Paula

Martin,

As a general rule, if one male is or can be in a group, the male form of a word is used. So if the female form is used, then no males are in the group. Only if both males and females are specified can we know whether females are excluded.

So it is context that determines who is being addressed, and in the context of Titus, we see Paul using terms both ways: generically and specifically. But there are additional indicators in Titus that Paul refers to female elders and not merely elderly women.

1– There is a phrase in ch. 2 that means “in keeping with their appointment” regarding female elders. What appointment? In this very short letter we only know of the one mentioned in ch. 1, the elders Titus was to appoint. Since age cannot be appointed, this must refer to spiritual elders. We should also note that the word translated “young” can also mean “new”, that is, new believers.

2– If Paul is saying that female elders can only teach women, then he must also be saying that male elders can only teach men. Yet who would believe that? The male supremacists would have a dilemma on their hands since they presume men can teach anyone but women can only teach women and children– ironically, the most easily deceived according to them. So if it cannot be denied that men can teach women, then it also cannot be denied that women can teach men. If Titus is cited as proof that women can only teach women then the corresponding restriction on men only teaching men must go with it.

So there is no consistent and uncontradictory way for male supremacists to argue that the male form must exclude females.