they feel inhibited from speaking?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ironically one of the speakers I really want to hear at the Strange Fire Conference is Joni Eareckson-Tada. Call me a hypocrite if you want but I do notice her contribution is labelled "testimony".
Click to expand...


I would hardly call you a hypocrite. Joni has a wonderful testimony and there is much we can learn from her.


----------



## sevenzedek

Dan Kratz Jr. said:


> ... Man is the glory of God, and woman is the glory of man. We know this because God created man from dust, then He took from man to create woman. Just as Christ was submissive to God the Father, men are to be submissive to Christ, as He is the head of the of the church. ...



The order is that of "who came first"—just as we are to give honor those who are older than us.

If there is no man in the household, the woman becomes the head of the household. How would that play out in missional circumstances where there is no man in the church house?

It is not the ideal for there to be no man in a household. In that case, would the woman take charge until a man comes to the house? It would seem so, but I am still working through such a theoretical situation.


----------



## THE W

ok..

It's amazing to see the situation in the garden of eden in genesis 3 play itself out again in today's society.

Men following in the footsteps of their cowardly first federal head adam in sitting idly by while the serpent of feminism entices women to disobey a clear and direct order from the LORD.

Men need to step up and play the role they are called to play by the LORD in leading the women and being head of the women. Bottomline, women are out of place because men won't take their place. the whole "well, there are no men to do it" excuse simply means that men are derelict of their duty in leadership. this should in no way be seen as a warrant for women to make it their duty to take up a man's role. 

A women will take a leadership role that a man should have if there are no men to do it in the same way someone will have to walk or hitchhike the rest of the way to their destination if there vehicle breaks down on the freeway.

if the person took better care of their car they wouldn't be in such a situation and in the same way if men were trained up as they are supposed to in order to be leaders you would have no need for women to be taking over these roles.

I'm sure most of us know isaiah 3:12 and understand the context of that chapter. a nation given over to folly. some will say "well, men simply aren't being trained to do certain things that many women are able and willing to do. What then?" Folly leads to more folly, sin leads to more sin. Since men are derelict of their duty and not doing what they're supposed to do, women will then be forced to do what they're not supposed to do.

some will still say "well, there are many very talented and gifted women doing great things in the ministry. should we stop them from using their talents and gifts?" this issue has NEVER been about ability, it's about ROLES! the LORD gave men and women specific roles to play. Men are derelict in their leader role and women are rebelling against their submissive role. Women who bring up such an excuse are simply rebelling. Men must step up, and women must step down. Men lead, women help. those are the roles our LORD and Creator gave to men and women. this complementarianism is reflective of the relationship within the eternal Godhead between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Jesus, being equal to the Father, submitted fully to the leadership of the Father(phil 2:5-9) and the Holy Ghost submitted to the will of the Father and the Son(john 16:13-15). Men and women are different, distinct, yet equal. 

I actually don't blame women for the feminist mentality that has grown over the decades and is now more prevalent then ever. The modern women is the result of circumstances due to either the cowardice or brutishness of men. Leadership and responsibility go hand-in-hand. Not to say that the folly of women should be overlooked, but that their folly is directly related to man's folly. When men behave like men, women will behave like women.



Just my bronze lincolns..


----------



## ZackF

KevinInReno said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> psycheives said:
> 
> 
> 
> But women GO to seminary. So this isn't "for pastors only".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, women do go to seminary, but at most confessionally reformed seminaries, women are not permitted to enroll in MDiv programs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just to piggy back, for instance Covenant Seminary in St Louis first off encourages the wives to take courses. In addition there is a healthy dose of women there for counseling degrees, both single and wives. Westminster West I believe does the same.
Click to expand...



This is a good thing. If I were a pastor I would want my wife to have had some training on being a pastor's wife.


----------



## a mere housewife

Randy, you are such a sweet friend, and have taught me a great deal. I was looking at my Charlie Brown book the other day and being so grateful for your kindness over the years; and your words are just another part of your kindness.

I do love the fellowship here and am always learning a great deal from all the threads I read with all the contributors. I hope it is not misunderstood as a disparagement of anything I value here to say that I think perhaps the kind of teaching and learning available in this setting is only an aspect of the fullness Scripture is speaking about -- it is less costly than the kind we are always doing with our lives. And I have found it much easier to learn the lessons here than the ones I am always struggling to learn day to day, from the lives of women whose examples I treasure. For me personally the discussion about women teaching in various settings is overshadowed by what seems to me a steep reality that it is easier to teach in some ways than in others. That's why I find the question of teaching positions for women in the secular realm more clear cut: there's more of a recognition that it's just a profession, it just means a person has specialised knowledge in a certain area. It doesn't mean they are godly daughter, wife, friend, sister, or mom. It doesn't mean they suffer well, love steadfastly, or persevere in daily trivialities of caring for others, even without any seeming reward. It doesn't mean they have a servant's heart. They may, but people who are learning that godliness from them don't also have to learn to be math or science teachers. The profession isn't a manner of life. But once the realm of seminary or Bible study is brought in, the *idea* of a 'teacher' blurs into that other 'manner of life' teaching (because of being in a spiritual, not simply a specialised knowledge, setting), and women are called to teach men in the manner of submission. Authority and position in that realm is a special form of serving the needs of those under authority -- leading by example, not lording it over -- to which which men are called. Hierarchy in the church (or in the home) undergoes an inversion in human ideas of glory and service, and a position of oversight or 'teaching' in those realms is far more comprehensive than a position in the secular realm.


----------



## Stratiotes

I think that it would benefit everyone to go to seminary. Because we are all supposed to preach the gospel. Yet God has ordained men to preach and teach to the body of Christ. Women are more easily deceived than men, and are the weaker vessels. I truly think this plays a part as well.


----------



## JimmyH

I'm surprised that this thread is still going. I didn't vote in the poll. The Scriptures speak plainly regarding this topic.


----------

