Commentary

C. Michael Patton explains why women cannot teach in the church

23 Comments

He explains why he thinks that the Bible teaches that women cannot teach in the church.

His point:

Now, let me give my short and sweet answer as to why Paul did not allow women to teach:

Paul did not let women teach due to the often aggressive and combative nature that teaching must entail concerning the confrontation of false doctrine. Men must be the teachers when combating false teaching. However, because the role of a teacher in the church is so often to combat false doctrine, and because false doctrine is always a problem, generally speaking, the principles are always applicable. The “exercising of authority” is inherently tied to teaching and its necessary condemnation of false doctrine.

The combative nature of teaching is particularly relevant to a broader understanding of the characteristics of men and women.

I agree with Patton on this one. I think in practice most women are more interested in relationships and community than they are in truth and polemics. Christianity is a propositional faith, though. It’s not meant to be a set of arbitrary preferences that give our lives hope and meaning without any evidential foundation. And it needs to be defended using rational arguments and evidence against lies.

I would make an exception for women who want to teach on an area of knowledge not related to the Bible but related to apologetics or Christian living, like astrophysics, economics, ancient history, bio-ethics, etc. In that case I would allow a woman to teach. I would also be willing to make exceptions for women who are truth-focused and who do not mind making exclusive claims if it makes them unpopular, e.g. – Jennifer Roback Morse.

Apologetics advocacy

Related posts

 

23 thoughts on “C. Michael Patton explains why women cannot teach in the church”

  1. I generally think it’s better for men to be the leaders in church, but there are circumstances that require a woman to lead in certain areas. One of those reasons is that not enough men have been stepping up to the plate. For example, there are more women missionaries in the field right now than men. It’s not because women are driving men out, but because there aren’t enough men volunteering to go. I believe that if the men won’t go, God will send willing women in their place.

    I have taught Sunday School before, because I was educated on the subject (our church does 6-week specific courses, not just random class every week) and because there weren’t enough knowledgeable or experienced men willing to teach that semester.

    Like

    Reply

  2. Interesting take. However, I believe woman CAN teach in the church: to other women.

    The reason for this? Is that the roles God gave man and woman in the church was that women were to be subordinate. The man is to be the head over the woman.

    1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:22-24 Both of these passages deal with this. Also, Paul wrote: “For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man” (1 Corinthians 11:8, 9)

    This is God’s word, not mine! :) But the point is simple: men are to lead in worship, to teach, and women are to be subordinate to men. Any denomination that teaches the reserve of that is guilty of false teaching.

    Like

    Reply

  3. I’m agreed with Kelly in that Men seem to be stepping down from leadership positions in the church these days. It’s almost like a lot of guys in the church have lost interest. (of course resulting from a lack of understanding/experience of the Gospel)

    I think the media has a lot to do with it

    Like

    Reply

  4. I am so glad that my church is completely untouched by this nonsense.

    I taught Adult Sunday School last Sunday and today to a mixed class, men and women. My pastor asked me to. I did not push my way into it or usurp any man’s authority in order to do this.

    People who push the male-only Bible teaching B.S. ignore Joel 2, Acts 2, and many other places where women are encouraged to speak. They ignore Deborah, Huldah, Miriam, Pricilla, Pheobe, Junia, and many more examples in the scriptures of women taking active part, and yes, even leadership roles in the O.T and early church.
    It is poor Bible exegesis on the part of certain prominate men that is making this lovely, off-balanced teaching possible. Poor Bible exegesis includes, but is not limited to, exalting certain scriptures and diminishing, or even flat-out ignoring, other scriptures. It also includes getting far more milage out of the ‘favored’ scriptures than what is actually there due to poor translation or poor understanding of the issues the writer is dealing with in these corrective epistles.

    http://strivetoenter.com/wim/category/1-corinthians-11/

    http://strivetoenter.com/wim/category/ephesians-5/

    http://strivetoenter.com/wim/category/egalitarian-vs-complementarian/

    Men who ignore the words of Jesus and raise up the words of Paul and Peter to a higher level than the words of the WORD MADE FLESH are the ones guilty of false teaching.

    Jesus spoke specifically AGAINST hiearchy. Yet men are determined to have it. This is God’s word, spoken by God Himself while He walk with us on this earth, not mine! :)

    Like

    Reply

  5. Wintery, for years now, I have held informal Bible studies after work in libraries, cafes, and at Starbucks. Guys and girls attend, a number coming because they wouldn’t step foot in a church. Others were college students away from their home church. Was/am I (in your opinion) wrong to do this? I definitely was in a leader position (it was my idea as a non-pushy outreach), and I spent time preparing before hand, with outlines, study books, etc. I’m curious.

    And as another commenter noted, the guys weren’t stepping up. While there guys who attended, they felt they were too busy with work and life to actually lead (even for a week).

    Like

    Reply

  6. I’m happy, like Mara, that the church I go to isn’t hung up on gender roles. Women in it are teachers at the highest levels, in positions of leadership, and men teach toddlers in Sunday School and care for infants in child care.

    The branch of Christianity that thinks women shouldn’t teach is one branch, and it is by no means the most prominent. So why even ask if it’s wrong? According to which rules? In which circumstances?

    Like

    Reply

      1. Yes, that’s true, Wintery. So for me, the issue of male teaching vs. female has never come up. There are both male and female teachers. My own teacher, as an adult, though, is male.

        Like

        Reply

  7. @MCSpinster, hi, I actually wanted to know Wintery’s opinion, since for the most part, he disagrees with women as teachers (with some exceptions).

    I’ve visited Brethren churches where women sit pretty much silent through the whole services, while I was a member of churches where women were pastors. My own Grandmother is a pastor. So I’ve seen both sides of the spectrum.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Only if you read William Lane Craig’s “On Guard” first. Then you can. Sorry, but it’s the law! And I’ve replaced all teh hymnals in your church with copies of it, so it won’t be hard to find one.

      Like

      Reply

  11. Wintery,
    May I add the reason Paul gives for not allowing women to teach: For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

    Paul ties it back to creation, so the issue is NOT cultural, but a creation issue. Men are to be the leaders in the church and represent Christ when they do so. To shrug off this admonition is to fall into the sin of Eve by becoming a usurper of authority, even if some pastors agree to it.

    Yes, there are instances when a woman can teach, but I limit that to other women, not the congregation. The problem of our culture is because we have ignored this biblical admonition founded in creation. We want to say what Paul was doing was cultural, but even in his day, there were plenty of pagan religions where women were in leadership, so that argument is completely false. Paul is not arguing from culture, but the way God created men and women.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Timothy,
      So according to your logic, Eve was only decieved but Adam was outright rebellious. Therefore ALL men are rebellious, just as ALL women are easily decieved.

      Sorry, plain logic and reason does not allow you to have one and not the other. You can’t use this account to say ALL women are easily deceived unless you give equal time to ALL me are blatantly rebellious, then turn around and blame God for their blatant rebellion.

      The problem I have with your line of thinking and reading into scripture is that men are basically saying it is better to have the outright rebellious as teachers than those innocently deceived. You know like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Joseph Smith and all.

      Timothy: “The problem of our culture is because we have ignored this biblical admonition founded in creation.”

      Sorry, dude, but the ONLY admonitions found in the creation account for both Adam and Eve were, Be fruitful and multiply, Rule the earth and subdue it, and don’t eat the from this certain tree.
      There are NO other rules given at that time.
      To see any other rules there is to read into the text what does not exist. Something men with agendas frequently do when they are trying to prove a point.

      Go ahead. Go back there and read. But do so without the help of men who try to make the creation account say what it does not plainly say.

      Like

      Reply

  12. I don’t know Wintery.
    I actually just looked it up on Amazon and saw what it was about. So I did at least that much right away. And that was good, right?

    Question. To you, what is the difference between apologetics and exegesis? or do you know?

    I ask because I think that this is where you and I differ. You are into Christian apologetics and I’m into Bible exegesis. And this might be one of the reasons we sometimes talk past each other.

    I’m actually on a book buying freeze. I have too many books and need to get rid of some before I can buy any more. Maybe I’ll see if I can order it through my library. Sometimes they can get me books like that.

    But I’m warning you. If I am able to get my hands on it and read it, then I’m going to ask you to read something I suggest. And there won’t be any peace until you do. :D

    Okay, I have it written down. We’ll see what I can do.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Exegesis is trying to understand the intent of the author of a book.

      Apologetics is the reasoned defense of the faith to those who ask why you believe, as in Acts 17.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Actually, I looked it up the other day and my dictionary said exegesis is to critically analyze and study it and said nothing about author intent.

        I’ll have to look it up again when I get home to double check. But I’m pretty sure that what it said. If I can, I post my dictionary’s definition later. Time permitting.

        Like

        Reply

  13. Mara,

    In regards to a recent post from you:

    /////
    The problem I have with your line of thinking and reading into scripture is that men are basically saying it is better to have the outright rebellious as teachers than those innocently deceived. You know like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Joseph Smith and all.
    ////

    Actually scripture is pretty clear here. It says: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

    There is a REASON why Adam was formed first, instead of both at the same time. God was ordaining that the man be the leader of the family.

    Women tend to process information through an emotional prism. Satan was aware of this, and exploited that quality since he deemed that would be the path of least resistance.

    Eve was deceived into believing the lie when she “…saw that the tree was beautiful and its fruit looked delicious…” and then decided to disobey God and usurp authority over her husband.

    Adam’s sin was in choosing his wife over God. He knew perfectly well what he was doing when he ate the fruit but couldn’t bear the thought of living without his wife.

    wgbutler777

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment