Answer:
The passages that restrict the full freedom of women to minister in leadership roles are hard to understand in our era of women`s liberation. So first we must keep in mind that these two scriptures you`re referring to, 1 Cor 14:34-37 and 1 Tim 2:11-15 are only two passages in a big Bible which must be interpreted in light of many other references in Scripture to women in leadership roles. To discern God`s instruction for the Church we have to take all Scripture on balance and not interpret any verse in violation of all the others.
So we must not forget the O.T. examples of women in spiritual leadership as prophetesses, like Huldah and Miriam, who were not “silent” in their roles. Also we have Deborah who was a military, political and spiritual leader in Judges 4. And in the New Testament, women in ministry to the church and in leadership roles are everywhere. Women were intercessors(Acts 1:14), helpers (Acts 9:36, Mark 15:40,41), deacons (Rom. 16:1,2), prophetess` (Acts 21:9) teachers (Acts 18:26), apostles (Rom. 16:7), leaders of house churches, IE. functional elders (Col. 4:15), messengers of good news (John 20:17, 18) and evangelists (Phil. 4:2,3) Essentially they were functioning in any role in which they were gifted. As a sign of God’s favor on women in these roles, his Spirit fell on them just as He did on the men on the day of Pentecost. The women stand up with the men to preach the gospel publicly.
And of course, all these wonderful freedoms had their foundation in Jesus ministry as he brought women into his extended band of disciples (Luke 8:1-4), teaching them and accepting them and talking to them in public (John 4). If we understand the cultural context, this was a radical shift and set a new tone for female freedoms and value in Christ’s Kingdom.
Now, against these awesome descriptors of women`s diverse service in the early church, we have the two passages you mention.
The Corinthian passage about silence is probably not a prescription for the church at all... why? Because Paul is probably not the author of that prescription. He often quotes the Corinthian factions in this letter to them, and I suspect that he`s quoting a group of Jewish believers in Corinth who have a Talmudic view of women in Synagogues and he is actually rebuking them with a stern warning.
What lends credence to this view (*Gilbert Bilezikian, Beyond Sex Roles) is simply that in 1 Cor 11, Paul has just explained and given direction for how women should pray (not being silent) and prophesy (a gift of teaching and leadership!) in the public meetings of the church! How can you reconcile the two passages by the SAME author in the SAME letter? Is Paul schizophrenic? No, I think it much more likely that he was granting great freedom for women to minister in public ways and he was actually REBUKING those who thot they should be silent in public. How so?
Read his instruction in 11 against the backdrop of a faction in the church who thought that the women were being too free – to help them all get along, Paul gives them a system of conduct for public meetings by which the women could lead and teach with the gift of prophesy, without upsetting those in the church who thought they were usurping their created role.
Read 1 Cor 14:34,35 as if it was in "quotes" (as if Paul was quoting a motto or teaching from a faction in the church, something he does repeatedly, in 6:12,13; 7:1; 8:1; 10:23) and then read 36,37 as if it`s a response from Paul to that faction. It makes the entire passage come into focus – AND puts in complete harmony with chapter 11.
The 1 Tim 2:11-15 passage you mention, is more problematic since it`s clear that Paul IS limiting women`s teaching and authority role in the Ephesian church. But if he`s giving them freedom to prophesy in Corinth, this must be a special case. And if you research the context of the Ephesians church, looking at the dozens of clues inside the two letters to Timothy, you see WHY Paul was banning women from leadership in that church. Simply put, there was a crisis. There were renegade elders that needed to be rebuked. And most important for this discussion, there were young widows who were causing trouble. They were teaching things they shouldn`t teach (5:13). They weren`t learning the gospel as they should. And these young, single women were being sexually promiscuous (5:11). So in light of the crisis, Paul tells them they can`t have or "usurp" authority over a man. But he doesn`t do so without first telling them they must LEARN! (2:11) Now, that seems demeaning to us today. Women can learn they just can`t teach? But in context, women didn`t learn in those days. Most Roman women didn`t even know how to read because they weren’t allowed in school! But here is Paul COMMANDING them to go to school on the Gospel and learn!
Learning precedes teaching, but it seems that the Ephesian women had put the cart before the horse. They were ignorant of the deep truths of the gospel and becoming "busybodies" and "saying things they ought not to" (5:13), "always hearing, but never understanding" (2 Tim 3:7). Their implied moral laxity also helps explain that baffling phrase about "being saved through childbirth" (2:15). I thot Christians were saved by grace? We are. Most likely that entire verse is Paul`s way of saying, “if these immature women, will marry and settle down and stop being promiscuous and start learning the gospel – they`ll be saved, but of course, they have to have the prerequisite of faith.” He`s not REALLY saying that a woman`s salvation is secured through the work of having children... it`s just in this situation, childbirth would be a key sign of true repentance, which would INDICATE faith, through which they are saved (15b). Also, the false male teachers were teaching that marriage was a sin (4:3), so the instruction about child bearing would also counter the “marriage is evil” cult that was developing.
It’s very revealing that Paul would give this advice to widows and singles in Ephesus, when in 1 Corinth he specifically tells widows and singles to stay single if they can (1 Cor 7:8). Why would he change his advice to the singles in this church (1 Tim 5:14)? Again, because of the crisis – which puts more emphasis on the unique nature of the problem in Ephesus, and underlines the unique nature of the restriction on women.
It was a bad situation. Imagine a frat party had broken out in Ephesus, sexual promiscuity, heresy etc... and Paul is writing to settle it down: "ok, people, let`s get this thing under control. Fire these guys (1 Tim 1:20), pull the young women back (2:12), they`re abusing the freedoms the gospel has given them (5:13), but don’t abandon them, tell them to go back to basics and learn (2:11), call them to settle down (5:14) and have kids (2:15)... and the men that DO lead must be thoroughly checked out (3:1-13). It`s time to clean house, Timothy."
Read 1 and 2 Tim in one sitting and the crisis with young widows and renegade elders will pop out at you.
We have written a position paper on this topic for AC3 and you can email me to get a copy*. It goes into far more detail on these two and other Scriptures. Read it with your Bible open and you`ll have a great study of the issues involved in this key question.