Driscoll's droll interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12-14 is precisely what makes his application of the text so surprising. Mars Hill Church endorses gifted (but apparently "gullible" and "easily deceived") women to lead and to teach men so long as such women are not ordained as pastor/elder. Driscoll explains, "The teaching here likely also refers to preaching and teaching as done by the elders, as every other time teaching is spoken of in the remainder of the letter it is in reference to the teaching of an elder (1 Tim 4:11, 5:7, 6:2)."34 According to Driscoll,
At Mars Hill we seek to encourage women to use the abilities that God has given them to their fullest extent in anything from teaching a class to leading a community group, overseeing a ministry, leading as a deacon, speaking in church, leading worship, serving communion, entering into full-time paid ministry as a member of the staff, and receiving formal theological education-or basically every opportunity in our church but the office of elder/pastor.35 Mark Driscoll, "Church Leadership," 47.
It is the opinion of the present writers that not only is Driscoll mistaken in his interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12, but also his application of it to the ministries of his church is a non-sequitur. Why would one allow a person from the "gullible" and "easier to deceive" sex to lead and to teach God's people? How could such a person possibly be qualified to teach and to lead when they are so easily brought under the spell of error? We are not ready to concede Driscoll's interpretation of Paul on this point.36 Yet even if we were to grant his interpretation, we believe that his praxis is hardly a legitimate implication of his exegesis.
Some reformed theologians pursue a similar line in introducing a distinction between the "special" teaching office and the "general" teaching office.37 With this distinction made, women are allowed to teach men. The problem with this among those who practice it is that Paul does not prohibit women from taking up a teaching office over men. Rather, he simply prohibits women from teaching men.
I suppose the command for not cussing or making course jokes is as hard for Driscoll to understand as a pastor, as is the command for women to not teach men. And just how is he biblical? And why is Piper, who supposedly sees this as wrong, continue to endorse this man?
Are God's commands optional to obey? What happened to the Lordship of the Lord and the Sovereignty of God and the desire to obey HIM?
*I haven't looked over the whole site so I would just caution readers to read with discernment