Are Women More Easily Deceived?: Part Two

The second in a series examining if 1 Timothy 2:14 teaches that women are more easily deceived than men.

Today I’ll look at scholar Thomas R. Schreiner’s take on this issue. Schreiner contributes the chapter “A Dialogue with Scholarship” to the book Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15. (Andreas J. Kostenberger, Thomas R. Schreiner, and H. Scott Baldwin, eds. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995) The entire book addresses the interpretation of this much debated passage and defends the historical reading (women should not teach or exercise authority over men in the context of the church.)

Verse by verse, Schreiner examines both the historical reading of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 and the progressive reading (which states that the passage is not intended as a universal mandate against women teaching or exercising authority over men.)

Schreiner begins his discussion of 1 Timothy 2:14 by examining the progressive interpretation of the verse. Many proponents of this view argue that the women at Timothy’s church in Ephesus were under the influence of false teachers and were spreading heresy. Paul’s admonition that they not teach was not a universal mandate for all women, but a caution to these particular women until they were better educated. Progressives say that the reference to Eve’s deception indicates that the women at Ephesus were being deceived by false teachers and teaching others the heresy. Some progressives argue that Adam knew of God’s prohibition firsthand, while Eve only knew of it from Adam. Because she was uneducated about God’s command, she fell into sin. Therefore, the issue at hand was not that women as a whole should not teach, but rather uneducated women should be educated by men before they teach so they will not spread heresy.

Schreiner points out several flaws with this interpretation.
1. Nothing in the Bible ever suggests that Eve taught Adam. The focus is on Eve’s deception – not her teaching Adam. This verse can be used to argue that women were listening to heresy, but not that they were teaching it.
2. It doesn’t make much sense to argue that the women were deceived because they lacked knowledge. This implies that Adam must have severely bungled his explanation of God’s command for Eve to have been deceived by Satan. If Eve sinned because Adam didn’t communicate God’s command accurately, then why would Paul recommend that the women of Ephesus be educated by men before they teach?
3. Genesis 3 is clear that Eve was deceived by Satan, not Adam. And her deception was not out of ignorance but rather because Satan promised her that she could be like God and be independent of Him. Eve was deceived not because she was uneducated, but because she failed morally.

Schreiner effectively points out the problems with the progressive interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:14. He then explains that though the historical view (Paul forbids women from teaching because they are more likely to be deceived than men) is likely to offend modern audiences, it is much less speculative than the progressive view.

Schreiner believes one of the reasons Satan approached Eve instead of Adam was because of their different inclinations. Schreiner states, “Generally speaking, women are more relational and nurturing and men are more given to relational analysis and objectivity. Women are less prone than men to see the importance of doctrinal formulations, especially when it comes to the issue of identifying heresy and making a stand for the truth.” (145) Schreiner continues to argue that women are “less likely to draw a line on doctrinal non-negotiables” and are more likely to let heresy enter the church. This is why Paul admonishes that women should not teach doctrine to men.

While I appreciate Schreiner’s commitment to the Bible and agree with him about the holes in the progressive view, I have some problems with his explanation of the passage. Schreiner’s views on women’s inclinations seem to stem more from personal experience than evidence from Scripture. The Bible has great examples of women who were bold and accurate in their handling of God’s truth (see Deborah’s exhortation in Judges 4 and 5, Mary’s song in Luke 1, Priscilla in Acts 18) but I don’t find many women who allowed others to spout heresy because of their gentler nature.

I agree that women tend to be more relational and nurturing, but I don’t see why this would prevent them from valuing doctrine. Some of the most nurturing women I know are also very strong in their views on right doctrine and would speak up if someone wasn't handling God's Word accurately.

I think that Schreiner does a great job defending the historical view of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, but his explanation of 2:14 is a bit of a let down after such rigorous scholarship. I'm absolutely not ready to accept the progressive take on 2:14, but I'm not sure I'm ready to embrace Schreiner's take either. I'm not saying I adamantly disagree with him at this point, but I'd like to look at some other viewpoints before making a decision.

In the meantime, I'm still using my "whitening power" toothpaste and not seeing any results. However, I've found that I can deceive myself and others into thinking I have whiter teeth by wearing really red lipstick. And is that really so bad?