Category Archives: 1 TIMOTHY 2

Instructions as to assembly prayer.

1 TIMOTHY 2

SURVEY OF THE CHAPTER
The first part of this passage has in view the collective prayer of the assembly.  It gives to us first of all reminders for whom we should pray.  Then we are told why we should pray for them, for the gospel is set forth best under settled conditions.  Following this we have instruction as to behaviour in prayer, with the duties of both men and women set out.  In the last part the apostle reverts to the teaching of the truth, and the respective duties of the man and the woman again.]

 

STRUCTURE OF THE CHAPTER

(a) Verses 1-2(i) Men to be prayed for.
(b) Verses 2(ii)-7 Motive for praying.
(c) Verses 8-10 Manner of praying.
(d) Verses 11-15 Manner of teaching.

  
        
THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY CHAPTER 2, VERSES 1 TO 7:

2:1  I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2:2  For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
2:3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
2:4  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
2:5  For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
2:6  Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
2:7  Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

Second charge to the Ephesians:
2:1-15      Prayer and preaching. 
The Father’s resources are drawn upon in prayer. 
God supports His house so that they can function in peace in a hostile world.
The Father’s desires that men be saved are made known in preaching.
The respective duties of male and female when there is prayer or preaching.

(a)  Verses 1-2(i)  Men to be prayed for.

2:1  I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

I exhort therefore- the charge through Timothy comes by way of an exhortation.  It is not a command, as the first charge was.  To exhort means to address people with the aim of producing an effect on them.  The prayers in view are the assembly prayers, when believers come together to unitedly pray to God, as the early believers did.  They continued steadfastly in…prayers”, Acts 2:42. 
The “therefore” links back to the charge the apostle gave to Timothy.  Not that the exhortation is specifically to him, but he is to “war a good warfare”, resolutely putting things in order in the assembly at Ephesus, and the first thing to be set in order is the prayer meeting.
That, first of all- the word ‘that’ is in italics, and has been supplied, not being in the Greek text called Stephen’s 1550.  It is the first exhortation the apostle is making, rather than the first thing the believers should do.
Supplications- these are expressions of need.  Prayer is an evidence that we are dependant upon God for any change that is brought about in the attitudes of men.  In the face of the unbelief of men, we should be the more cast upon God for his power to be made known.
Prayers- this is the recognition that the one we speak to is superior to ourselves; we speak therefore with due reverence and respect.
Intercessions- technically, this is the term for approach to a king.  Paul worshipped God as the King eternal in 1:17, and now he is exhorting us to address that august person.  He is also going to exhort that we pray for kings, verse 2, so as we do so, we remember our own allegiance to the King eternal.
And giving of thanks- this is gratitude for past answers, and thankfulness that past answers lead us to expect future answers.  There is a difference between “giving of thanks”, as a general expression of thankfulness, and “giving of thanks for kings”.  There will invariably be things about the kings of the earth that we cannot thank God for, but we can give thanks for any way in which prayers have been answered in the past.
Be made for all men- this is because God desires all men to be saved, and He is pleased to answer His people’s prayers in this matter.  We cannot understand how God’s will can be in any way influenced by our prayers, but still He expects us to pray, even though we do not understand.
The preposition “for” means, in this context, ” in relation to all men”.  It is not instead of men praying for themselves.  No man can act as the substitute for another, but believers can pray on behalf of men.

2:2  For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

For kings, and for all that are in authority- the believer is not to fight against the king, but to pray for him.  The believer is not called to fight for the king either, for who knows whether it is God’s will that the king be deposed?  It is the same with voting in elections.  The powers that be are ordained of God.  Which of us is so in tune with God that we know what His will is?  And if we are not in tune, and do not vote for the party that is successful, have we not resisted the power?  We are specifically warned against this in Romans 13:2.  “There is no power but of God”, for He is the supreme authority, and is the fount of all lesser authority.  And it is not that He institutes the power and then leaves the scene.  He superintends according to His own perfect wisdom.
It is interesting to notice that the Lord Jesus called Matthew to be an apostle, even though he was a tax-gatherer, and sided with the Romans in their occupation of the land of Israel.  But he also called Simon the Canaanite.  A Cananite, or Kananite,(not to be confused with an inhabitant of Canaan), was a Zealot, a person fanatically opposed to the Roman occupation.  The Lord called both these men away from what they were doing, signalling that He would not become involved in politics of either persuasion, and indicating that the disciples should not become involved either.
One of the accusations against Christ was that He claimed to be king, but He explained to Pilate that His kingdom was not of this world, John 18:33-38.  In other words, the principles of His kingdom are not derived from earthly ideas.  The proof is seen in that He ordered His disciples not to fight in Gethsemane at His arrest.  If His kingdom was of this world He would order His soldiers to fight, for that is the way of the world.  What commander in chief tells his troops to lay down their arms?  When Christians fight for the king, they are fighting to preserve earthly rule, and are delaying the reign of Christ.
In the context here, it is not that we pray for kings so that a particular form of government is preserved.  Rather, it is that the lives of the people of God may be peaceful, so that they may go about their business of making known the truth of God.  Believers should be scrupulously neutral when it comes to political matters.  They are here to uphold the righteousness of God, not a political ideology.

(b)  Verses 2(ii) -7  Motive for praying.

That we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty- at first glance this may look as if we pray for selfish ends, an “anything for a quiet life” attitude.  This is not the purpose of the praying.  The quiet and peaceable life is for the sake of the spread of the gospel.  David could not build the house of God because his reign was marked by warfare.  In countries where there is war and strife, gospel-progress is hindered, or even halted.  It is said that Ethiopia had an unbroken history of nearly two thousand years of Christian influence, (very probably because of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch), but then upheaval came, and with it, disruption of gospel activity.
A quiet life is one lived with tranquil circumstances prevailing without, in the present.
A peaceful life is one lived with quietness of heart prevailing within, with no fears for the future.
Godliness is devotedness to God which seeks to express itself in the doing of that which pleases Him.
Honesty is a combination of gravity and dignity.
Clearly, it is not expected that peaceful conditions should make us indifferent to God’s expectations of us.  When conditions are calm and settled, the gospel can flourish.  When conditions are not calm, that is no excuse for carnal attitudes and behaviour.

2:3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

For this is good and acceptable- both the living of a godly life, and the peace and quietness of settled conditions, are good and acceptable to God.  The word for good is that one which means “well-suited to the end in view”.  And the word acceptable has the idea of being pleasing and welcome.  So the quiet conditions are both well-suited to the living of godly lives and the making known of the gospel, and also are pleasing to God.
In the sight of God our Saviour- since God is the Saviour-God, He is delighted when His salvation can be made available to men.  Infidels criticize the God of the Bible, for instance for ordering the destruction of the Canaanites.  But it should be remembered that He had waited four centuries since Abraham’s time to see if they would repent, Genesis 15:16.  When their iniquity had come to the full, then there could be nothing else but annihilation for them.  What shall we say of people that sacrifice tiny babies to their god, throwing them into a burning furnace to calm his anger?  Such persons have forfeited their right to live.  Believers need not be embarrassed at all when the subject of the Canaanites is brought up.  It is interesting that the name of Joshua, the man commanding the army of Israel, means “Salvation of Jehovah”.  For he enabled Israel to be saved from the vile influences of the Canaanites, and swept away the abominations and immorality so as to make the land pure and clean.
God was a Saviour-God even under Joshua, then, but His saviour-hood is now expressed in a far higher way, for He saves from sin, and saves for heaven, and it is His delight to do so.  The fact that He is the Saviour-God of Paul, and Timothy, and all who believe, (“our” Saviour”), shows that salvation is dependant on individual faith that makes the salvation personal.

2:4  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Who will have all men to be saved- God’s salvation is available to all, without reserve.  There is no-one alive on the earth who is beyond being saved.  There is no imaginary line which some men cross after they have refused the gospel many times, and beyond which they cannot be saved.  Such a notion is the invention of preachers, it is not supported by Scripture. 
All have the ability to believe, for it in-built into our constitution as human beings, and the foundation of salvation has been laid by Christ, as the next two verses emphasize.  The word for “will” here, is that one which means to desire.  Not in the sense of a fond hope, but a deliberate intention to save all who will believe.  It is possible to resist God’s will, as Stephen indicated in his address to the Jewish authorities, for he accused them of resisting the Holy Spirit, as their fathers had done as well, Acts 7:51.  Since the Holy Spirit is God, then it is possible to resist God, as Saul of Tarsus did, for he “kicked against the pricks”, Acts 9:5.
If God decreed all would be saved, then all would be.  That all are not saved is testimony to the hardness of man’s heart, not the hardness of God’s heart.  The apostle assures us that God has desires for all men.  He does not make known a deceptive gospel, which pretends there is provision for all when in fact there is not.
God said through Ezekiel, “As I live, siath the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live.  Turn ye, turn ye, from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”  Ezekiel 33:11. 
And the Lord Jesus, God manifest in flesh, who has told God out, said this as He looked over Jerusalem, ” O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!”  Matthew 23:37. 
So we see that the reason why men do not get saved is because they “would not”, their will is set against the idea.  But God’s will is set in favour of the idea.
The apostle Peter makes it very clear that God is “longsuffering, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”, 2 Peter 3:9.  In other words, God is not deliberately exercising His will so that men perish.  So we have both sides of the matter in these two verses.  God’s will is that all men be saved; God’s will is not that men perish.  The Bible does not teach that all men will be saved, but it does teach most definitely that all could be saved.  To say otherwise is to disparage the greatness of the sacrifice of Christ.
And to come unto the knowledge of the truth- God also desires that men progress in Divine things after they are saved, hence the apostle goes on to speak of Himself as a teacher of the Gentiles, verse seven.  The command of the Lord Jesus to his own was that they “teach all nations…teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you”, Matthew 28:19.  So the gospel is taught initially, so men get saved, and then it is taught subsequently, so that they progress spiritually.  This progress comes through an accurate understanding of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith, which need to be constantly set before believers.
We should never despise knowledge, for it is the means by which Divine truth is instilled into our souls.  The heretics despised written revelation, and relied upon supposed revelations through mystic experiences.  God has willed to make His mind known through a written revelation in the Scriptures, and it is to these we must turn if we are to know that mind.  The Scriptures are complete, final, authoritative and reliable.

Verses 5-7 form a parenthesis in which the apostle gives proofs of His assertion that God desires all men to be saved.  Those proofs are as follows:
1.    There is one God, so the word of salvation does not come from different sources, leading to confusion.
2.    He has provided a mediator, to act for men.
3.    That mediator is unique, so there is not a perplexing range of options.
4.    The mediator is between God and men, so the mediator is able to communicate with both.
5.    The mediator is a man, so is able to deal with our situation.
6.    The mediator is Christ Jesus, a title which denotes He is exalted in heaven.
7.    The mediator gave Himself a ransom for all.
8.    That ransom is substitutionary, so is effective.
9.    The truth of these things is made known in this current age.
10.    It is made known by God-appointed men.

2:5  For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

For there is one God- the word “for” introduces reasons why Paul is justified in asserting that God desires the salvation of all men.  Since there is but one God, matters are very simple.  It is with Him, and with Him alone, that we have to do.  The fact that He is, in fact God, tells us that He is in control, and He orders all things after the counsel of His own will.  He will not be frustrated in His desire for the salvation of men, for His desire is in the context of the conditions He lays down to men, which the majority are not prepared to accept.  His will is not, “all men will be saved regardless of their reaction to the gospel”.  Rather, it is, “All men can be saved, if they are prepared to come the way I direct”.  It is that will which shall not be frustrated.
And one mediator between God and men- the current world-view is that of relativism, which says that truth is within the individual, and each must decide for himself what is right.  So we have the strange situation where what is right for one person is wrong for the other.  The Word of God, on the other hand, is absolute truth, for it is sourced in God Himself.  This is not to say that a thing is true because God says so, as if He could decree that darkness is light.  Rather, a thing is true because it conforms to the Only True God.  So light is light because God is light, 1 John 1:5. 
If any and every religion is sufficient to lead us to God, even when the beliefs of one religion are totally opposed to the beliefs of another, then there is no need for a mediator, for man can fend for himself through his religion.  Instead of all religions leading to God, the Scripture says that “they are all gone out of the way”, Romans 3:12.  So instead of all men being on the way to God, they are in fact all off the way. 
When man sinned and fell, God barred the way to the Tree of Life, acting in the best interests of men.  It was something too awful for God to endure, that a sinner should gain eternal life and yet remain a sinner.  This is why the sentence in Genesis 3:22 trails off, without it being finished.  We read, “And the Lord God said, ‘Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever:'”  God could not bring Himself to finish the sentence.  The way to life is barred to man on his terms, but is open to those who come on God’s terms.
A mediator is one who acts as a go-between for two persons or groups.  Job lamented “For He is not a man, as I am, that I should answer Him, and we should come together in judgement.  Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both”, Job 9:32,33.  This cannot be said now, for one has come to be that daysman, or mediator, and He can lay His hand upon God and man, being Himself the Son of God become man.  The word daysman comes from the word right, or correct.  The thought is that a true daysman will be able to show what is right when two parties are in dispute.  The modern equivalent is an umpire, one who is qualified to decide what is right in a dispute situation.  This is why the Lord Jesus described Himself as the truth when He pointed out that no man can come to God the Father but by Him, John 14:6.  It is because He is the truth, as well as expresses the truth, that He can act effectively for both God and man.
It is vital that the mediator should be both God and man, and this the Lord Jesus is, uniquely.  This is why there is only one mediator; no-one else combines Deity and manhood in one person, as He does. 
Notice the mediator is between God and “men”, not “man”.  In other words, He is potentially the mediator for each individual man, but He does not mediate between the race of man as a whole and God.  Men must have individual dealings with God.
The man Christ Jesus- this does not ignore the fact that He is also God, but it emphasizes the truth that He is near to men, for we shall read in the next verse of a ransom price being paid, and the one who did this in olden times was the kinsman of the one needing redemption.  Christ is near of kin to us, being real man, and having a genealogy that is traced by Luke right back to Adam, Luke 3:23,38.  He shares an interest with God His Father in the well-being of men.
There are some who suggest that Paul did not believe in the virgin birth, because, they say, he did not teach it or write about it.  It is true that the fact that Christ’s mother was a virgin when He was born is not specifically stated by Paul.  But it is strongly implied in statements he makes.  For instance, he declares that the Lord Jesus “knew no sin”, 2 Corinthians 5:21.  How could this be the case if He was the son of Joseph biologically?  Only if He were born of a virgin, without human intervention, could He be free of the sin-principle.  If we apply this rule to the other writers of the New Testament, we shall have to say that only Matthew and Luke believed in the virgin birth, because no-one else directly states it.  The point is, they did not need to state it afresh, for it was written already.  In any case, can we understand Luke, the writer of a gospel that declares Christ was virgin-born, being happy to be the companion of the apostle Paul, (as he was, on several occasions, even up to the death of Paul, 2 Timothy 4:11),  knowing all the time that he did not believe this?  Luke would have separated himself from him if he denied this fundamental truth.
He is entitled Christ Jesus, for the time of the testimony about Him as mediator is after He has gone back to heaven.  The name Christ Jesus is reserved for Him as one who is exalted, His work on earth done.  This name tells us that His mediatorship is valid, since God has received Him back to heaven, and He is seated at God’s right hand.

2:6  Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Who gave Himself a ransom for all- His birth was not enough, for we are not saved by the birth of Christ, but by His death as a ransom.  The notion that Christ united the race of man to Himself by being born, and thus man is thereby reconciled to God, is blasphemous heresy. How can the pure Son of God unite Himself to vile sinners?  Yet many believers are happy to sing “God and sinners reconciled” in connection with His birth.
That He is a man tells of His incarnation; that He is Christ Jesus tells us of His ascension, implying His resurrection, and now the ransom tells of His crucifixion.

The word ransom introduces us to a set of words used in the New Testament in connection with the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.  First of all, though, we must see how Scripture describes man as a slave.
Man is a slave to:
1.  Sin- the Lord Jesus taught that “he that committeth sin is the servant of sin”, John 8:34.  Man has a sin-principle within him, and he is a slave to that, and cannot break free.
2.  Sins- we are described as “serving divers lusts and pleasures”, Titus 3:3.
3.  Traditions- man is in bondage to his personal world-view, which prevents him seeing things as God does.  It is by the Lamb of God that men may be “redeemed…from vain traditions”, 1 Peter 1:18.  In the context, this means the Jewish world-view.
4.  Fear of death- because he is helpless in the face of death, man is “through fear of death subject to bondage”, Hebrews 2:15.
5.  Curse of the law- the law of Moses pronounced a curse on those who did not keep its commands perfectly, but believers can say Christ “redeemed us from the curse of the law?”, Galatians 3:13.
6.  Idolatry- the Gentiles in particular were held in superstitious fear of the evil spirits behind their idols, and so did “service unto them which by nature are no gods”, Galatians 4:8.
7.  Corrupt body- as the believer still has the body he was born with, and which is part of a creation made subject to corruption, he is held in the “bondage of corruption”, and awaits the “redemption of the body”, when the Lord comes, Romans 8:21,23.
8.  Grave- because he has a mortal body, man is destined for the grave and corruption.  The psalmist laments that “none can redeem his brother that…he should not see corruption”, Psalm 49:7,9.  But he also rejoices, for he is confident that God will redeem his soul from the power of the grave, verse 15.

There are seven words used in the New Testament for the process of buying a slave.  Five are formed from the verb to loose, and two from the verb to buy in a market:
Stage 1.  A buyer comes into the market with the necessary money, which is called the “lutron”, the means of loosing.
References: 
“The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many”, Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45.

Stage 2.  That sum of money is enough to buy the slave, for it corresponds to the price asked, hence is called the “anti-lutron”, the corresponding price.
Reference:
“the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all”, 1 Timothy 2:6.

Stage 3.  The buyer hands the money over; this is the “agorazo”, the purchase-event.
References:
“and hast redeemed us to God by they blood”, Revelation 5:9.
“which were redeemed from the earth”, Revelation 14:3.
“these were redeemed from among men”, Revelation 14:4.
“for ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s”, 1 Corinthians 6:20.
“ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men”, 1 Corinthians 7:23.
(The other 26 references to buying have not to do with slaves).

Stage 4.  The buyer makes that purchase with the view to releasing the slave, so the purchase is “ex-agorazo”, to buy so as to take out of the market-place.
References:
“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law”, Galatians 3:13.
“to redeem them that were under the law”, Galatians 4:5.

Stage 5.  The slave is released because his ransom-price has been paid; this is “lutroo”, to release on payment of a ransom.
“But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel”, Luke 24:21. 
“that He might redeem us from all iniquity”, Titus 2:14.
“ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things”, 1 Peter 1:18.

Stage 6.  The whole transaction is called the “lutrosis”, the redemption-process.
References:
“she spake of Him to all that looked for redemption in Jerusalem”, Luke 2:38.
“having obtained eternal redemption for us”, Hebrews 9:12.

Stage 7.  The whole transaction is also called “apo-lutrosis”, for the slave is ransomed and taken away from his former master.
References:
“look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh”, Luke 21:28.
“through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus”, Romans 3:24.
“waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body”, Romans 8:23.
“Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us…redemption”, 1 Corinthians 1:30.
“in whom we have redemption through His blood”, Ephesians 1:7.
“until the redemption of the purchased possession”, Ephesians 1:14.
“whereby we are sealed unto the day of redemption”, Ephesians 4:30.
“in whom we have redemption through His blood”, Colossians 1:14.
“for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament”, Hebrews 9:15.

Stages 1 and 2 correspond to the incarnation of Christ.
Stages 3 and 4 correspond to the death of Christ.
Stage 5 corresponds to conversion.
Stages 6 and 7 relate to the whole process.

The Saviour said, “the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many”, Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45.  Wonderful and beneficial as His service during His public ministry was, there was another service needed, and this He performed when He gave His life, (meaning His soul, His person in its entirety, with nothing held back), a ransom for many.  The preposition “for” translates the word “anti”, meaning substitution.  Those in bondage could not pay, so He paid it instead of them paying it.  How else could He pay it?  He cannot pay it as one who is in bondage Himself.  And how could those in bondage pay it?  They were spiritually bankrupt.
There are those with Calvinistic tendencies who wish to tell us that the Lord Jesus only paid the ransom instead of, (“anti”), the elect, and this is why, they say, the preposition meaning substitution is used here, and also why the Lord says “many” and not “all”.  Yet when the apostle, in our passage, is speaking of these things, and tells us that Christ is the ransom for all, he deliberately uses the word for ransom which has the substitution preposition attached to it, the “anti-lutron”.  In Matthew and Mark the Lord is contrasting the value of His service, and the value of His life, with the lives of those many people who are in bondage.  In 1 Timothy 2 the apostle is showing the extent of the desires of God, for He has made provision for all.  There is substitution in both passages, but in Matthew and Mark the substitution is in connection with the people for whom the ransom is paid, whereas in 1 Timothy 2 the emphasis is on the character of the ransom price. 
There is the same use of both “all” and “many” in Romans 5:12-21.  Judgement came upon all men, and the free gift came upon all men, verse 18.  Yet in verse 19 many were made sinners, and many shall be made righteous.  Shall we say that because it is “many”, and not “all”, that were made sinners, there were some who were not made sinners?  We are forced to the conclusion that we need to look carefully at each phrase in its context.  In verse 18 the extent of the judgement and the free gift is the same, for they are both to all.  But in verse 19 the end-result is in view, and many, but not all, are made righteous.
It is the same in Matthew 20 as compared to 1 Timothy 2.  In Matthew 20 the ransom is instead of many because the Lord is speaking of the purpose for which He came into the world, “the Son of man is come”, and He is looking at the end-result He knows there will be, for not all will avail themselves of the ransom He obtains.  It is not that He will only pay the ransom-price for some and not for others, but rather, that not everyone will respond to what He has done, when it is preached to them.  In 1 Timothy 2 the apostle is looking back, “who gave Himself”, and is proving the genuineness of God’s desire that men be saved from the fact that Calvary is history.  Christ acted on behalf of all men, not a limited number, and that shows that God desires all men to be saved.  That all men can be saved in shown in that the price paid for them was a substitutionary-price, it matched the price demanded, so they have no excuse.  They cannot plead that Christ did not pay the ransom price for them, for it was for all, and it was an anti-lutron.
To be testified in due time- in 6:15 we learn that at the correct time Christ will show who is the blessed and only Potentate.  When He comes to earth again, then will be the time for the declaration of His kingship.  Now it is the time to testify of His Saviour-hood and His redeeming work at Calvary. 

2:7  Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

Whereunto I am ordained a preacher- the apostle has been appointed to announce the truths he has just set out, as a herald announces matters the authorities purpose to make known, and which are of public interest.  Because God desires to save men, He also desires that those whom He has appointed and gifted should announce gospel truths in the ears of men, and inform them of God’s true character, (for He is largely misunderstood in the world), and announce that Christ is the only mediator, who has given Himself at Calvary to ransom from sin.
And an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;)- sadly, Paul had to constantly assert his apostleship, for there were those who disputed it.  Hence he assures us that he is not lying, but is speaking truth as one who is in Christ, and therefore linked to Him, as are all believers.  To associate Christ with a lie is a very, very serious thing.
A teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity- not only is the truth to be heralded, but it is to be taught.  The word of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 28:19,20 was, “Go…teach”.  In Mark 16:15 His word was, “Go…preach”.  So it is that the apostles “ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus Christ”, Acts 5:42.  They taught who He was, and then preached that men should believe on Him.  Christ was central to their message; they did not expect people to believe on a person they had not been taught about.  It is very possible for preachers to assume that their listeners know basic truths about Christianity, when they do not. This is why men are commanded to repent, for they need to change their minds about Divine things once they are announced to them, which implies their current thinking is wrong. 
God not only desires men to be saved, but also to come to a knowledge of the truth, verse 4.  A reading of the messages recorded in the Book of the Acts will soon reveal that they preached a Christ-centred message.  After all, the apostle states very clearly in Romans 1:1,3 that the gospel of God is concerning His Son.  He is central to its message and therefore ought to be central in its presentation to men.
Paul preached in faith and verity.  In other words, he really believed what he preached, (he preached in faith), and he did so sincerely, as one governed by the truth, and not by some self-interest or hidden agenda, (he preached in verity). 

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY CHAPTER 2, VERSES 8 TO 10:

2:8  I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

2:9  In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

2:10  But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

 

(c)    Verses 8-10        Manner of praying.

2:8  I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

I will therefore that men pray every where– as an apostle, Paul is authorised to issue these directives.  There is a very deliberate and pointed change in the word used for man, at this point.  In verses 1 and 4, the word is “anthropos”, meaning men generally, people, including women.  And since it was as a true man that Christ gave Himself, the word anthropos is used of Him in verse 5, for He is relevant to all, whether men or women.  But now the apostle is about to give instructions to men and women separately, so he uses the word “aner”, which means a male person, as opposed to a female person.  That the word does signal that distinction is seen in the fact that it is often translated “husband”, which could not be used of a woman.  So the apostle is regulating the respective roles of male and female believers in connection with assembly prayer meetings.  We know it is assembly prayer that is in mind, because Timothy is instructed to pass on truth relative to behaviour in the house of God, 3:15.
Note it is “every where”, and not “everywhere”.  The Lord Jesus condemned praying on the street corners, Matthew 6:5, so the apostle is not instructing believers to act contrary to Christ’s teaching. 
The word “where” is a translation of the same expression as is used in 1 Corinthians 1:2, where it is rendered “in every place”, meaning in every locality where there was an assembly.  So this is an instruction for assembly prayer meetings in any location on earth.  There is not to be any local variation, perhaps because of custom or culture.  It should be possible to go to any assembly prayer meeting anywhere on earth and find this injunction being obeyed.  If there are companies that do not obey it, they have clearly forfeited any claim to be an assembly, in the New Testament sense. 
Note it is not that some men are to pray.  It is all the male members of the assembly who should rise to their responsibilities and audibly voice their petitions on behalf of the assembly.  If it is objected that this would take too long, if the assembly is large, then perhaps the assembly should divide and one part should establish elsewhere.
It is on behalf of others that they pray.  It is not personal prayers relocated to the assembly gathering-place.  The prayers, being on behalf of the whole company, should be in the first person plural, not the first person singular; in other words, using “we”, not “I”. 
Lifting up holy hands- this expression suggests several things, as follows:
1.    That the hands lifted up are clean hands, being holy.  The words of Psalm 24:3-5 are these, “Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord?  And who shall stand in His holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.  He shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation”.  So clean hands are imperative if we are to approach God, and the promise is that those who pray with clean hands, and pure heart, will receive blessing from the Lord.  On the other hand, in another psalm, the psalmist says “If I regard iniquity in mine heart, the Lord will not hear me”, Psalm 66:16.
The word for “holy” is hagios, which involves a combination of piety towards God, and loving-kindness towards men.  Clearly, our prayers will not be answered if our hands have not been occupied with acts of mercy. 

2.    That the hands are priestly hands.  The psalmist exhorted the servants of the Lord to “lift up your hands in the sanctuary, and bless the Lord”, Psalm 134:2.  This psalm is the last of the Songs of Degrees, sung as the pilgrims came up to Jerusalem for the feasts.  This is the climax, to bless God in the temple courts.  It is the highest occupation that can engage God’s people, to bless Him for what and who He is.

3.    That the hands are worshipful hands.  The psalmist wrote, “Let my prayer be set forth before Thee as incense; And the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice”, Psalm 141:2.  He would be familiar with the temple worship, how that morning and evening a lamb was offered on the altar as a burnt offering, the sweet savour of which would arise to delight God’s nostrils, Exodus 29:38-44.  He would also know that incense was burnt on the golden altar, and this was done morning and evening also, Exodus 30:7,8.  So the sweet savour of the offering, and the sweet savour of the incense, both arose to God at the same time.  But the psalmist was not content with symbolism.  He knew that devotion to God was an even better thing that an ox on the altar, for he said in another psalm, “I will praise the name of the Lord with a song, and will magnify Him with thanksgiving.  This also shall please the Lord better than an ox or bullock that hath horns and hoofs”, Psalm, 69:30,31. 
So it is that he desired that his prayer might be as pleasing to God as the holy incense, and the sweet savour of the burnt offering as it ascended heavenwards, for it arose from one whose life was pleasing to God, and whose devotion was truly sacrificial.  In another psalm, David showed that he knew that the best thing God was looking for was not sacrifices and offerings on an altar, but a life surrendered to God.  And his words, found in Psalm 40:6-8, are quoted by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as being fulfilled perfectly by Christ, Hebrews 10:5-9.  So we in this age have the great privilege of taking our example from Christ, whose character and graces were like sweet incense to His Father, and whose death brought Him the utmost pleasure.  Our prayers and praises can mingle these things together, and arise to gratify the heart of God, just as the incense and the sweet savour of the burnt sacrifice arose to God together.

4.    That the hands are expectant hands, for they reach up heavenwards, ready to receive the blessing our God longs to bestow.  God challenged His people through the prophet Malachi with the words, “And prove Me now herewith, saith the Lord of Hosts, if I will not open to you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive  it”, Malachi 3:10.  And by what were they to prove the Lord?  The first part of the verse tells us, “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in Mine house”.  In other words, if the people gave God His due, then He would pour them out a blessing.  And this is still the principle.  We cannot expect to reach up with our hands to receive blessing from God, if we are not prepared to give Him His place and His rightful portion.

5.    That the hands are interceding hands.  It is in Luke, the Gospel of the Priestly Man, that we are told that the Lord Jesus ascended to God with hands stretched out in blessing.  We read, “And He led them out as far as to Bethany, and He lifted up His hands, and blessed them.  And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up to heaven”, Luke 24:50,51.  Luke’s gospel begins with a Levitical priest seeking to function in the temple in Jerusalem.  He had been chosen to burn incense on the golden altar, and as he did so, the people were outside praying, thus reminding us of the link between incense and prayer.  Sadly however, he doubted the word of the angel who appeared to him, and he was struck dumb, so that when he came out from the temple he could not pronounce a blessing over them, Luke 1:8-10; 20-22; see also Leviticus 9:22. 
There is no such fault with the Lord Jesus, however.  His attitude as He ascended is the same now that He is back in heaven, for “He ever liveth to make intercession for us”, Hebrews 7:25.  Nor should there be fault with us, for we should bless God with hearts that do not doubt Him.  We should bless men too, as we seek God’s salvation for them.  As Peter wrote, “not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are hereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing”, 1 Peter 3:9.
As to whether this lifting up of hands is to be physically carried out, we should remember the words of Psalm 141:2 already quoted.  The psalmist equates the lifting up of his hands with praying, so they are interchangeable terms.  After all, the Lord Jesus prayed in Gethsemane with his face to the earth.  It was impossible to lift up hands when in that position.  So also with the apostle in Ephesians 3:14, when he writes, “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”.  This is a moral position, denoting submission to the one to whom the prayer is made. 

Without wrath and doubting- prayers for vengeance are not in order in this present age.  The psalms that are called imprecatory, Psalms 35, 59, 69, 109, are not suitable for the age of grace.  They will be appropriate in the Tribulation Period, for we read that those who have been martyred will cry out for vengeance, Revelation 6:9-11.  We in this age have the responsibility and privilege to pray down blessing upon men, not fire and brimstone. 
James and John had to learn this lesson.  The Lord called them “Sons of thunder”, because He discerned their nature.  When some Samaritans refused to allow the Lord to come through their village, James and John were clearly angry, for they said, “Lord, wilt Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?”  But He turned, and rebuked them, and said, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.  For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them”, Luke 9:54-56.  And so it is still, and despite the horrid wickedness of men, we are to pray for their salvation, not their destruction. 
Nor should we have wrath in our hearts in relation to believers, for that is no condition in which to approach God.  If there are matters which need putting right, then this should happen beforehand, as the Lord taught in Matthew 5:23,24.  When the apostle was in prison in Rome, he discovered that there were those who were taking advantage of his restrictions, and were preaching for wrong motives.  He valued the prayers of the believers at Philippi to whom he was writing, so that instead of being sullen in this situation, he might genuinely rejoice that Christ was being preached.  In this way he would manifest the spirit of Jesus Christ; that is, the spirit or attitude that he knew Christ would adopt in this situation.  See Philippians 1:12-19.
Doubt is also out of place in the prayer meeting, for the Lord said, “And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive”, Matthew 21:22.  If our hearts are reasoning naturally, and not resting in God’s promises, our prayers are tinged with doubt.  The promise of the Lord Jesus was, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in My name, He will give it you.  Hitherto have ye asked nothing in My name; ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full”, John 16:23,24.  Given such a promise, we dare not doubt. 

2:9  In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

In like manner also- that is, “I will…in like manner also”.  So it is not that “men are to pray in this manner, and the women also are to pray like that”, for that would ignore the fact that the word for man means male.  Rather, it is, “I will this for the men, and I also will for the women”.  What he wills is told us in the rest of the verse.  Notice that the apostle is being very even-handed here, and not favouring men over women or vice versa.
Notice that it is expected that the sisters be present at the prayer meeting.  They were not to think that because they could not pray out loud, there was no point in them being there.  The fact is, that as an assembly calls upon God in collective prayer, they need to be united in the exercise.  Of course, home duties will often prevent the sisters being present, in which case they are fulfilling scripture at home, and are not at fault even though absent from the meeting.  This, however, is the exception, not the rule.
He does not regulate the praying of the sisters, (although surely they will want to have pure hands, and be without wrath and doubting), but he does regulate the way they dress.  Now some will object to being told how to dress, but such should remember that the writings of the apostle are “the commandments of the Lord”, 1 Corinthians 14:37, and they need to respond to them accordingly.  The clothing a person wears more often than not gives an indication of their character.  This is why in Scripture clothing is often used as a figure for characteristics.  For instance, “For He put on righteousness as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on His head; and He put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak”, Isaiah 59:17.  And, “Who coverest Thyself with light as with a garment”, Psalm 104:2.  So the character of God is poetically said to be expressed by garments.  So it is with us, and great care should be exercised in order that the right impression is given to others.
That women adorn themselves in modest apparel- so the dress of the sisters is as much a contribution to the prayers as is the audible prayers of the brothers.  They are to adorn themselves, for there is no virtue in being drab.  The lively and vibrant faith of the sisters may be reflected in their clothing, in a spiritual way.  If they are spiritual, they will dress attractively but not extravagantly. 
Their dress is, however, to be modest, suited to the occasion and their faith.  The dress of the women of the world is often designed to attract attention to themselves for the wrong reasons.  Such behaviour is certainly not becoming.  The saints need to be free of anything that would disturb or distract the praying. 
With shamefacedness and sobriety- the idea of shamefacedness is not a sense of embarrassment because something impure has been done, but a determination to so fix securely in the character a sense of what is pure, that the impure thing is not done.  Sobriety is sound judgement as to what is suitable.  It is the determination to not allow anything that would go against shamefacedness.  This will come as the Holy Spirit leads.  If there are those who have not reached this level of discernment, then the older sisters have a role to instruct and guide into better things,  “The aged women…teach the young women to be sober”, Titus 2:3,4.  This presumes that the aged women have learnt these lessons themselves.
Not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array- having spoken of the positive things that may be done, the apostle now instructs as to what is not to be done.  It was the custom for ladies of high station in society to have elaborate hairstyles, with hair interwoven with gold braid and pearls.  This became a status symbol, and was designed to advertise the riches the person possessed, and to draw the attention of others.  Clearly, such adorning is out of place in God’s house, even if it were acceptable in the houses of the gentry of the time.  The fashions of this world, governed as it is by Satan himself, are no precedent for the dress of believers, whether male or female. 
Costly array is also unacceptable, for this is also designed to pander to pride and conceit, and causes the poor to feel inferior.  Such a spirit of arrogance has no place in God’s assembly, where all are equal as to privilege and blessing.  Social standing in the world does not give standing before God, or fellow-believers.  Costly array also indicates that there has not been the wise use of money.  If the Lord gives us financial resources over and above that which we need, then He means us to give the surplus to others.

2:10  But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works- the apostle envisages that the sisters, as they sit silently praying in the prayer meeting, will not only be adorned suitably and modestly, but will also be clothed with good works.  Their profession or calling is godliness, and this will be expressed in a practical way in their everyday lives, and God will see it as characterising them as they assemble for prayer.  In this way their whole lives will contribute to the atmosphere of the prayer meeting.  They have recognised that God has a claim upon them, and they, in turn, because of that, have a claim upon Him, in terms of answers to their prayers.  Which claim He is only too ready to meet.

THE WORDS OF THE BIBLE, THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, AS FOUND IN THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY CHAPTER 2, VERSES 11 TO 15:

2:11  Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
2:13  For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
2:14  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
2:15  Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

(d)    Verses 11-15    Manner of teaching.

The apostle had introduced the twin ideas of praying and preaching in verses 1-7.  Having dealt with the praying in verses 1-10, he now turns to the matter of preaching and teaching.

2:11  Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

Let the woman learn in silence- in verses 8-10 it was men and women, plural, for it is a collective act of praying that is in view.  Here, the idea is of one man preaching or teaching, and the attitude to be adopted by any one woman as he does so.  Incidentally, the apostle envisages that preaching as well as teaching is to be done in the assembly gatherings.  There is nothing wrong, therefore, in having meetings of the assembly for the preaching of the gospel.  We see from the examples in the book of Acts, that the gospel was preached in the environment that was conducive to serious thought.  So the apostles invariably went first into the synagogues, for that was the place where those who were seeking God could be found.  On occasions, the apostle was rejected by the synagogue, so what did he do?  He is forbidden to cast his pearls before swine or give that which is holy to dogs, Matthew 7:6.  In other words, it is to interested persons that the gospel is to be made known.  Having preached in the synagogue in Ephesus for three months, he found that many were rejecting his word, so he went and preached in the school of Tyrannus, and as a result, during the next two years, “all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus”, Acts 19:8-10.  Clearly, those who came to hear Paul had an interest in seeking God, and he was therefore free to preach to them.  The same thing happened at Corinth, for when the Jews in the synagogue opposed Paul’s preaching, he departed, and entered into the house of Justus, which adjoined the synagogue.  As a result the chief ruler of the synagogue was converted, Acts 18:6-8.  And even Paul’s practice at Athens will not be seen as an exception to this.  He went to the synagogue, but also to the market-place, for in those times that was where ideas were exchanged. There were those who met with him, interested in the ideas he promoted, and then the philosophers “encountered him”, a translation of the same word as is found in Acts 4:15, rendered there “conferred”. Then he was invited to speak on Mars’ Hill, for the philosophers expressed some sort of interest, Acts 17:16-19.
To return to our verses.  Any and every believing woman, then, as preaching or teaching is going on in the assembly, is to learn in silence.  This is not to say, of course, that the men are not to learn.  Rather, the idea is that she learns, and does not teach.  It is not a contrast between learning or not learning, but between teaching and learning.  And this is to be done in silence.  But it is the silence of one who is intelligent as to why it is to be so, and without any fretting because it is so.  Hence the word for silence has the idea of quietness of spirit, the opposite of smouldering anger and resentment.  Such a spirit is out of place in any assembly gathering, prayer meeting included.  Those who harbour such an attitude will grieve the Spirit and hinder the prayers.
With all subjection- there is not to be a constant attempt to avoid the injunction, (by the introduction of women’s prayer meetings, for instance), but a willing and wholehearted bowing to the will of God.  The word subjection reminds us that God has put in place a certain order with regard to believers.  “The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God”, 1 Corinthians 11:3.  The last phrase removes any idea from our minds that being in subjection is a morally or intellectually inferior position, for Christ is not morally or intellectually inferior to God.  What He is, though, is one who, as a man, has willingly subjected Himself to His Father.  It is therefore a spiritual attitude to adopt.  So Christ is subject, to God.  The man is subject, to Christ.  The woman is subject, to the man.  This is God’s order in God’s house, whatever the order in the houses of men may be. 

2:12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

But I suffer not a woman to teach- we have noticed that the directions here relate to the house of God, the assembly, when it is gathered together.  In that setting, it is the man who is given the task of teaching, and the woman is not to teach, but learn from the teaching.  Of course the male believers who are not teaching are learning also, but they may teach on other occasions, if gifted to do so, but the women are not to do so. 
Nor to usurp authority over the man- this is the second thing the woman must not do.  There is no ground for saying that the woman may teach as long as she does not usurp the authority of the man as she does so, for teaching is an exercise of authority, under God, for it is the setting forth of Divine commands.  It is said of the Lord Jesus that “He taught them as one having authority”, Matthew 7:29. 
When two statements are separated by “nor”, as here, it means that they are distinct, and the second is not an explanation or expansion of the first, but has its own relevance.  The apostle is very decisive in 1 Corinthians 14:34 when he writes, “Let your women keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak”.  It is impossible to teach without speaking, so the two Scriptures complement one another.
But to be in silence- here is a repeat of the word used in the previous verse, emphasising again that there should be quietness of spirit on the part of the sisters.  They may have misgivings about what a brother is teaching, and they may raise this privately with one of the elders, but they must not interrupt or in any other way assert themselves.  If they do not remain silent, then they must either be teaching, or in other ways usurping the authority of the man. 
The fact that the word silence means quietness also has a lesson for the men, for they should not act or speak in any way that causes the sisters disquiet.  So the injunction is a positive one for both males and females.  For the sisters, there is the opportunity of responding to God’s will with a happy spirit, not fretting because of God’s requirement, but seeing it as a command to be cheerfully obeyed, to His glory.  It is a positive one for the brothers, too, not to give them licence to be overbearing, but to administer for God in a spiritual way.

God very graciously gives us the reason for the foregoing injunctions, for He expects us to have enquiring minds.  There were two things the woman must not do, in verse 12.  Now the apostle explains the reasoning behind the prohibitions, and he does so, as often, in the reverse order to which they were mentioned.  So he deals with the question of the woman usurping authority, and then the question of the woman teaching.

2:13  For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

For Adam was first formed, then Eve- in Genesis 1:26-28 we read of God’s determination to make man.  That is, man in the sense of “man-kind”, in contrast to the “kinds” of animals created previously.  Mankind is going to consist of male and female, and so the first male and female are made by God on the sixth day.  They are equal in that they are both made in the image of God and after the likeness of God.  And they are both given dominion over the rest of creation.  In chapter 2, however, we are given more details about the way each was made, for God, by the way and the order in which He made the man and the woman, sets forth basic principles that would pertain to life on earth from then on. 
We need to be clear that both the man and the woman are made in the image of God, and so are equal before Him.  But when it comes to the administration of the earth, then the man is given the dominant position.  He is to be dominant, but not domineering.  This makes the situation clear from the beginning, and God’s mind is thereby known from the outset.
So it is that in Genesis 1:7 the man is made from the dust of the ground, and God breathes into his nostrils the breath of life and he becomes a living soul.  In verses 18-23 we learn about the formation of the woman from one of Adam’s ribs.  So, as the apostle says in the verse we are considering, Adam was formed first, before Eve.  Clearly, they could have both been made of the dust of the ground at the same time, but God was indicating certain principles by the order in which they were made.
The fact that the apostle appeals to the Book of Genesis shows that he was not speaking of a matter that was particular to Ephesus.  By going back to the very beginning of life upon earth, Paul is setting out truth of universal application.
The apostle calls the woman Eve, even though she was not called that until God had indicated, in Genesis 3:16, that she would bear children.  Adam called her “Eve”, a name which means “living”, because “she was the mother of all living”.  (It is interesting to note that scientists are coming round to the idea that the human race descends from one woman, and they have labelled her “Mitochrondial Eve”).  By using this name for the woman Paul is moving us on from Genesis 2 to Genesis 3, where the naming took place, and also where the transgression took place, and the prophecies about childbearing also. 
Because she was formed after Adam, the woman came on the scene after God had given Adam commandments about the trees of the garden, Genesis 2:16,17.  So it was that he was established as the custodian of God’s commands, with responsibility for passing them on, not only to the woman, but also to all who should be born afterwards.  For this reason, the woman is not to usurp the authority of the man, for he is charged with administering for God.  This is rejected in the world, but if there is one place where it should be accepted it is in God’s house, the local assembly.  All in the assembly have the duty of upholding this principle; the sisters by not usurping authority, the brothers by rising to their responsibilities.  Details as to how they may do this are given in chapter 4 of this epistle, and elsewhere in the New Testament epistles.
In 1 Corinthians 11: 3 the apostle makes three statements, in which he sets out the governing principles behind the Divinely-ordered relationships between brothers, sisters, Christ and God.  These statements are as follows:
“The head of every man is Christ”.
“The head of the woman is the man”.
“The head of Christ is God”.
The first statement speaks of Christ’s headship, the third of His subjection.  The first and second statements show that man is both subject and head, as Christ is, and the second statement shows that the woman is subject, as Christ is; so both man and woman have Christ as their model. 
The idea of Christ being subject to God is reserved as the climax to the statement.  Perhaps this is because subjection to a head comes hard to us, and we are reminded that Christ was subject, yet He did not find it hard, but was subject to God in willing obedience.  We should take our example from this.  Perhaps the apostle also puts the subjection of Christ last because both male and female are subject in this passage, whereas the male is head as well as being subject.  What is common to both male and female, and which both need a perfect example of, is found in the end of the verse for emphasis.

2:14  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

And- Paul is indicating by this word that he is now dealing with the other matter suggested by verse 12, namely the matter of the woman not being allowed to teach.  It would be helpful to consider the Scripture Paul is referring to here, and to notice the way events unfolded. 

Genesis 3:1-13
We must remember that at the close of chapter 2 the state of things was the same as it had been at the beginning of the chapter, in verse 4.  For chapter 2 from verse 7 onwards, as we have seen, is taken up with the details which were spoken of in general terms in connection with the days of creation.  So all was very good, as God had said.  Lucifer was still Lucifer, and had not rebelled and become Satan and the Devil.  It is inconceivable that God would have pronounced the whole of creation very good if the fall of the angels had taken place.  So that event must have happened in between the end of chapter 2 and the beginning of chapter 3.
From Ezekiel 28:14-18 we learn that Lucifer has been one of the cherubim guarding the very throne of God.  One day, iniquity was found in him, and he sought to rebel against God, and usurp His place of supremacy in the universe, Isaiah 14:12-15.  In pride, (for pride is the condemnation of the Devil, 1 Timothy 3:6), he determined to rise higher than God, and managed to persuade a third of the angels to rebel with him, Revelation 12:4.  This rebellion was easily repulsed by God, however, and he was cast out of his place of privilege.  Said the Lord Jesus, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven”, Luke 10:18.  That he fell as lightning shows the swift and summary way in which God dealt with his rebellion.
Expelled from heaven itself, (although allowed access to it at times, Job 1:6; 2:1), he was confined to the atmospheric and stellar heavens.  And not content with having succeeded in causing the downfall of some of the angelic host, thus depriving God of their worship, (for “the host of heaven worshippeth Thee”, said Nehemiah, 9:6), he now attempts to cause the downfall of man. 

3:1  Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made- as there were only two humans on earth at this time, Satan cannot use another person.  To come in spirit-form might arouse the suspicions of Adam and his wife.  To simply speak from the air would also cause them to be on their guard.  The only alternative is to use one of the animals.  We need not assume that the serpent was the same as it is now.  When God cursed it later in the chapter, it was cursed above all cattle.  They were cursed, but it was cursed more.  This would suggest that the serpent was degraded to a higher degree than the other creatures.  Since one of the judgements upon it was to go upon its belly, we may safely assume that it did not do so before, or else that would be no sign of judgement.  There is the possibility, then, that the serpent was originally an erect and beautiful creature.  There is also the possibility that the serpent was able to fly, so that it came to the woman as “an angel of light”.  It is interesting to notice that that phrase comes in the passage where the apostle Paul is speaking of the tempting and beguiling of Eve, 2 Corinthians 11:3,14.  Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 speak of flying serpents, (and the word used was “saraph”, the same word as is used of the seraphim), so, strange as it may seem to us, the serpent may have been a winged creature originally, which makes the judgement of creeping along the ground even more severe and suitable.  In confirmation of this, the serpent is classed, before it was used by Satan, as one of the beasts of the field, and not one of the creeping things mentioned in Genesis 1:24,26. 
There is an eye-witness account in the book “After the Flood”, by Bill Cooper, in which an old person, speaking in the late 1900’s about the experience of his father and grandfather, told of winged, flying serpents in Penllin, Wales.  They “looked as if they were covered with jewels of all sorts.  Some of them had crests sparkling with all the colours of the rainbow…their outspread wings were bright, and sometimes with eyes, too, like the feathers in a peacock’s tail…they were as bad as foxes for poultry”.  It is interesting that they are likened to foxes, for these are noted for their sly cunning, and the serpent was more crafty than other creatures.  Since the serpent was cursed by being made to creep along the ground, the creatures spoken of in this secular account would have been of a different kind, but they still illustrate the possibility of serpent-like creatures flying.
That it was more subtle, or crafty, does not mean that it was wickedly crafty.  The word is used several times in the Book of Proverbs with reference to a prudent man.  When Adam named the creatures, it clearly occurred to him that this animal had remarkable capacities.  The word Adam gave to the serpent is “nachash”, and besides the sinister meanings attaching to this word since the fall, there are two references which give an insight into the original meaning.  It is the word that Laban used when he said that he had “learned by experience” that God had blessed him through Jacob, Genesis 30:22.  It is also the word used of the men of Benhadad’s army, who had gone to the camp of Israel to see what the attitude of the king of Israel would be to their leader.  They went to “diligently observe”, a translation of the word “nachash”.  When he said, “He is my brother”, they immediately deduced that he would be treated favourably, 2 Kings 20:33.  We build up a picture from this word, then, of a creature that is observant, intelligent, and quickly learns by experience.  The root meaning of the word nachash is whisperer, from its hiss, which now would make us think of an evil characteristic.  Clearly before sin came in this was not the case; it simply and innocently gives us the impression of a gentle creature, more intelligent than the others God had made. 
As a animal, the serpent had no moral sense.  It had no interest in whether God had commanded Adam certain things or not.  But Satan did, and planned to spoil what God had made, and invade the earth with his rebellious designs.  The fact that the judgement of God was imposed upon a moral being in verse 15, shows that there is more to this incident than a serpent talking- it is Satan behind the scenes.  What more suitable vehicle than an intelligent, beautiful, angel-like creature?  Ever since this event, however, Satan has been that “Ancient Serpent, which deceiveth the whole world”, Revelation 12:9.  What he did in the garden, he has been doing ever since, deceiving men with his lies.  The Lord Jesus made clear that “he is a liar, and the father of it”, John 8:44.  Not content with lying himself, he strives to get others to share his characteristic, so that they become of their “father the Devil”, John 8:44.  The psalmist said that “man goeth astray as soon as he be born, speaking lies”, Psalm 58:3.  And not only so, follows this by believing lies, too, for the natural inclination of the sinner is to believe the Devil’s lies- his heart gravitates towards error.  That is why the Spirit of God needs to act and convince men of the truth of the gospel. 
And he said- Satan’s word is now being set against the Word of God.  This is always Satan’s tactic, to get men to believe him rather than God.  The Lord Jesus, when tempted in the wilderness by the Devil, always referred to the word of God.  He repulsed the Enemy with the words, “It is written”.  For Him, that was enough.  And it should be enough for every believer.  How important to store our minds with the truth of Scripture, so that in the moment of trial we have that available resource of remembered truth to combat the Devil successfully.
Unto the woman- notice that the temptation comes first to the woman.  The command to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil came to Adam before the woman had been made.  This established him as the one responsible for asserting his headship-authority by informing the woman of it.  This is why the command is “Thou (singular) shalt not eat of it”, rather than “Ye (plural) shall not eat of it”.  (One of the many reasons why the Authorised Version of the Scriptures is by far the best translation, is because it preserves these important distinctions).
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?- It is noticeable that the serpent does not use the title Lord God, but speaks only of God.  God is the one who created things in chapter 1, but in chapter 2 He established relationships with the man and his wife, and so the title Lord God is used.  The latter name signifying His unchangeable faithfulness.  Satan will not recognise the Lordship of God, any more than Judas Iscariot, one of his agents, would.  We never find Judas addressing the Lord Jesus as Lord.  An apparent exception is found in John 14:22, where a man named Judas asks the Lord Jesus a question, and calls Him Lord.  John the apostle is quick to explain to us, however, that it was not Judas Iscariot, but another Judas, who spoke in those terms.
He begins with a question.  Now when a question is asked, there is always suggested to us a variety of answers, even if they are simply “yes” or “no”.  Immediately the woman has to make up her mind.  But the question is framed in such a way as to put her off her guard.  The word “yea” could be translated “is it the case that”, and she has to decide.  He is not asking out of interest, but in order to trip her up, and suggest a doubt in her mind; a doubt, that is, as to the goodness of God.  By his question to the woman, the Devil is insinuating that God was being unreasonable to impose this restriction.  Now the truth is that God’s exact words were not that they could not eat of every tree.  What He had said was they should not eat of a particular one, as 2:17 makes clear.  So what is the correct answer?  Is it “No, God has not said that”, or is it, “Yes, God has said, by implication, that they are not to eat of every tree, for He has banned one”.  The woman may begin to wonder whether Adam had passed on the message correctly.  By saying “ye” and not “thou”, the Devil is making the woman answer for Adam as well.  Immediately the woman is confused, for both a “yes”, (God did say by implication that they were not to eat of every tree, 2:17), and a “no”, (since God said they could eat of every tree, 2:16), are correct answers to the question.  Satan loves to confuse people, and he does it by mixing truth and lies together.

3:2  And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

And the woman said unto the serpent- notice that the woman does not consult with her husband.  He had been made before she was formed, and an order of priority had been established by that simple fact, as 1 Timothy 2:13 makes clear.  It does not mean she is inferior, but that for the sake of order, God has ordained that the man should be first in responsibility.  It is very often the case that the man is second in spirituality, but that is not the point here.  The fact that the woman does not consult the man is made all the more reprehensible if the words “her husband with her”, verse 6, indicate that he was present, or at least near at hand.
We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden- so she had understood the words of God correctly, and Adam had passed them on to her faithfully.  Her answer goes some way to contradict the implied idea in the serpent’s question, that God had been unreasonable, and possibly confusing, by saying on the one hand they could eat of every tree, and then saying there was one they could not eat of.  She is to be commended for this, but then she begins to tamper with what God said.  She does not deny God’s word outright, but alters it somewhat.  However, this, in effect, is the same as denying it, for by altering God’s perfect word we spoil it.
God had said “freely eat”, so by simply saying “eat” she was lessening God’s goodness.  Her mind is being opened to the possibility that God was withholding the maximum pleasure from them.  This is the very basis of Satan’s statement of verse 4 that God was keeping back the best from them.

3:3  But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it- the word for “midst” has the idea of bisect, or sever, so perhaps the tree was at the meeting point of paths that met in the centre of the garden.  There was no mistaking the tree.  God had not made it difficult for them to know which tree was prohibited.  The woman is aware that they may not eat of the tree, so Adam has passed that information on to her, and she knows that it applies to her as well, for she says “Ye”, whereas God said “Thou” to Adam. 
Notice that she has begun to use the name for God that Satan used, and not the one she has been familiar with.  The idea of His faithfulness and authority is receding from her mind.  Instead of thinking of God as her loving Lord, she now begins to think of Him as an unreasonable Creator.  The Devil builds upon this idea of doubting the goodness of God, for he will suggest in verse 5 that God’s motives are suspect.
Neither shall ye touch it- not only has the woman lessened the goodness of God, but she now begins to suggest that His demands are unreasonable.  God had not, in fact, said anything about touching the tree, although of course there was no need to do so if there was no intention to eat of it.  She has added to the word of God, a fatal mistake.
Lest ye die- she is now lessening the severity of the penalty, from “surely die”, (certainty), to “lest ye die”, (possibility).  Satan’s attack on the integrity and goodness of God is working in her mind.  She has now, in intention, taken away from the word of God, another fatal mistake.  There is a fearful judgement for those who add or take away from the Word of God, Revelation 22:18,19.

3:4  And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

And the serpent said unto the woman- we come now to the point-blank denial of what God had said.  Satan has no respect for the word of God, but hates it, since it effectively deals with his power, and predicts his certain downfall.  The word of God was what defeated him when he tempted Christ, and the same weapon is effective against him still. 
Ye shall not surely die- note that the Devil quotes the words of God accurately, inasmuch as he says “surely die”, but in the process he denies their truth.  This is the event the Lord Jesus referred to when He said that the Devil was “a liar, and the father of it”, John 8:44.  The reason he is a liar is because he did not abide in the truth.  Instead of continuing in the path of truth as one of God’s highest creatures, he chose to apostatise, and go away from the stand he had formerly taken.  “The beginning” as far as earth is concerned is the beginning of the world as a place hostile to God.  He managed to convince some of the angels by his lies about God, and so was a liar from the beginning of the rebellion in heaven.  Satan is the god of this world or age, and has been since the moment when he introduced sin into it.  He is also a murderer, and we see that very clearly in that he provoked the man and his wife to eat, and they received the judgement of death upon themselves.  This event is not recorded as if God is against females.  God is against falsehood, and is in favour of the facts.

3:5  For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

For God doth know- he now dares to claim to know what is in God’s mind, and having made the claim, to deliberately mislead the woman about it.  If the woman had only gone by the rule that if God says something, He has no ulterior motive, but is acting for our good, she would not have been deceived.
That in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened- there is a sense in which this was true, for we read it happened in verse 7.  But it did not happen in the way the Devil said it would.  He is not only a liar and a murderer, but a deceiver as well, and adds to this sin the misrepresentation of God.  It is not a question of their physical eyes being opened, but rather their mental insight into things would be increased.
And ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil- before he fell, the Devil convinced himself that it was possible to be like God.  “I will be like the Most High” were his words, Isaiah 14:14.  In fact, it has been suggested that this is the germ of the idea of evolution.  If lesser beings can become men, what is to prevent man from climbing higher?  It is also the germ thought of pantheism, the idea that “god is all and all is god”; in other words, that we are all part of “god”, and merge into “god” when we die.  This is the basis of the Gnosticism that the apostles had to contend so strongly against in their day.  It is in fact the religion of the coming Antichrist, who will sit in the temple in Jerusalem claiming to be God, 2 Thessalonians 2:4.  He will be worshipped as one who has attained the consciousness of the divine, and is the full expression of what a man can be.  As the woman was deceived at the beginning, so men shall be deceived at the end of man’s rule on the earth. 
We need to beware of any so-called gospel which claims to be able to offer spiritual blessing without repentance and faith.  The apostle Paul warned the Corinthians against being beguiled as Eve had been.  The things Satan uses are another gospel, another spirit, another Jesus, all counterfeits of his devising, which give an appearance of being more exciting, 2 Corinthians 11:4.

3:6  And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her;

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food- its forbidden character is lost sight of, as is the command which made it so.  Had she not noticed that it seemed to be good for food before?  She is looking at things in a different light now, influenced by Satan to do so.  The natural features of the tree, the quality of its fruit, now impress her deeply.  She was wrong in her thinking however, for from God’s viewpoint it was not good for food, for by eating it sin was committed.  Perhaps she began to question the wisdom of making a tree that was good for food and then preventing them from eating it.  Where is the logic in that, she may have thought. 
And that it was pleasant to the eyes- it is the case now, that some trees are pleasant to look upon, but their fruit is not edible, whereas other trees are not so attractive, yet their fruit is valuable.  This tree seems to have combined both features.  Yet in Eden every tree was “pleasant to the sight and good for food”, 2:9, so why is Eve singling out this tree, if it is not because she has been influenced by the Devil? 
And a tree to be desired to make one wise- how could she tell this by looking at it?  She could not, but her mind’s eye is discerning things in the light of Satan’s suggestions.  She has adopted a world-view that does not allow God’s word its place.  She now looks at the tree as desirable, for it will elevate her above the level at which God had placed her.  Satan loves to deceive men into thinking that he can offer them knowledge beyond what ordinary mortals know, for knowledge is power, and men love power.  The first two observations were based on what God’s word said about the trees of the garden, this third thing is based on the Devil’s lie.
She took of the fruit thereof-  she has succumbed to the wiles of the devil, and now acts in accordance with his suggestion, and contrary to God’s command.   
And gave also unto her husband with her- she is now taking the intiative, leading, with Adam following.  She has abandoned her role as helper of the man, and is now putting a stumblingblock in his way.  But she does this convinced that she is in fact helping him to a better position.
And did eat- Adam now acts as the head of mankind, and leads them into sin, rather than leading them to God.  He disobeys the command of God, at the instigation of his wife.  By one man sin came into the world…by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners”, Romans 5:12, 19.
And he did eat- how much is involved in this simple statement.  Men may dismiss the events here as merely the eating of an “apple”.  But this event has far reaching effects.  Far reaching, not just in terms of time, (for the effects will not be finally eradicated until 7000 years after they happened), but also in respect to the number of people affected, even the whole of mankind until the end of time.  More than this, what happened when Adam ate the fruit affected God, and He needed to step in to assert His rights in the world. 
We must remember that Adam was the head of the race of men.  His very name indicated that, for his personal name, Adam, or “Man”, is the name of the race that comes from him.  There is only one race of men, (even though in the world people speak of different “races”), for God “hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth”, Acts 17:26.  So what happened to Adam has very serious consequences for us all.  There is another occasion, however, that had far greater consequences, and that was when the Lord Jesus “tasted death for every man”, at the place called Calvary, see Hebrews 2:9.  As the one who is called the Last Adam, 1 Corinthians 15:45, He undertook to deal with the sin of the first man, and make it possible for the consequences of his sin to be cancelled, for those who believe in Him. 

3:7  And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

And the eyes of them both were opened- as the Devil said they would be.  But how different was the real consequence to the imaginary consequence he had spoken of.  They do not see good and evil as gods, but as sinners.  Instead of being a great blessing, as Satan suggested, it was seen to be a great calamity.  They now know the difference between good and evil, whereas before they only knew good.  And they find that their hearts are now inclined towards the evil, and away from the good.  Each of the Persons of the Godhead knows good and evil, for Genesis 3:22 says so.  But God is holy, and knows evil in the sense that He is aware of it and its dreadful possibilities for those who, like Adam and Eve, are now unholy.
And they knew that they were naked- before, it is said that “they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed”, Genesis 2:25.  Completely comfortable in one another’s presence, no evil, lustful thought crossed their minds.  All was innocent and pure.  How different now!  Sin had perverted their holy relationship into one of lust rather than love, and consequently they are embarrassed in one another’s company.  They have now gained the knowledge of good and evil, which would include the knowledge of what evil may be committed.  Although there was no other woman for Adam to desire, and no other man for Eve to lust after, the possibilities now cross their minds.  All they know of life is bound up with themselves; for them, sin will be expressed in relation to one another.  They know they have been commanded to be fruitful and multiply, so it is inevitable that their thoughts should centre on the organs of reproduction.  Whereas before they were not ashamed, now they are, so sin brings in disruption and spoils everything.
And they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons- feeling keenly their shame, they do what men have done constantly since that day, namely, seek to remedy the situation themselves.  But how can polluted, sinful hands ever manage to do deeds that please God?  It is instructive to notice that before the sins of men are spoken of in Romans 3:13-18, (as the apostle shows that we are “all under sin”), he writes of the nature of man, that he is unrighteous, does not understand; does not seek God; is gone out of the way; has become unprofitable.  Only then does he say, “There is none that doeth good, no not one”, verse 12.  In other words, the reason man does not do good is because he is not good.  His nature renders him unable to do that which is in harmony with the character of God. 
So it is here.  By nature sinners, they have no understanding as to what will really cover their shame.  They may satisfy themselves for a time, but soon they are to meet God.  How will it be with them then?  They will find that all their righteousnesses will be seen as “filthy rags”, Isaiah 64:6, and as such, distasteful to God.

3:8  And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.

And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day- before, they would have welcomed another opportunity to commune with God.  Now, all is different.  Not only has sin disturbed their relationship with one another, but it has broken their relationship with God.  Sin always does this.  “Your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, Isaiah 59:2.  Those who know the cleansing of the precious blood of Christ know what it is to walk in the light of God’s presence, and have fellowship with Him, 1 John 1:7.
The voice of the Lord God may refer to the sound of Him walking in the garden.  The sense of the word “walking” is that He was walking up and down, enjoying the beauty of His handiwork, and longing that the man and his wife were there to enjoy it with Him.  God the Father is now longing to bring his people into an increased enjoyment of the glories, not of the natural world, but the spiritual truths concerning His Son.  This is the secret of true and full joy, as the apostle John indicated in 1 John 1:4, “these things I write unto you, that your joy might be full”.  The things he wrote about being what he had seen and heard with regard to God’s Son.  The Father enjoys those things perfectly;  He desires that His people come into the good of them also.  How easily we are distracted, however, to our great spiritual loss.
Notice that God did not call out immediately.  He was no doubt waiting for the man to take the initiative in confession of his sin.  He should have been like the prodigal of a later day, who said, “I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father I have sinned”, Luke 15:18.  Or as Hosea said to the people of his day, “Take with you words, and turn to the Lord”, Hosea 14:1.
And Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden- notice that the title of God used in these verses has reverted back to that of chapter two.  In chapter one it was God the All-powerful creator that was at work.  Then He manifested Himself as Lord God, the One who is always there, and who can be relied upon in every way.  Eve rejected that character of God, and believed the devil when he implied that God could not be trusted.  Yet He is still Jehovah, the Unchanging.  He cannot and will not change.  So it is that He comes as He always did, seeking communion with Adam and his wife after their work for the day was done. 
Sadly however, although God has not changed, the man and his wife have.  They may be more comfortable in the presence of one another because of the fig leaves, but they are not comfortable with the presence of God, and so they seek to hide.

3:9  And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?- God gives no name to the person of whom He is asking the question.  Yet the Scripture makes it clear that He was calling to Adam.  The man is the one responsible for the situation.  It was to him that the command about the tree came, and he is first in guilt, if not first in transgression.  Adam is head of the race, and as such must match that great privilege with great responsibility.  This he failed to do, with disastrous consequences, not just for himself, but the whole of mankind.
The fact that Adam had to be asked where he was would indicate that he and God had a pre-arranged meeting-place; yet he was not there.  In later times the tabernacle was called the “tabernacle of the congregation”, the congregation being, not the people, but what the people did, namely congregate.  But the word has more to it than this, for it means “congregation by appointment”.  Having associated His name with the building, God agreed to meet with His people by appointment.  So it is that in the New Testament, the Lord Jesus met with His disciples in the upper room “when the hour was come”, Luke 22:14.  It was as if by appointment.  It is good for God’s people to remember that the Lord Jesus has promised to be in the midst of those who gather in His name, Matthew 18:20- are we going to disappoint Him by missing our appointment with Him?

3:10  And he said, I heard Thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

And he said, I heard Thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid- the voice that once he delighted to hear now fills him with dread.  He and his wife have rebelled against what God said before, failing to fear with believing fear, and now that voice is feared with sinful fear.
Because I was naked- this suggests that they either heard the voice before they sewed the fig leaves together for aprons, or that he still feels himself naked despite the fig-leaves.  Notice that Adam does not say he was afraid because he had sinned; he is not prepared to confess the real reason for his fear.  He has not yet repented.
And I hid myself- by this statement he admits that his apron of fig leaves has not successfully covered him, as far as God’s all discerning eye is concerned.  “All things are naked and opened before the eyes of Him with whom we have to do”, Hebrews 4:13.  He has tried to hide behind leaves, and behind trees, but in neither case is he successful.

3:11  And He said, Who told thee that thou wast naked?  Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

And He said, Who told thee that thou wast naked?- the question is calculated to get Adam to confess he now has a guilty conscience, and it is this that has caused him to fear God.
Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?- of course God knew the answer to this question, but as is often the case, He is seeking to bring out a confession from the guilty party.  The question is not “Have you listened to the lies of the Devil?”  The sin is in relation to God, whatever the other issues involved.

3:12  And the man said, The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

And the man said, The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me- there now follows a sad sequence of evasion and blaming others.  Worst of all, Adam tries to blame God for his own failure.  If God had not given him the woman, then he would not have sinned!  How many there are who try to blame God for that which happens either in their own personal lives, or in the world generally.  God is not the author of evil, nor can He be, for “He cannot deny Himself”, 2 Timothy 2:13, which means He can never act contrary to His nature, and since that nature is light and love, then evil is not something He is able to be or do.
It is sad to hear Adam speaking like this, for God had indeed given him the woman to be with him, but not so that she could usurp his authority and take of the forbidden fruit, but so that she could be a help rather than a hindrance.  The goodness of God is seen in His provision. What Adam did in response to that provision is entirely up to him.

She gave me of the tree, and I did eat- not only does Adam appear to blame God, but now he is blaming the woman, as if he had no power to resist her suggestion that he eat.  But we cannot thus shirk our responsibilities.  As Ezekiel wrote, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die”, Ezekiel 18:20.  The emphasis in that quotation being on the word “it”.  In other words, the person sinning is the person responsible, whatever and whoever else was involved.  Sin is an act of the will contrary to God, and cannot be committed by proxy. Adam is here admitting that he was led astray.  Yet he was the one who was told about the tree by God, and because of this, his was the overall responsibility.  He has surrendered his will to another’s, always a dangerous thing, unless it be the surrender of the will to God.
For the moment, God makes no pronouncement on Adam’s sin, as far as he personally is concerned.  He leaves that until He has interviewed the woman.  It is important to realise that the judgement of God against Adam’s sin had already been passed.  For the apostle Paul declares in connection with Adam’s trespass, that “the judgement was by one to condemnation”, Romans 5:16.  Adam had transgressed God’s clearly stated command, so he was guilty, so the judgement, the pronouncement of the sentence, went against Adam, and because it was against him, it was against all who come from him and share his nature.  The judgement the apostle is referring to being the spiritual one of dying spiritually.  The judgement of God as expressed in verses Genesis 3:13-16 is physical and temporal, rather than spiritual and eternal. 

3:13  And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?- building upon what Adam has said, God now seeks to gain from the woman a confession.  Alas, it is no more forthcoming than it was with Adam. 
And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat- she seeks to avoid blame by pointing to the beguiling of the serpent.  But by blaming the serpent she is admitting that his word had more influence over her than God’s.  And this is a disastrous position to be in.  It is the same position that the Corinthian believers were in, for the apostle feared that just as the serpent had beguiled Eve in his subtilty, so their minds would be corrupted from “the simplicity that is in Christ”, 2 Corinthians 11:3.  Single-hearted devotion to Christ will prevent the believer from becoming a prey to the enemy.

We can say the following things about this sad incident:
1.    Satan did not come personally, but used the serpent as his disguise, so that Eve would not be put on her guard.
2.    He targetted the woman, seeking to drive a wedge between her and her husband, thus setting aside his God-given authority as head of creation.
3.    Satan does not recognise the Lordship of God, or bow to his authority, refusing to say “Lord” of God.  He was able to get Eve to resist His authority too, (for she does not use the word Lord either), and thus be on the same side as the Devil.
4.    He began with a question, not an outright denial.  This sowed the seeds of doubt in Eve’s mind.  It was only after Eve had begun to show signs of rejecting God’s word that he contradicted God.
5.    Eve allowed her emotions to mix with her mind.  We see this in that:
(a) she did not give God full credit, for He had said “freely eat”, whereas Eve says “eat”.  She is beginning to appreciate God’s goodness less than she did.  As a consequence, her love and devotion to God is diminished.
(b) she lessened the penalty from “surely die” to “lest ye die”, showing that she was not so sure that God would certainly do what He said, but only might do it.  She has softened her attitude to God’s sovereign authority, and has allowed her feelings on the matter to intrude.   How can God be so severe as to threaten such a harsh penalty just for eating some fruit?  This is how she is beginning to reason.
(c) she increased the severity of the command from “eat” to “touch and eat”, thus instead of bowing to the word of God as being final, she is adding her thoughts to it, and by so doing suggests that God was unreasonable and harsh. 
So it was that Eve is allowing her thoughts to override the word of God, which had been plainly revealed to her by Adam.  Because Satan knew how God had made the woman, he concentrated on this side of her constitution in his subtlety and cunning. 

Returning to 1 Timothy 2:14:

Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression- we return to the fact that Adam was not deceived, whereas the woman was.  Adam looked at the situation when Eve offered him the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and blatantly sided with her rebellion.  But Eve had been beguiled, for Satan had worked upon her mind to deceive her.  He does not need to do this with Adam, for his mind is made up, and he rebels knowingly.  He is not deceived at all, but sins in open defiance of God.  He knows full well that he has been given the place of dominion over creation, yet
“By one man sin entered into the world”, Romans 5:12, so God holds Adam responsible for the entrance of sin.  And because he is the father of the race, he passes on to all a nature that is sinful.  He does this by begetting children, who in their turn beget, and so the world comes into being.
The fact that the woman was deceived but the man was not, is made by the apostle the ground for the prohibition on the woman teaching.  It is not that she is intellectually inferior, or spiritually deficient, but that God has made her in such a way that she involves her emotions more in her decision-making.  And preaching and teaching cannot be carried out without making decisions in relation to the Word of God.  (This is why there were female prophets, but not female teachers.  A prophetess simply passed on the message that came into her mind by the Spirit; no decisions had to be made as to what to say). 
A female, unbelieving psychologist has written, “Men think about things logically without having to engage the emotional receptors of their brain, but women have them spread out all over their brains, so it is hard for them to have a discussion without some emotional tone in it”.  Put another way, we may say that God has so formed the woman that her emotions are involved in all her decision-making, whereas with man this is less the case.  This is because a woman’s emotional receptors are not concentrated in one place, as with a man.  The woman is made this way because she is the bearer and nurturer of children, and all her decisions must be made with a view to the welfare of the child.  Her love and care must influence her thinking and decisions at all times, and she is designed by God so that this is what happens. 
We have seen how Eve allowed her feelings to govern her when she was tempted of the Devil.  She allowed those emotions to over-ride her good sense, and by so doing, perversely, she ensured that many children would be ill-treated and abused by those, (mothers among them), whose emotions have been distorted and corrupted by sin.

2:15  Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. 

Notwithstanding- there is a Divine remedy for this situation, and the Christian woman is here advised what it is.  It is not, however, to embark on preaching and teaching.  It might be thought that a good way of counteracting the failure of Eve to obey the Word of God would be to allow the woman to teach the Word of God.  This is not God’s way, however, for the constitution of the woman is not changed by conversion.  Just as the woman allowed her feelings to get in the way at the beginning, so she will inevitably, sooner or later, allow them to intrude again.  Rather, her emotions are to be directed in the God-appointed direction of bringing up children.  This is the best way to nullify the harm done to children by Eve’s transgression. 
It is interesting and instructive to notice how Paul refers to men and women in this passage, as follows:
Verses 8 and 9, men and women as male and female.
Verse 13, Adam and Eve as historical persons in the Book of Genesis.  He calls the woman Eve although she was not called this when she fell, but only afterwards.  She is woman because she was taken from man, Genesis 2:23, and Eve because she is the mother of all living, Genesis 3:20.
Verse 14, Adam and the woman, with the historical name for the man retained, but the name for the woman now reverting to that name which emphasizes her ability to bear children.  The word for woman is “gune”, which most likely comes from the verb “ginomai”, meaning to cause to be, or generate.  So the idea of childbearing is enshrined in the very word woman itself.  This prepares the way for verse 15.
She shall be saved in childbearing- just as the word woman is linked with the idea of childbirth, so this word also.  It is the performance of maternal duties, as well as the giving birth to children.  Of course salvation from sin is not by works, Ephesians 2:9, so this must be salvation in a secondary sense.  Believers need to be saved from the pitfalls on the way through this world.  If believing women are to be saved from the mistake Eve made, and also saved from wanting to be teachers, then the remedy is here.  They should use their God-given abilities and mental outlook to bear and care for children.  Of course the apostle is giving us the general principle here.  Not all believing sisters are married, nor are all of those that are married able to bear children.  This is not the point.  The general theme here is that the woman is ideally fitted for maternal duties, and she is best occupied with those duties.  For some, this will be in looking after the children of other people, or engaging in one of the other caring professions. 
This is contrary to current thinking in the world, however.  It is not “politically correct”.  It might be as well to notice what political correctness really is.  It is another was of saying “Cultural Marxism”.  When it became evident during the First World War that the masses were not prepared to embrace Marxism in its political form, and rise up against their governments, a different strategy was adopted by those who wished to see the destruction of Western Civilization, based, as it was, on Christian values rooted in the Bible.  Everything was done to undermine the principles set out by God the Creator in the best interests of men and women.  One of the main ways of rebelling against the Creator’s laws was to relentlessly attack the concept of the family.  “Alternative lifestyles” were promoted, “free love” was encouraged, rebellion against authority, whether expressed by parents, schools, or police, was actively encouraged.  Part of this strategy was to erode the differences between male and female, blurring the distinctions that God had established. 
Such is the world we live in, and so Christians would be well advised to be aware of these things, and adhere firmly to what God has established.
If they continue in faith- the salvation of which Paul writes is not automatic, for it is very possible to continue in childbearing for no other reason than a love of children.  That, of course, is necessary, but if the believing sister is to be saved from the pitfalls of a world-view that rejects God, other things are necessary, and the first of these is an attitude of faith.  She must have a deep-seated conviction that the Word of God is the final authority in domestic matters, as in all others.  She must not be like Eve, who began to doubt that the word of God was binding, and indeed was best.
And charity- the Lord Jesus said, “If ye love Me, keep My commandments”, John 14:15.  That Eve wavered in her love to God is shown in that she transgressed His clear commandment to not eat of the tree.  The sisters will show their love to God by adhering to the teaching of this chapter. 
And holiness- this is the word for holiness which denotes a state of purity, free from the defiling influences of a world that hates God and His laws.  The sisters will welcome ways of positively siding with God, and just as positively distancing themselves from this world’s thinking.
With sobriety- this is the result of a sound mind, self-control in the realm of the thoughts.  It is to accompany both faith, and  love, and holiness, so that the faith is well-informed, the love is intelligent, and the holiness is thoroughgoing.  In this way the damage that Eve did in the garden may be counteracted by the believing women in the assembly, and in their homes.

SPECIAL NOTE
The wearing of trousers by believing women.
To the believer, the Word of God should be sufficient to decide any matter.  God has “given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness”, 2 Peter 1:3, so we are not without resources.  We are called to walk circumspectly towards them that are without, so ordering our lives that not only is God honoured by them, (“do all to the glory of God”, 1 Corinthians 10:31) but also so that the gospel is commended to every man’s conscience, 2 Corinthians 4:2, and sinners are not given cause to stumble if they are seeking God, 1 Corinthians 10:42. 
In the final analysis, the life of Christ is the test for all conduct.  Having spoken of the manner of life of unsaved Gentiles in Ephesians 4:17-19, Paul goes on to say, “Ye have not so learned Christ”.  He then explains that we have, at conversion, put on the new man, which is the character of Christ the Righteous and Holy One, and also put off the old man, the character of Adam the sinner.  Instead of being in the image of Adam, as Seth was when he was born, Genesis 5:3, we are created after the image of God, Ephesians 4:24.  Adam had been this before he fell, but we are created in likeness to Christ who cannot fall, so our situation is vastly better.  This, of course, places a greater responsibility upon us.
The Lord Jesus was a man, and it is not recorded that He gave any teaching regarding women’s clothing as such.  It was not an issue in His day, and immediately we realise that in the nation that God had blessed with so much advantage, there was no debate about this matter, or else He would have dealt with it.  The reason there was no debate was obviously that the Jews saw Deuteronomy 22:5 as settling the matter. 
Whilst it is true that Christ gave no specific teaching on the matter we are thinking of, He did very firmly draw attention to the distinction between male and female in His quotations from the Book of Genesis.  “He that made them in the beginning made them male and female”, Matthew 19:4.  Any attempt, therefore, to blur this distinction should be seen as a form of rebellion against God as Creator and Moral Governor of the universe. 
We live in a day when the claims of God as Creator are being attacked as never before.  As believers, we should be on our guard, and not allow anything in our lives or testimony that gives the Devil a foothold.
Christ came to fulfil the law and the prophets, Matthew 5:17.  This expression means two things.  First, to practice the teaching of the Law and prophets perfectly, so filling out the principle of them with the practice of them.  Christ “magnified the law and made it honourable”, as Isaiah said He would, Isaiah 42:21.  Second, to bring out the full meaning contained in the words of the law and prophets.  This the Lord Jesus was alone able to do fully. 
The Jews tended to view the words of the law simply at face value, whereas the Lord taught that motives and attitudes are important.  So a person who had not actually killed a person was thought of as not having transgressed the command “Thou shalt not kill”.  However, Christ fully filled out that command when He taught that a person who was angry with his brother has shown a murderous spirit, Matthew 5:21,22.  He only lacks resources, motive and opportunity to be a murderer.  Hence the apostle John had grasped the import of Christ’s teaching on this matter when he stated that “He that hateth his brother is a murderer”, 1 John 3:15.  The same is true with “Thou shalt not commit adultery” as Matthew 5:27-32 explains.  So it is that the law of Moses is to be seen in the light of its underlying principles, and not just its precepts.
It may be objected, however, that as Christians we are not under law, but under grace.  This is perfectly true, for Scripture says it, Romans 6:14.  But Scripture also indicates that the righteousness of the law is to be fulfilled by believers as they walk according to the influence of the Spirit of God, Romans 8:4.  By “the righteousness of the law” the apostle means “all that the law demanded as being right”.  So when we go back to the commandments of the law we should look for the principles behind the precepts, and see how the righteous conduct which they demand may be met by us in the power of the Spirit of God. 
With these things in mind we turn now to a consideration of Deuteronomy 22:5, which reads in the Authorised Version as follows-
“The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God”. 
A literal translation reads- “There shall not be the thing of a (strong) man on a woman, nor shall a (strong) man put on a woman’s garment.  Whoever does these things is an abomination to Jehovah your God”.
Certain things call for mention.  First, the expression “that which pertaineth unto a man” is of very wide meaning, and in fact this is the only place where it relates to a woman’s dress.  The fact that it does so relate is seen from the fact that the rest of the verse goes on to specifically speak of a man wearing a woman’s garment, and the two halves of the verse are linked by “neither”, and not by “and”. 
It is clear that two related things are being dealt with.  The woman is not to have on her person that which is distinctively male, and a man is not to wear woman’s clothing.  The distinction between the sexes is to be maintained in the matter of dress, as in all else.
Whereas the word to the man is limited to garments, the word to the woman is more extensive, “the thing of a man”.  Now it is true that the word used for “thing” is most often used of armour.  It is also true that the word for man used here is “strong man”, which in certain contexts can be translated “warrior”.  But this word for man is used in both parts of the verse.  Are we to think that only warriors are to avoid wearing woman’s clothing, and others not in the army can do so?  Are warriors, whose glory is in their masculinity, likely to be tempted to dress like a woman, whilst less brave souls are not?  The reverse would surely be the case.  The fact is, that the word for man used here is emphasising that he is to be strong for God as the representative of the race before God.  According to 1 Corinthians 11:7 the man is the image and glory of God when it comes to the matter of headship and Divine order.  In other areas the woman is equally the image of God, according to Genesis 1:27.
So if the translation “warrior” is not valid for the second half of the verse, it cannot be for the first half, because they are joined together by “neither”, as we have already noted.  That being the case, the “thing” the woman is not to have on, is a man’s garment, and indeed anything that is distinctively male. 
It was not envisaged that Jewish women would be in the army, anyway, for when Israel was numbered for war, only the males were counted, Numbers 1:1-3.  The woman is the gentle, more sensitive one, gifted to bring new life into the world, not engaged in the death and destruction that are the hallmarks of army activity.  The idea of fighting should be far from her mind.  Hers is the domestic sphere, where she may glorify God in the faithful discharge of her vital duties as the guide of the house, 1 Timothy 5:14.
It is clear from Deuteronomy 22:5 that instruction as to what was male or female clothing did not need to be given.  There was enough difference between the two to settle the matter.  Up to the early years of the twentieth century this was true in the Western world also.  Those who were at the forefront of change were guilty of sexual perversions.  The wearing of trousers by women was greeted with horror by believers and unbelievers alike.  Then came the Women’s Liberation movement, with its aggressive advancement of equal rights in every sphere.  Gradually, what was outrageous in 1930 has become normal to the worldling.   
But Divine principles do not change!  God still demands as Creator that His laws be obeyed and His principles adhered to.  He has a deep interest in the well-being of His creatures, even though they have sinned against Him.  The apostle John saw that the throne of God is rainbow-circled, Revelation 4:3.  The covenant He made with the earth in Genesis 9 is still in vogue, and the rainbow was the sign of that covenant.  God has not forgotten His undertakings, even though men have forgotten their obligations.  Believers, of all people, should be careful to uphold Divine principles in this area of God’s Creatorial rights, and one of them is the distinction between male and female.
The idea is sometimes advanced that trousers are an accepted style of fashion for women nowadays, and therefore the wearing of them by Christian women does not go against Deuteronomy 22:5.  But we are not to be governed in our thinking or our acting by passing fashion.  “The fashion of this world passeth away”, 1 Corinthians 7:32, where fashion means this present scheme of things, not just clothing fashion.  If trousers are really women’s wear now, then men should stop wearing them to avoid transgressing the second half of Deuteronomy 22:5.  What was outrageous to unbelievers in 1930 may not be so to most of them now, but it is human thinking that has changed, not the laws of God. 
There is another consideration which should be borne in mind, which is totally separate from any question as to whether trousers are female clothing or not.  It is this.  In 1 Timothy 3 the sisters are enjoined to wear modest apparel.  It is submitted that trousers on a woman are not modest.  They are often designed not so much to cover the body as to reveal the profile.  As such they should be avoided by those who desire to please the Lord in all things. 
Finally, trouser-wearing is symbolic of an attitude of mind which rejects male headship.  Christian wives have a solemn responsibility to submit to the headship of the man, whether it be their husband if they are married, or their father if they are not.  The principle of subjection is precious to God, for it reminds Him of the way in which His Son subjected Himself to Him when He came into manhood, 1 Corinthians 11:3.  Believers should welcome any opportunity of displaying likeness to Him.  By so doing they will be a living testimony to the power of the gospel, and will reprove the ungodliness of the age in which they live.  Thus God will be glorified- should this not be our main aim?