The conditions under which a woman may teach continue to be a source of confusion for some. An opinion held by a few is that as long as the gathering is an assembly of the church, a woman may teach Bible or Bible topics. This allows her to write articles for religious periodicals which may be sent into all the world, or teach a Bible subject to a group of young people at a recreational gathering to which the public is invited or at least has access. She could, according to that logic, also teach on the street corners to every one within hearing or even on the radio. In other words, she may teach the Bible in public, or to the public, but not within a public assembly of the church.

Please notice the Scripture given by inspiration in 1 Timothy 2:11-14. "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

Paul had been, in previous verses, giving instruction as to the manner in which women were to adorn (make attractive DLK) themselves. Now in verse 11 he points out that they are to learn in silence. They are not to be a part of the teaching process when the church comes together to worship. gather they are to remain in subjection there just as at other times. Then he flatly forbids her to teach in verse 12. Yes, he is dealing specifically with when the church comes together. The word for "teach" here is "didasko" which means to hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses, according to Thayer. (pg 144 #1321) This word is usually reserved for those who were public teachers. Paul says the women are not to be didactic teachers. That responsibility is reserved for the men of the congregation Then Paul shows that she is also not to usurp authority or domineer over the man. So, there are two things Paul did not permit: he did not allow the woman to teach, publicly; and he did not allow her to be in a position of authority over the man anytime. She may never dominate the man with out incurring the displeasure of Almighty God is to be in silence when the Word of God is taught publicly.

Then, in verses 13, 14 he shows why this restriction is placed upon her. "For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." Like it or not it was the woman who was deceived by Satan. The aim was likely to get to Adam you say. Yes, probably so. However, it was achieved by fooling or deceiving the woman. Paul plainly says that Adam was not deceived. He ate of the fruit apparently out of a desire to please her. One thing is clear, however, and that is he was not deceived. She was. Paul brings up this historical case to show why women are not to be public teachers. God apparently did not wish to allow a similar situation to exist again. Under the new covenant women are not to be public teachers.

I realize Acts 18:24-26 relates how a woman was involved in the teaching of Apollos, who was an eloquent man and mighty in the scriptures. However, one needs to always keep in mind that when she taught Apollos she was with her husband in private. Any historian will tell you that no woman of the day would have dared to take the leading role in the teaching of Apollos even in a private situation. It is unthinkable. Yes, she and her husband". ..took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." If anything, this only strengthens point we are making. Even in this case, her teaching along with her husband was in private.

Consider this: Does it make sense that God would forbid the woman in teaching when the church comes together because of the woman's being deceived in the beginning, only to turn her loose any other time? Who believes it? She isn't to teach publicly period. Why would God forbid her to teach when the church comes together but allow it in a religious periodical which is read by thousands or perhaps millions? Has his divine purpose been thwarted? of course it has. Why forbid the woman to teach when the church comes together, but allow her to gather the young ones around in a public capacity and teach them Bible topics? Has God's reason for her not teaching publicly been bypassed? Surely it has.

This troubles my mind. Women are surely to be teachers, but not in a public way. When Paul wrote to Titus in chapter 2:3-5, he outlined what they are to teach. "The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; that they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed."

Inspiration not only forbids women to teach publicly when church comes together but, furthermore, instructs her what she is to teach in a private manner. Her responsibility is not public teaching in any form or manner. The men are to do that. A Godly woman has a tremendously important position. The fact that she has largely forsaken it in our day, is undoubtedly at the root of many problems in homes and marriages all around the world. How long has it been since an older sister went to a young one privately to help with her responsibilities as outlined by Paul in Titus 2:3-5? Do you know of a case where this has happened? If it did, what was the reaction of the younger sister? Did she accept it as she should or was she insulted? Brethren, this is needed in our day and time. Give this some thought. We welcome letters of response both pro or con.--DLK.