⁹Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, ¹⁰but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.

The emphasis on men in the previous verse is to be seen in the context of the public meeting of the church, with Paul emphasizing that men are to take the lead role in bringing the congregation to God in prayer. This should happen in all the churches “in every place.” Later Paul clearly states that this is the context for his instructions: “I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15).

We tread forward knowing full well that this is not a popular teaching in many churches today. Neither was it in the church where Timothy resided when receiving this letter—otherwise, why would Paul need to address this issue of gender roles? A common mistake today is assuming Paul’s teaching was conditioned by his culture or at the least limited to local difficulties. Hardly would we argue that the substitutionary atonement was limited to Jewish culture. Or that baptism was limited to common first-century religious practice, in that many of pagan religions had similar rituals. The Scripture uses gender-specific teaching enough times that it stretches credible interpretation to assume all were limited. There is certainly nothing in the passage at present to indicate this was teaching for only the church at Ephesus.

We also recognize that in today’s gender-political sensitivities, to address a woman’s outward appearance, even among believing Christians, can be a landmine experience, especially for a male writer. But Paul writes as “an apostle of Christ Jesus according to the commandment of God . . .” (1 Tim. 1:1), who, repeating himself, “was appointed a preacher and an apostle . . . as a teacher” (1 Tim. 2:7). The use of the word “want” does not diminish the authority of this teaching, just as it doesn’t diminish his teaching about men’s behavior (1 Tim. 2:8). Nor is Paul erecting a legalistic approach to gender roles, for he just got through castigating those who were “wanting to be teachers of the Law” (1 Tim. 1:7).

The argument that Paul was only giving his personal opinion creates a significant problem: how would we know that any of his writings are to be taken as the authoritative Word of God and inspired?

Lord, help me to rightly interpret Your Word so that I would not be ashamed before You.