Y Safle

I was first in a Christian Conference when I heard something like this (I have seen it repeated from time to time since) concerning Paul’s words that he does not allow a woman to have authority in a Church:

“(Actually, let’s go to the Greek) The word “authority” is actually “authenteo” (ow-then-teh’-o) which actually means ["final authority", "lord it over" - insert your favourite]“

Hold on there!

Whilst I have the greatest respect for the intentions of those proposing these arguments and interpretations, we should make sure that we always do our exegisis correctly.

Firstly, the word authentein is a rare word, the meaning of which is not entirely clear. It is generally considered that the best translation is simply “authority”, but other suggestions are “final authority”, “total authority” or “lordship”. It is thus acceptable (but not the preferred reading) to say that Paul wrote “I do not permit a woman to lord over a man” (some have suggested this implies the colloquial usage “to lord it over” someone and I was particularly disturbed to see that interpretation, without further comment in an evangelical commentary of some popularity).

Having said that, we should note that this is still bad exegesis, because we have not looked at the letter as a whole, nor its context. Timothy is a difficult book because Paul’s vocabulary in this letter is substantially different from his vocabulary in other letters. Many have used this (and other points) as an excuse for calling the book a 2nd century forgery (which fails to take into account that it is more likely that a forger would try to imitate Paul’s vocabulary, not depart from it). Nevertheless, there is a problem as to why Paul suddenly starts using a whole huge set of words he had never before used.

J N D Kelly proposes a solution to this, based on the fact that this letter was written from within a prison cell, and was much later then most of Paul’s letters.

We know Paul dictated his letters, and it seems likely (almost certain in fact) that Paul was now using a different amanuensis (or scribe) from that which he used previously. We also know that the dictation would have been difficult from a prison cell - that his scribe would probably hear Paul’s words and then go away and write them down. In fact there is much evidence that scribes were given a freer hand then we have previously supposed, and that whilst they would faithfully write down the thoughts and content of the author, they might nevertheless not use an identical vocabulary.

Now I notice this all the time with my wife, who will often faithfully repeat some story to friends and will attempt to quote exactly what she heard. Whilst the story she passes on is always correct she often manages to change a few words here and there.

Let us suppose then that Paul’s scribe for the letters to Timothy did just this, writing Paul’s thoughts and meanings faithfully but using his different vocabulary (they had dialects then as now), then the problem of Paul’s different vocabulary here is dealt with. This is good news for those who seriously wondered about the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles, as we can say that the burden of proof actually lies with those who argue these epistles are not authentic, and until they can prove otherwise it is a wise assumption to presume they are indeed authentic.

However, this is bad news for all those who would use these specialised Greek words to build an argument, because we have just rendered them quite inoucuous. There is no reason to suppose Paul meant anything but “authority” in this passage of his letter, and it is quite inappropriate to surmise anything further from the Greek.

So finally to the point in hand - the most likely interpretation for Paul’s words here is exactly what it appears to be - Paul will not suffer a woman to have authority in the churches of God.

The verse is problematic (as has been pointed out) but we have no valid reason for believing Paul meant to say anything different. We know however that Paul does not discount women from being deacons, although he seems to forbid them from being overseers. He does not forbid them prophesying and he affirms their role within the church.

Whether or not Paul’s admonition was cultural or not is not something I have addressed here, but as to the actual reading of scripture - we are in no doubt.