TEXT [Commentary]
F. Women Learners and Teachers (2:11–3:1a)
11 Women should learn quietly and submissively. 12 I do not let women teach men or have authority over them.[*] Let them listen quietly. 13 For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing,[*] assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty.
CHAPTER 3
1 This is a trustworthy saying:
NOTES
2:11 Women should learn quietly. The Greek word for “quietly” (hēsuchia [TG2271, ZG2484]) denotes not an absence of speech but a calm demeanor (cf. 1 Pet 3:4). See note on “quiet” at 2:2.
submissively. Hupotagē [TG5292, ZG5717] is not a passive idea. It denotes the voluntary waiving of one’s rights for the sake of another (cf. 3:4; 2 Cor 9:13; Gal 2:5). Some assume that Paul is speaking of submission to a husband. However, “submissively” modifies “learn”—that is, women are to learn “calmly” and “submissively.”
2:12 I do not let women. The verb epitrepō [TG2010, ZG2205] is a present tense indicative: “I am not permitting” or “I do not permit.” And the number is singular: “a woman.”
teach men or have authority over them. The Greek verb authentein [TG831, ZG883] is not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings or the NT. In the Greek of the day, the word meant “domineer.” The root of the noun is auto + entos, meaning “to do or originate something with one’s own hand.” The standard lexicons define the verb as “to control in a domineering manner” and understand Paul’s usage as, “I do not allow women . . . to dominate men” (L&N 37.21). When Paul has exercise of authority in mind, he uses a word such as exousia [TG1849, ZG2026] (e.g., Rom 9:21; 13:1-3; 1 Cor 7:4, 37; 9:4-6, 12, 18; 11:10; 15:24; 2 Cor 10:8; 13:10; Eph 1:21; Col 1:16; 2 Thess 3:9; Titus 3:1). This means that Paul was highlighting the manner in which a woman taught—that is, a woman was not to teach in a domineering way (cf. the TNIV footnote). Evangelical scholarship has been largely dependent on Knight’s study for its understanding of authentein and his translation of authentekotos pros auton as, “I exercised authority over him” (1984:145). But the preposition pros [TG4314, ZG4639] plus the accusative auton does not bear this sense in Greek. “To/towards,” “against,” and “with” (and less frequently “at,” “for,” “with reference to,” “on,” and “on account of”) are the range of possible meanings. See BAGD pros + the accusative.
Furthermore, in the Greek, we see a “neither–nor” construction: “neither teach nor domineer” (NLT, “have authority over”). Such constructions in the NT pair synonyms (“neither despised nor scorned,” Gal 4:14), antonyms (“neither slave nor free,” Gal 3:28), or closely related ideas (“neither of the night nor of the dark,” 1 Thess 5:5). It is also used to define a related purpose or a goal (“where thieves neither break in nor steal” [i.e., break in to steal], Matt 6:20), to move from the general to the particular (“wisdom neither of this age nor of the rulers of this age,” 1 Cor 2:6), or to define a natural progression of related ideas (“they neither sow, nor reap, nor gather into barns,” Matt 6:26). In this context it seems that the Greek correlative “neither–nor” defines a single activity. (Compare Psalm 121:4 “[God] who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep,” ESV.) This means that women here are not prohibited from roles that involve teaching men. The issue is rather the manner in which they teach—that is, they should not teach in a dictatorial or domineering way (see commentary, and see Belleville 1990:176-177).
Let them listen quietly. The NLT implies that women are not to speak at all. Others who take it this way translate the Greek phrase en hēsuchia [TG2271, ZG2484] as “in silence” (e.g., KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, TEV, CEV). The Greek merely has “to be calm” (i.e., noncontentious: einai en hēsuchia). When Paul has silence in view, he typically uses sigaō [TG4601, ZG4967] (Rom 16:25; 1 Cor 14:28, 30, 34). Hēsuchia here, as in 2:2 and 2:11, refers to a quiet demeanor (cf. 1 Thess 4:11; 2 Thess 3:12).
2:13 For. The Greek conjunction (gar [TG1063, ZG1142]) introduces an explanation (not a causal relationship), as it does elsewhere in 1 Timothy (2:5; 3:13; 4:5, 8, 10, 16; 5:4, 11, 15, 18; 6:7, 10). There is nothing in the context that would support a causal link with v. 12 (see BDF §456).
God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. The verb plassō [TG4111, ZG4421] means “to form,” “mold,” or “shape” and is typically used of the artist who works in clay or wax (cf. Rom 9:20). It recalls the Genesis 2 account of the man’s creation from the clay earth and the woman’s creation from a portion of man’s side plus clay earth: “The Lord God took the human being whom he formed [eplasen] and placed him in the garden” (Gen 2:15, LXX). The terms “first” and “afterward” in Paul’s writings define a historical sequence and not a hierarchical relationship (3:10; 1 Cor 15:46; 1 Thess 4:16-17).
2:14 And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. Paul was alluding to the Genesis 3 account of how the serpent misled the woman so that she disobeyed God’s command: “The serpent deceived (ēpatēsen [TG538, ZG572]) me and I ate” (Gen 3:13, LXX). The word in 2:14 is an intensified form of apataō that means “utterly misled” (ex + apatētheisa [TG1818, ZG1987]). Some argue that the intensive implies the belief that Eve’s sin was sexual in nature. Yet lexical evidence for this theory is lacking. The phrase “by Satan” is added by the NLT to supply the implied agent.
The woman was deceived. Paul may be countering the beliefs of an early form of gnosticism that thought women were elevated as the favored instruments of revelation. Eve (not Adam) was thought to be the one who was created first and then sent as an instructor to raise up Adam, in whom there was no soul. Her progeny, in turn, became the source of special revelation to men from that point on (see Kroeger 1998).
sin was the result. Lit., “[the woman] became a transgressor” (en parabasei gegonen [TG3847, ZG4126]; cf. “transgression”). Paul is not saying that Eve was the means by which sin entered the world. Elsewhere he attributes this state of affairs to Adam (Rom 5:12).
2:15 But women will be saved through childbearing. “Women” is actually the singular “she,” referring to Eve. “Through childbearing” is literally “through the childbearing,” that is, the birth of Jesus Christ. Paul is not saying that salvation for women comes through the bearing of children. He is referring to Gen 3:15 and the statement “I will cause hostility between you [Satan] and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He [Christ] will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.”
modesty. The Greek term sōphrosunēs [TG4997, ZG5408] has to do with the ability to restrain either passions and impulses (self-control, moderation) or the intellect (TLNT 41-42).
3:1a This is a trustworthy saying. This phrase is unique to the Pastorals. It occurs five times (1:15; 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim 2:11; Titus 3:8). In each case it precedes or follows a statement about God’s saving work through Jesus Christ. It follows Titus 3:6-7 (“He generously poured out the Spirit upon us through Jesus Christ our Savior. Because of his grace he made us right in his sight and gave us confidence that we will inherit eternal life.”) and precedes 1 Tim 1:15b (“Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners”), 4:10 (“our hope is in the living God, who is the Savior of all people”), and 2 Tim 2:11 (“If we die with him, we will also live with him”). The NLT links the trustworthy saying at 1 Tim 3:1 with what follows (i.e., those who aspire to leadership roles). However, it probably refers back to 2:15 and the statement that Eve (and her descendants) will be saved through the bearing of the Christ child. See commentary.
COMMENTARY [Text]
Paul continues on the topic of how women conduct themselves during worship. There is a shift at verse 11, however, from women who pray to women who learn. The posture is corrective: “Women should learn quietly and submissively.” This is the fourth time in the space of a few verses that Paul calls for peace and harmony. Prayer for rulers is needed to lead a quiet life (2:2), the men are not to lash out at others while praying (2:8), and women are to be mild mannered while learning (2:11) and (perhaps) teaching (2:12; see below).
Paul’s first corrective is that women “learn quietly” (en hēsuchia [TG2271, ZG2484]; 2:11). The NLT reads “let them listen quietly” in 2:12, more specific wording than the Greek einai en hēsuchia (“be calm”) warrants. The NLT assumes that Paul was attempting to silence women—i.e., they can listen but they cannot speak during the teaching process. To phrase it this way, however, makes no sense. Silence is simply not compatible with the dialogical learning method of Paul’s day. The issue is manner and not speech per se. Indeed, the same adjective appears nine verses earlier to describe the “peaceful and quiet life” believers are to live (hēsuchion bion [TG2272/979, ZG2485/1050]; 2:2). Peter used the term in the same way, stating that a woman’s beauty should be that of a gentle and quiet spirit (hēsuchiou pneumatos [TG2272/4151, ZG2485/4460]).
Paul’s second corrective is that women learn “submissively” (2:11). Some jump to the conclusion that women are being asked to submit either to their husbands or to male leadership. The command, however, is, “let a woman learn” not “let a woman submit.” How she is to learn is Paul’s concern. All too often, the fact is missed that Paul affirms that a woman should be allowed to learn and be instructed. This affirmation is no small thing. While a female student is hardly a novelty today, it was quite unusual in Paul’s day. Girls in the Greco-Roman period were taught the three “Rs.” But higher education past the age of 12, though on the rise, was still not commonplace. The verse may imply submission to a teacher. A submissive spirit was (and is) a necessary prerequisite for learning. This would not eliminate expression of one’s own opinions. It has more to do with a willingness to take direction. On the other hand, the verse may imply “self-restraint” or “self-control” (see note on 2:11). This sense appears in 1 Corinthians 14:32, where Paul states that those “who prophesy are in control of their spirit and can take turns.” In either case, Paul was not questioning a woman’s prerogative to learn as long as she did it “quietly” and “submissively.”
Paul’s third corrective is found in a much-debated text: “I am not permitting a woman to teach.” The ongoing sense of the present tense verb is to be noted. The corrective is not the commonly found categorical prohibition, “I do not permit,” (aorist tense) but a restriction specific to the current situation at Ephesus (“I am not permitting [you Ephesian women]”). The NLT’s “I do not let women” can be easily misunderstood as Paul’s universal practice and overlooks the context of false teaching specific to the Ephesian situation. It is also important to note that Paul introduces verse 12 as a point of contrast with verse 11. The initial but in the Greek makes this quite clear: “Let a woman learn quietly and submissively but for a woman to teach . . . a man I am not permitting” (my translation).
What then is the restriction? It can’t be women teaching per se, since Paul commands Cretan women in a letter written roughly at the same time to “teach others what is good” (Titus 2:3-5; cf. Acts 18:26). It could be that Paul was restricting women from public or “official” teaching. Yet this too has its difficulties, for teaching was part of what a prophet did in a public setting. To prophesy was to instruct so that “everyone will learn” (1 Cor 14:19, 31). And women were certainly active in the early Christian communities in this way (e.g., 1 Cor 11:5). Also, Paul taught elsewhere that when believers gather corporately, “one will sing, another will teach, another will tell some special revelation God has given, one will speak in tongues, and another will interpret what is said” (1 Cor 14:26). There are no gender distinctions here. Both women and men brought a teaching to the congregation.
Some claim that the issue is women teaching men doctrine and that Paul is stating that women cannot do so. But this misconstrues the verb didaskō and the term “doctrine.” To “teach” (didaskein) is to provide instruction in a formal or informal setting (L&N 33.224; cf. Luke 11:1). The Greek term for “teach doctrine” is katēcheō (cf. English “catechism”; Luke 1:4; Acts 18:25; 21:21, 24; 1 Cor 14:19; Gal 6:6). “Doctrine” as a system of thought assumes that authority lies in the act of teaching (or in the person who teaches). Yet, in the Pastorals, authority resides in the deposit of truth—literally, “the mystery of the faith” (3:9), “the message of faith” (4:6), “the faith” (4:1; 5:8; 6:10, 12, 21), and “the trust” (6:20) that Jesus passed on to his disciples and that they in turn passed on to their disciples (2 Tim 2:2). So “doctrine” with this definition was not a first-century development. That is why Paul instructed Timothy to publicly rebuke (5:20) anyone who departed from, literally, “the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ” (6:3). The teacher was subject to evaluation and discipline just like any other leader or minister.
Perhaps the prohibition only applies to the “wife” and “husband” (and not “woman” and “man”): “I do not permit a wife to teach or have authority over her husband” (TNIV mg, NRSV mg). The difficulty is that Paul gives no clue that he is shifting from men and women in general (2:8-10) to husbands and wives specifically (2:11-15). It is true that Adam and Eve are mentioned in the following verses. But they are pointed to as the prototypical male and female, rather than as husband and wife.
The command for a quiet demeanor while learning and teaching suggests that women were disrupting worship. The men, too, were praying in an angry and contentious way (2:8). Since Paul targeted women who teach men (2:12) and used the example of Adam and Eve as a corrective, it is reasonable to conclude that there was a bit of a battle of the sexes going on in the congregation.
The feminine side of this battle is summed up in the phrase oude authentein—translated “or usurp their authority” in the NLT mg and “have authority over them” in the text. The key term is authentein [TG831, ZG883], a word found nowhere else in the Greek Bible and only a handful of times outside the Bible. Although the infinitive authentein is commonly translated “to have authority over,” this is most unlikely. If Paul had wanted to speak of the ordinary exercise of authority, he could have picked any number of recurring words such as exousia [TG1849, ZG2026] (Titus 3:1), epitagē [TG2003, ZG2198] (Titus 2:15), krinō [TG2919, ZG3212] (2 Tim 4:1; Titus 3:12), kurieuō [TG2961, ZG3259] (6:15), or archē [TG746, ZG794] (Titus 3:1). But he did not, so we must ask, “why not?” A reasonable answer is that authentein has a nuance that particularly suited the Ephesian situation. “Rule” and “exercise authority” are routine. So the nuance lies elsewhere.
This nuance can be gleaned from sources contemporary with Paul. The noun authentēs is a literary word that means “murderer.” Wisdom of Solomon 12:6, for example, refers to Canaanite practices of sorcery and unholy rites such as “parents who murder (authentas) helpless lives.” By the first century AD, the lexical range expanded to include the perpetrator of crimes committed by others. The first- century Greek historian, Diodorus of Sicily, for instance, speaks of the sponsors (authentas) of some daring plans (Library of History 3.34.35.25), the perpetrators (authentais) of a sacrilege (1.16.61.1), and the master-mind (authentas) of a crime (17.5.4.5).
While the noun appears frequently, the verb authenteō first appears in the first century BC and only in nonliterary works. In the common Greek of the day it means to “domineer” or “gain the upper hand” (L&N 37.21). For example, one brother writes to the other about a business dispute with the foreman regarding the amount to be paid the ferryman for shipping a load of cattle: “I had my way with him” [or “I took a firm stand with him”; authentēkotos pros auton], and he [the foreman] agreed to pay the ferryman the full fare for shipping a load of cattle” (Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin 4.1208). The first-century rhetorician Philodemus talks of certain orators who fight every chance they get with prominent people—“with powerful dignitaries” (sun authent[ou]sin anaxin; Rhetorica II Fragmenta Libri [V] fr. IV line 14). The second-century geometrician Ptolemy states: “Therefore, if Saturn alone takes planetary control of the soul and dominates (authentēsas) Mercury and the moon [who govern the soul] [and] if Saturn has an honorable position toward both the solar system and its angles, then he [Saturn] makes [them] lovers of the body . . . dictatorial, ready to punish . . . (Tetrabiblos III.13 [#157]).
During the apostolic era, the term authentein was not used of the simple exercise of authority. After the New Testament, the noun authentēs does not appear with this sense in Christian literature until mid- to late second century AD (e.g., Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and the Shepherd of Hermas)—far too late to provide a linguistic context for Paul—and the verb does not occur until well into the third century AD (e.g., Hippolytus). Studies of the Hellenistic letters argue that authenteō originated in the popular Greek vocabulary as a synonym for “to dominate someone” (kratein tinos). Biblical lexicographers Louw and Nida put authenteō [TG831, ZG883] into the semantic domain “to control, restrain, domineer” and define the verb as “to control in a domineering manner” (L&N 37.21). This matches what is found in the earliest translations: The Latin Vulgate and the Old Latin have “domineer.” “Usurp authority” appears in the older English versions (Geneva, Bishops’, KJV), and “take authority over” or “lay down the law for” in the earliest Spanish (Casiodoro de Reina) and French (Louis Segond [1910], La Sainte [1938], Jerusalem Bible [1974 Cerf edition]) translations. Some modern versions have “I do not allow women . . . to domineer over men” (Goodspeed, NEB) and “they should . . . not be allowed . . . to tell men what to do” (CEV). This means that the NLT’s “to have authority over” should be understood in the sense of “holding sway” or “having dominance over” another.
So how do teaching and domineering fit together? The “neither-nor” structure of this verse is crucial. While some translations have two prohibitions (a woman is not permitted to teach, and she is not permitted to dictate to a man), the neither-nor (ouk-oude [TG3756/3761, ZG4024/4028] structure of verse 12 requires a single coherent idea (“I am permitting a woman neither-to-teach-nor-tell-a-man-what-to-do”). A bit of literary background is needed at this point. “Neither-nor” in antiquity was a poetic device. In biblical Greek (and Hebrew) it sets in parallel two or more natural groupings of words, phrases, and clauses. “He who watches over Israel will neither slumber nor sleep” is a familiar example (Ps 121:4, NIV). So what is the relationship between “teach” and “domineer”? They aren’t synonyms (slumber/sleep), antonyms (slave/free; Gal 3:28), closely related ideas (night/darkness; 1 Thess 5:5), or a natural progression of related ideas (sow/harvest/store; Matt 6:26). “Neither-nor” can define progression toward a goal or purpose: “neither hear nor understand” (that is, hearing with the intent to understand; Matt 13:13); “neither dwells in temples made with human hands nor is served by human hands” (that is, dwells with a view to being served; Acts 17:24-25); “where thieves neither break in nor steal” (that is, break in to steal; Matt 6:20). And this provides quite a good fit for 1 Timothy 2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach so as to gain mastery over a man,” or “I do not permit a woman to teach with a view to dominating a man.” It is quite natural then to interpret verse 12 as women leaders seeking to dictate to or dominate men. (See note on 2:12.)
“Neither-nor” can also correlate general and particular ideas: “Neither the wisdom of this age nor the rulers of this age” (1 Cor 2:6); “you know neither the day nor the hour” (Matt 25:13); “I neither consulted with flesh and blood nor went up to Jerusalem” (Gal 1:16-17). This is perhaps the best fit of all. “To domineer over a man” would then particularize “to teach.” What manner of teaching is Paul prohibiting? The kind that is domineering in style: “I do not permit a woman to teach in a domineering manner over a man.”
This would also solve a grammatical difficulty with Paul’s absolute statement: “I do not permit a woman to teach.” The word “to teach” (didaskein) demands an object (teach what or whom?) or a qualifier (teach how?). Only Jesus teaches in an absolute sense. “A man” cannot be the object of “teach.” The Greek andros (“man” in the genitive case) is the object of authentein (which requires the genitive; see note). A qualifier for didaskein needs to be in the accusative case—and there is none. This means that the second half of the correlative functions as the needed qualifier: teach how?—in a domineering fashion. The movement from general to particular is a common one in the New Testament. The closest parallel to our text is Revelation 2:20: “You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching [didaskei] and beguiling [kai plana; NLT, “lead astray”] my servants to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols.” How does she teach? In a misleading, deceptive fashion. Overbearing teaching fits admirably the contrast with verse 12b: “I do not permit a woman to teach a man in a dominating way over a man but to have a quiet demeanor” (lit., “to be in calmness”). Even more, “to teach in a domineering manner” fits well the context of 1 Timothy 2. Men were praying in an angry and disputing way (2:8). Women were learning in a disruptive fashion (2:11). Women were teaching in a domineering way (2:12).
If the sense of verse 12 is that women are not permitted to teach men in a domineering fashion, then verse 13 provides the explanation: “For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve.” “For” can be causal, in which case Paul would be invoking creation order and proneness to deception as reasons why a woman must not teach a man. This is theologically problematic, however. Proneness to deception is something that is endemic to the human race after the Fall. While Paul does assert that all human beings without exception sin (e.g., Rom 3:9-20), at no time does he suggest that women are more susceptible to sin’s deceiving activity than men. In the case of the Ephesian community, it was two men (not women) who were expelled for false teaching that stemmed from personal deception (1:20).
Perhaps by noting Adam was “first” in the process of creation, Paul was saying something about male leadership—or even male superiority. However, it is important not to read our culture back into the text. Today we tend to think of “first” as the best, the winner. To be first is to have the advantage, the edge. According to Jesus, however, to be first is to be last and the servant of all (Matt 19:30; 20:27). The NLT’s “first, and afterward” need not imply male superiority or functional priority. Paul’s vocabulary emphasizes God’s creative activity in molding the clay of the earth into two human beings—first male, then female. Elsewhere in Paul “first . . . afterward” defines a temporal, not hierarchical, sequence. The dead in Christ will be raised “first” and “then” we who remain will be caught up with them in the air (1 Thess 4:16-17). Deacons should be “first” tested and “then” let them serve (3:10). In fact, nowhere in the New Testament does it mean anything more than this (cf. Mark 4:28; Jas 3:17).
Paul continues, “And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result” (2:14). The language of deception calls to mind the activities of the false teachers. Paul was alluding to the Genesis 3 (LXX) account of how the serpent misled the woman so that she disobeyed God’s command: “The serpent deceived me and I ate” (ēpatēsen [TG538, ZG572]; Gen 3:13, LXX). The Greek word in 1 Tim 2:14 is an intensified form of apataō [TG538, ZG572] that means “utterly misled” (ex + apatētheisa [TG1818, ZG1987]). Paul is not stating that Eve was the means by which sin entered the world. Elsewhere he attributes this state of affairs to Adam (Rom 5:12). Eve’s deception also appears in a warning given to the Corinthian congregation: “I fear that somehow your pure and undivided devotion to Christ will be corrupted, just as Eve was deceived by the cunning ways of the serpent” (2 Cor 11:3). Paul’s use of Eve’s deception as a warning about corporate deception precludes any theological possibility of deception inherent to Eve’s female descendants.
A reasonable conjecture is that the women at Ephesus (perhaps encouraged by the false teachers) were trying to gain the advantage over the men by teaching in a dictatorial fashion. The men in response became angry and disputed what they were doing. This interpretation fits well with the broader context of 1 Timothy 2:8-15, where Paul aims to correct inappropriate behavior on the part of both men and women. It also fits Paul’s presentation of Satan as the prototype of false teachers (e.g., 1:20; 5:15). The influence of the Ephesian cult of Artemis (the Anatolian goddess of fertility) was also likely a key factor: The female was considered superior to the male. Artemis’s perceived superiority was rooted in her origin. Artemis, the child of Zeus and Leto, came out of her mother’s womb first and then helped her mother give birth to her twin brother, Apollo (Pseudo-Apollodorus Library 1.4). Not only did she have the priority over her brother but over the other male gods, whom she spurned in favor of a human consort named Leimon. The importance of this legend can be seen in the annual feast, the Lord of Streets, when the priestess of Artemis pursued a man pretending to be Leimon (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, Online ed., s.v. “Artemis,”; Pausanias Description of Greece 8.53.3; see also 4.31.8; 7.18.10-13). Her renown extended to her skills in the hunt. The famed hunter, Menelaus, was taught by Artemis (edidaxe gar Artemis autē ballein agria panta; Homer Iliad 5.51). The influence of the cult of Artemis in Ephesus was outstanding (see the Introduction). The Ephesian temple was deemed one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. It housed Artemis’s image, which was believed to have fallen from Jupiter (Acts 19:35). The religious and economic importance of the temple cult is evident in the two-hour-long chant “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians” recorded by Luke in Acts 19:28-41.
An Artemis influence would certainly explain Paul’s correctives in 2:13-15. The legend of Artemis’s birth could account for Paul’s corrective in verse 13 that “God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve.” A corresponding belief that placed all women in a position of superiority following Artemis’s priority would also make clear Paul’s corrective in verse 14 that “it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result.”
Paul’s concluding statement is one of the most difficult to interpret. The NLT alternatives reflect this: “But women will be saved through childbearing,” “will be saved by accepting their role as mothers,” or “will be saved by the birth of the Child.” Salvation through childbearing is theologically problematic. In the New Testament, salvation is by grace through faith (e.g., Eph 2:6-8). “There was no need for Christ to die” if salvation is by any other means (Gal 2:21). That women will be saved by accepting their divinely created role as wife and mother (NAB, NLT mg) is equally problematic. Nowhere does Paul (or any other biblical author) link salvation with motherhood. In fact, it conflicts with his teaching elsewhere that women (and men) can best serve God in a state of singleness (1 Cor 7:34-35). Paul does counsel young widows later in the letter to remarry and raise a family (5:14), but this is because they were heeding the false teachers’ negative teaching about marriage (4:3). Elsewhere he explicitly counsels widows not to remarry (1 Cor 7:8; 7:39-40).
Paul could be employing the Greek word in the nontheological sense of “protect” or “preserve”: “But women will be preserved through the bearing of children” (NASB, Bible in Basic English, Darby Bible, NIV [1973, 1978 editions]; cf. BAGD). Ephesus was temple warden of Artemis, the goddess to whom women turned for safe travel through the childbearing process. The legend of Artemis’s birth gave rise to women invoking her help during labor (Apollodorus Library 1.4; Servius Commentary on the Aeneid of Virgil A. 3.73; Sokolowski 1962; idem, 1955).
The Greek article in verse 15 points the way to the most plausible reading: “But women will be saved through the birth of the Child”—that is, Jesus Christ. Although the NLT has “but they,” it is actually the singular “but she”—the historic Eve. Paul had already mentioned Eve twice in the preceding verses, recalling the Genesis 2–3 narrative about her creation, deception, and redemption. First, there is her creation as Adam’s partner and personal counterpart (Gen 2:18)—“bone from my bone, and flesh from my flesh” (Gen 2:23). Second, there is her deception by the serpent. “‘The serpent deceived me,’ she replied. ‘That’s why I ate it’” (Gen 3:13).
This third instance recalls the Genesis 3 narration of Eve’s role in the redemption of the human race. “I will cause hostility between you [the serpent] and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He [the Child] will strike your head, and you [Satan] will strike his heel” (Gen 3:15). Even though Eve was created for partnership (Gen 2:23-24) and then botched it through nonpartnership (Gen 3:6-7), ultimately she fulfilled her created purpose through the bearing of the Christ child (Gen 3:15). Robert Young’s 1898 edition catches the sense: “And she shall be saved through the Child-bearing.” Even so, it is conditional salvation: “assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty” (2:15b).
This is the eighth time Paul mentions faith in the space of two chapters (1:2, 4, 5, 14, 19 [2x]; 2:7, 15). Timothy is his “true son in the faith” (1:2) and is called to “cling to” it (1:19). At conversion, Paul was filled “with the faith and love” (1:14), judged “faithful” (NLT, “trustworthy”; 1:12) and called to teach the Gentiles “about faith” (2:7). Faith has a decidedly ethical dimension. It can be “shipwrecked” (1:19) and requires sincerity (1:5). “Faith and love” are what Paul experienced in coming face to face with Christ on the road to Damascus (1:19). This is the only time that “holiness” as a quality of life is mentioned, while “modesty” appeared just a few verses earlier (NLT, “appropriate”; 2:9). The former has to do with living a sanctified life, while the latter has to do with the ability to restrain impulses—self-control of the will and sobriety of the mind (see commentary on 2:9).
Paul concludes (see note on 3:1) his reflections about salvation coming through the Christ child with “This is a trustworthy statement”—the second of five occurences of this phrase, which is unique to the Pastorals. Although the NLT attaches this phrase to the leadership qualifications that follow in chapter 3, elsewhere in the Pastorals it either introduces (1:15; 4:9; 2 Tim 2:11) or concludes (Titus 3:8) a statement about salvation. Trustworthy and commendable for full acceptance is the fact that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (1:15). Our hope is in the living God, who is the Savior of all people (4:9-10). Paul’s ministry is to bring salvation and eternal glory in Christ Jesus to those God has chosen (2 Tim 2:10). God generously poured out the Spirit upon us through Jesus Christ our Savior (Titus 3:6-7).