Women in Leadership

Biblical Reflections
Karl House
February 2022

CREATION

Genesis 1:26-28 (NIV)

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
So God created mankind in his own image, 
in the image of God he created them; 
male and female he created them.
God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

Genesis 5:1-2 (NIV)

This is the written account of Adam’s family line.
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind” when they were created.

Both men and women bear the image of God. Both men and women are commissioned to exercise stewardship over creation. Is there any suggestion of male predominance here?

Genesis 2:19-25 (NIV)

Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones  and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’  for she was taken out of man.”
That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

Traditionally, the word "helper" has been interpreted to suggest that Eve was subordinate to Adam. But who is the one in need of help here—Adam or Eve? It was Adam. And what did he need help with? The dishes? Of course not. The only reason given in the text is that Adam needed help with not being alone. So Eve was created not as domestic help for Adam, but as one who would mutually share with him the responsibility of carrying out God's commission for human life, namely, to "be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” Which, by the way, is pretty hard to do all alone!

Also in regard to being a “helper,” it's important to note that God is often called our helper throughout Scripture (See Exodus 18:4; Deuteronomy 33:7,26,29; Psalm 33:20, etc.). Certainly that doesn't make God inferior to us! In fact, the Hebrew language has four other words for "helper" that denote subordination. None of these words are used in reference to women in Genesis 2.

Finally, Adam's first reaction to the creation of Eve is an exclamation of equality, mutuality, complementarity. None of the animals fit the bill. They couldn't fill Adam's God-created need for another human being. But Eve did. She was a perfect fit. And once again, in no way does Adam's reaction denote male superiority and female inferiority. In effect, he says, "Finally, I found another me (bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh) ... a her!”

Obviously, Eve is different from Adam. She is female and he is male. I’m sure that was part of Adam’s attraction to Eve. This difference is precisely how together they would be able to be fruitful and increase and fill the earth. And it is this difference when united together would make them one flesh. But this difference doesn’t change their sameness. They are both humans, created in the image of God, and therefore, essentially equal with each other.

Much of what we automatically consider promoting male predominance in the creation accounts is more likely read back from our understandings of 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2. But are we reading too much male predominance into these New Testament passages, and therefore, back into creation? We'll come to these passages later.

FALL

Genesis 3:1-6 (NIV)

Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Why did Satan target Eve? Was it because she was morally inferior to Adam? There is no suggestion of this in the text. Rather the narrative tells us that Adam received the command to not eat of the tree first hand from God, which suggests that Eve got it second hand from Adam. Could it be, then, that Satan targeted Eve because her second hand knowledge would make her easier to deceive? In fact, it seems that her knowledge of God's command was faulty considering she added that they weren't supposed to even touch the fruit, which God hadn’t said. Obviously, she lacked details about the command. But whose fault was that—Eve's or Adam's?

And where was Adam through all of this? He seems to be with her, maybe right at her side. Certainly, he could have stopped her from eating the fruit, but no such action is mentioned. Therefore, Adam is as responsible for the Fall as Eve. In fact, the Bible labels him as the one who brought sin and death into the world. Eve was simply deceived. Once again, does this have to do with some moral inferiority inherent to Eve's make-up or the fact that Adam was told directly by God to not eat of the tree, and therefore, held more responsible?

Genesis 3:16 (NLT)

Then he said to the woman,
“I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy,  and in pain you will give birth.  And you will desire to control your husband,  but he will rule over you.”

Male domination is finally explicitly mentioned in Scripture. But it’s not part of the order of Creation. It’s part of the disorder of the Fall. It's one of the consequences of sin. So it’s not a blessing, it’s a curse!

OLD COVENANT

Judges 4 (NIV)

Again the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD, now that Ehud was dead. So the LORD sold them into the hands of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. Sisera, the commander of his army, was based in Harosheth Haggoyim. Because he had nine hundred chariots fitted with iron and had cruelly oppressed the Israelites for twenty years, they cried to the LORD for help.
Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites went up to her to have their disputes decided. She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead them up to Mount Tabor. I will lead Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.’”
Barak said to her, “If you go with me, I will go; but if you don’t go with me, I won’t go.”
“Certainly I will go with you,” said Deborah. “But because of the course you are taking, the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman.” So Deborah went with Barak to Kedesh. There Barak summoned Zebulun and Naphtali, and ten thousand men went up under his command. Deborah also went up with him.
Now Heber the Kenite had left the other Kenites, the descendants of Hobab, Moses’ brother-in-law, and pitched his tent by the great tree in Zaanannim near Kedesh.
When they told Sisera that Barak son of Abinoam had gone up to Mount Tabor, Sisera summoned from Harosheth Haggoyim to the Kishon River all his men and his nine hundred chariots fitted with iron.
Then Deborah said to Barak, “Go! This is the day the LORD has given Sisera into your hands. Has not the LORD gone ahead of you?” So Barak went down Mount Tabor, with ten thousand men following him. At Barak’s advance, the LORD routed Sisera and all his chariots and army by the sword, and Sisera got down from his chariot and fled on foot.
Barak pursued the chariots and army as far as Harosheth Haggoyim, and all Sisera’s troops fell by the sword; not a man was left. Sisera, meanwhile, fled on foot to the tent of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, because there was an alliance between Jabin king of Hazor and the family of Heber the Kenite.
Jael went out to meet Sisera and said to him, “Come, my lord, come right in. Don’t be afraid.” So he entered her tent, and she covered him with a blanket.
“I’m thirsty,” he said. “Please give me some water.” She opened a skin of milk, gave him a drink, and covered him up.
“Stand in the doorway of the tent,” he told her. “If someone comes by and asks you, ‘Is anyone in there?’ say ‘No.’”
But Jael, Heber’s wife, picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to him while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground, and he died.
Just then Barak came by in pursuit of Sisera, and Jael went out to meet him. “Come,” she said, “I will show you the man you’re looking for.” So he went in with her, and there lay Sisera with the tent peg through his temple—dead.
On that day God subdued Jabin king of Canaan before the Israelites. And the hand of the Israelites pressed harder and harder against Jabin king of Canaan until they destroyed him.

Deborah is often said to be the female exception that proves the male leadership rule. But read the text again for the first time. There is no suggestion from the text that judgeship was reserved for men only and that she was an exception. She may have been exceptional, but not necessarily an exception.

The fact that Barak was commissioned by God (through Deborah) does not take away from the fact the she was considered the prophet and the judge. Just consider the prophecy itself. In no way does the prophecy call for Barak to replace Deborah as judge and prophet—a male replacing a female. Rather the prophecy calls for a division of labor. Deborah being the judge and prophet; Barak being the general of the army. In fact, to be technical, Deborah sent for Barak. Certainly this suggests that her position was one of greater authority than his own.

Regarding Deborah's prophecy that a woman would receive the honor for defeating Sisera, this prophecy wasn't fulfilled necessarily by Deborah herself, but by Jael.

Judges 5:24-27 (NIV)

Most blessed of women be Jael,  the wife of Heber the Kenite,  most blessed of tent-dwelling women.  He asked for water, and she gave him milk;  in a bowl fit for nobles she brought him curdled milk.  Her hand reached for the tent peg,  her right hand for the workman’s hammer.  She struck Sisera, she crushed his head,  she shattered and pierced his temple.  At her feet he sank,  he fell; there he lay.  At her feet he sank, he fell;  where he sank, there he fell—dead.

So once again, this wasn't Deborah's way of trying to get a man to do a man's job by hook or by crook, but simply stating the consequences when unbelief prevents us from doing what God has told us to do. We miss out on the blessing that God intends for us because of our fear.

Also note that Deborah was married. If male headship in Scripture is one of male superiority, then what does this example say about the supposed automatic transference of male headship in marriage to male headship in terms of leadership among God's people corporately? In other words, does headship at home, necessarily mean headship in the church? And what does headship mean? Stay tuned.

2 Kings 22:11-20 (NIV)

When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law, he tore his robes. He gave these orders to Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam son of Shaphan, Akbor son of Micaiah, Shaphan the secretary and Asaiah the king’s attendant: “Go and inquire of the LORD for me and for the people and for all Judah about what is written in this book that has been found. Great is the LORD’s anger that burns against us because those who have gone before us have not obeyed the words of this book; they have not acted in accordance with all that is written there concerning us.”
Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam, Akbor, Shaphan and Asaiah went to speak to the prophet Huldah, who was the wife of Shallum son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem, in the New Quarter.
She said to them, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Tell the man who sent you to me, ‘This is what the LORD says: I am going to bring disaster on this place and its people, according to everything written in the book the king of Judah has read. Because they have forsaken me and burned incense to other gods and aroused my anger by all the idols their hands have made, my anger will burn against this place and will not be quenched.’ Tell the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the LORD, ‘This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says concerning the words you heard: Because your heart was responsive and you humbled yourself before the LORD when you heard what I have spoken against this place and its people—that they would become a curse and be laid waste—and because you tore your robes and wept in my presence, I also have heard you, declares the LORD. Therefore I will gather you to your ancestors, and you will be buried in peace. Your eyes will not see all the disaster I am going to bring on this place.’”
So they took her answer back to the king.

Prophetess Huldah, the wife of Shallum, was officially consulted by a delegation from King Josiah. Was she consulted simply because there weren't any men who were prophets around? According to biblical history, Jeremiah and Zephaniah were prophets at that time. For some reason they went to Huldah and she spoke The Word of the LORD to them.

NEW COVENANT

Luke 8:1-3 (NIV)

After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Chuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.

Jesus’ treatment of women is revolutionary. He included women in His band of disciples, something no Jewish rabbi in His day would do.

Luke 10:38-42 (NIV)

As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him. She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said. But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!”
“Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed—or indeed only one. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”

To sit at a Jewish rabbi’s feet was reserved for men only. That’s because only men could be disciples. But Jesus not only allowed, but encouraged women to sit at His feet and be His disciples.

John 20:16-18 (NIV)

Jesus said to her, “Mary.”
She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”
Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.

On the day of Jesus’ resurrection, a woman was commissioned with the greatest news ever. Psalm 68:11 is being fulfilled.

Psalm 68:11 (CSB)

The Lord gave the command; a great company of women brought the good news.

Acts 2:17-18 quoting Joel 2:28-29 (NIV)

In the last days, God says,  I will pour out my Spirit on all people.  Your sons and daughters will prophesy,  your young men will see visions,  your old men will dream dreams.  Even on my servants, both men and women,  I will pour out my Spirit in those days,  and they will prophesy.

In the New Covenant, the ministry of prophecy is opened up even further than in the Old. In the Old Covenant, spiritually anointed men AND women were prophets. In the New Covenant ALL of God's people, both men and women, are anointed to be prophets.

Romans 12:3-8 (NIV)

For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you. For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

1 Corinthians 12:1-11 (NIV)

Now about the gifts of the Spirit, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.
There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work.
Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.

These passages on spiritual gifts are not gender specific. The sense one gets is that Paul didn't think that certain gifts were intended for men only. All the gifts are for all God’s people as the Spirit determines.

Acts 18:26 (NLT)

When Priscilla and Aquila heard [Apollos] preaching boldly in the synagogue, they took him aside and explained the way of God even more accurately.

Romans 6:3 (NIV)

Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus.

1 Corinthians 16:19 (NIV)

The churches in the province of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house.

Aquila and Priscilla were a husband and wife ministry team who were important friends and fellow tentmakers with Paul. Sometimes Aquila’s name comes first. He’s the husband. Other times Priscilla’s name comes first. Having the wife’s name come first is highly unusual in New Testament times. It’s hard to say who the leader of this ministry team was. It seems they ministered together. By putting Priscilla’s name first a few of times against the custom of the day, Paul may be noting the mutuality of their ministry. Paul confirms this by calling both of them his co-workers in Christ Jesus.

Romans 16:1-12 (NIV)

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me.
Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus. They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them. Greet also the church that meets at their house.
Greet my dear friend Epenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.
Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.
Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.
Greet Ampliatus, my dear friend in the Lord.
Greet Urbanus, our co-worker in Christ, and my dear friend Stachys.
Greet Apelles, whose fidelity to Christ has stood the test.
Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus.
Greet Herodion, my fellow Jew.
Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.
Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord.
Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.

In Romans 16, Paul greets a long list of people. The list includes both men and women who have a variety of ministry and leadership functions. Phoebe is a deacon. Once again, Priscilla is a co-worker. Junia (a woman’s name) is outstanding among the apostles. Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa and Persis worked hard in the Lord. Here and elsewhere, Paul uses the terms deacons, co-workers, apostles and hard workers to refer to both men AND women in New Testament ministry.

1 Corinthians 1:10-12 (ESV)

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”

Chloe was a woman. And a group of people from Chloe reported to Paul the divisions in the Corinthian church. Whether this delegation was from Chloe’s household or house church, they were sent by Chloe. Chloe, then, is clearly functioning in a leadership role and Paul accepts this delegation from Chloe and acts their report on the disunity in the church.

Philippians 4:2-3

I plead with Euodia and I plead with Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. Yes, and I ask you, my true companion, help these women since they have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Once again, Paul must address the issue of division in the Body. This time it’s between two women. And obviously, the division between these two women is important enough for Paul to address it publicly in a letter to the whole church in Philippi. Once again, Paul uses the label of co-worker for these women and notes that they contended at his side in the cause of the gospel. Does Paul address this situation publicly because Euodia and Syntytche served as leaders in the church?

Colossians 4:15 (NIV)

Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house.

Did the house church just meet in Nympha’s home or was she the leader of the house church that met in her home?

Galatians 3:26-28 (NIV)

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

This passage deals with the three great divisions of the ancient world—the division between Jews and Greeks, slaves and free, men and women. For example, some Jewish males greeted each day praying, "Lord, I thank you that I am not a Gentile, a slave, or a woman." Paul, however, says that faith in Jesus overcomes all of these divisions and makes all believers one in Christ. Could this passage give us Paul's ideal, and therefore, the ultimate goal for life in God's new Kingdom?

Actually Paul's treatment on slavery is helpful to consider in this discussion. This comes from Peter Fitch's paper prepared for The Association of Vineyard Churches in Canada:

The way that Paul teaches about the issue of slavery probably provides a framework for us to understand his limitations on women in the problem passages. If he had challenged the institution of slavery directly, Christianity would have been seen by everyone in the first century as another movement to free the slaves of the Roman Empire. Each one of these was squashed by Rome's imperial might, yet what Paul did proved to be more effective in the long run. He destroyed slavery, not by forbidding it, but by teaching slaves and masters to love each other as brothers in the Lord. In the Western world, the fight to free slaves was led by people like Britain's William Wilberforce in the 19th century precisely because he understood what Paul was teaching and was committed to it. Similarly, we believe that Paul dealt realistically with the difficulties of his culture's view of women in the problem passages, but that he sowed the seeds of a better way in Galatians 3:28.

ADDRESSING PROBLEMS

We will now turn to Paul’s problem passages. Actually, it would be better to say that Paul is dealing with problems in these passages. In other words, what we have looked at so far in the New Covenant is the norm and the normal—both men AND women involved in ministry and leadership. This is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy that God’s Spirit would come upon both men AND women and His gifts would be available to both so both men AND women would function in ministry and leadership. Having said that, however, certain problems arose in the churches involving women that Paul had to address.

1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (NIV)

I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.
A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.
Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.

Traditionally this passage has been used to point out that Paul sets up a clear chain of command—from God to Jesus, from Jesus to man and from man to woman. Therefore, women are subordinate to men, both in the church and in the home.

Is this what Paul is saying?

Something has gone wrong with worship at the Corinthian church. Paul is addressing certain abuses in their worship having to do with head coverings. The overarching subject here, then, is the protocol of men and women in worship and not necessarily the relationship between men and women in general.

First, we must say that whatever the passage is saying, it clearly states that both men and women are to pray and prophesy in church. Both men and women are speaking in church. So this passage is not about women not speaking in church, but about wearing head coverings.

We know that in Greek society, “good girls” wore head coverings (not like an Arab veil, but just a piece to cover the hair alone). In other words, young and old women wore head coverings, except prostitutes and other disreputable women. In Greek society, then, it was shameful for a woman to not wear a head covering. Paul’s concern is that Christian women not exercise their freedom in Christ in ways that are scandalous to their culture because that would hurt the cause of Christ. Paul didn’t want anything to impede people from coming to Christ.

And what about the men? Paul says it is a disgrace for a man to have long hair. But what about Samson who was told by God to not cut his hair (See Judges 13:5 and Numbers 6:1-21)? It seems that Paul is not making a Scriptural argument here, but a cultural one. Once again, for Paul it’s important to not offend people with cultural insensitivity because that could immediately and unnecessarily make it difficult for them to really hear the Gospel.

Loren Cunningham makes a helpful distinction between absolute truths and relative statements. He concludes that Paul’s instruction on hair length and head coverings are relative statements and not absolute truths for all men and all women in all places at all times. There is an absolute truth in Paul’s teaching, however. It is that in any culture the church should be very sensitive to not put a stumbling block in front of people which would keep them from hearing and responding to the Gospel.

He goes on to say that the trap of legalism is to make Paul’s relative statements into absolute truths. And the trap of liberalism is to turn Paul’s absolute truths into relative statements. Loren trusts the Spirit to guide the church into all truth so that we know the difference. (From Why Not Women: A Fresh Look at Scripture on Women in Missions, Ministry, and Leadership by Loren Cunningham and David Joel Hamilton—YWAM, 2000, pp. 37-39)

There are many meanings for the word "head". The first is the literal meaning of the word, namely, your head. The second is that of source or origin. We use the word still today in this sense when we talk about the head of a river or the source of a river. There are two other meanings to the Greek word head which were used very infrequently. One was a technical meaning referring to a ruler of a city. The other was a metaphorical meaning referring to leadership and authority. This is what we mean today by head and headship. But once again, these last two uses of head were not the normal ways the word was used in New Testament times.

Traditionally, we have interpreted the word "head" both here and elsewhere in the New Testament as leadership and authority. This, of course, leads to a male predominance interpretation, which then is read back to the creation accounts. This interpretation seems to be confirmed by the hierarchy mentioned in this passage. God has authority over Jesus; Jesus has authority over man and man has authority over woman.

But what if we use the two more familiar meanings as we read this passage. Then head refers to one's literal head and also to the source or the origin of one's being. If that were the case then the passage is not to be interpreted from an hierarchical point of reference, but from an historical point of reference. Jesus is the source of man because Jesus created man first (that is, chronologically before Eve, not predominantly or authoritatively before Eve) and man is the source of woman because she was formed from man's rib and finally, God is the source of Jesus in terms of His incarnation.

This interpretation has much going for it because it follows the order of Paul's sequence better. A hierarchical interpretation must contend with the fact that Paul's sequence seems strange. It would be more natural to speak of God being the head of Jesus, Jesus being the head of man and man being the head of woman. And this interpretation does justice to the natural reading of Genesis 2:19-25 as discussed earlier.

Also note the shift from creation and protocol to salvation in Jesus Christ in verse 11—Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. From the perspective of being in the Lord, men and women are equal. They are mutually dependent on each other and fully dependent on God. This may explain why Paul insists that we submit to each other in Christ in Ephesians 5:21.

Paul's use of the word "proper" in verse 13 seems to fall short of a universal command. In fact, Paul makes US the judge of such things!

Once again, whatever Paul is saying in reaction to whatever was happening in Corinth at this time, we can say that our freedom in Christ does not abolish the distinctions between the sexes nor does it call for the wanton disregard of the way that a culture expresses those distinctions. But then again, neither does it prohibit women from praying and prophesying in church.

1 Corinthians 14:26-40 (CSB)

What then, brothers and sisters? Whenever you come together, each one has a hymn, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Everything is to be done for building up. If anyone speaks in a tongue, there are to be only two, or at the most three, each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no interpreter, that person is to keep silent in the church and speak to himself and God.
Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should evaluate. But if something has been revealed to another person sitting there, the first prophet should be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that everyone may learn and everyone may be encouraged. And the prophets’ spirits are subject to the prophets, since God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, the women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but are to submit themselves, as the law also says. If they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home, since it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Or did the word of God originate from you, or did it come to you only?
If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, he should recognize that what I write to you is the Lord’s command. If anyone ignores this, he will be ignored. So then, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything is to be done decently and in order.

This is one of the classic passages used to irrefutably restrict women from certain ministries. But is that what this passage is saying? My personal approach to Scripture is that it is infallible. My humble approach to human interpretation, including my own, is that it is not.

In 1 Corinthians 11:5, Paul specifically states that women along with men are to pray and prophesy as long as they are following culturally sensitive dress codes. Does he then contradict himself three chapters later? How could women both pray and prophesy and remain silent at the same time?

Theories abound!

1) Paul is hopelessly confused and cannot be taken seriously.

2) The praying and prophesying that Paul's speaking of in chapter 11 isn't in the context of a congregational setting. When the whole congregation gets together, however, women must be silent. This is a universal principle or an absolute truth as seen in the fact that Paul appeals to the witness of the practice of all the congregations, the Law, and what is consider decent.

But many students of the Bible feel that Paul is clearly referring to congregational worship in chapter 11 as well. Which means that both chapter 11 and 14 deal with the Body coming together in worship. So that raises the question How can women prophesy and prayer yet remain silent?

3) The words "for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church" are more a statement of social fact, than biblical principle. Or to use Loren Cunningham’s terms, it is a relative statement but not an absolute truth. Once again, Paul was emphatic that nothing would become a stumbling block to the cause of Christ. After, just stating that women could pray and prophesy, with the socially appropriate attire, he goes on to say in some cases they shouldn't even speak at all for the sake of the Gospel. Therefore, Paul's words are considered situational and not universal. In other words, in cultures where there are no social taboos against women involved in public settings, then a woman's involvement would not be restricted, but encouraged.

This is how the "Life Application Bible" footnote puts it:

In the Corinthian culture, women were not allowed to confront men in public. Apparently some of the women who had become Christians thought their Christian freedom gave them the right to speak up in public worship and question the men. This was causing division in the church. In addition, women of the day did not receive formal religious education as did the men. Women may have been raising questions in the worship service which could have more easily been answered at home without disrupting the church service. To promote unity, Paul was asking the women not to flaunt their Christian freedom during the worship services. The purpose of Paul's words here were to promote unity, not to teach about women's role in the church.

4) The women in the Corinthian church were an unruly bunch. In fact, much of the church's confusion was caused by them. Coming from pagan mystery religions, where women may have exercised a vocal and brash hold on leadership, it seems that they were taking this model right into the church. Obviously, Paul didn't want that happening. So Paul gives some pretty strong words to curb this problem. He restores order to a disorderly situation. So Paul is not against women praying and prophesying in the church as he has already made clear in 1 Corinthians 11. What Paul is against is prayers and prophecies that resemble the chaotic pagan culture around the church. So, Paul's instructions are considered situational and not universal. Paul, then, is not against women ministering publicly, but specifically how they were ministering publicly in the Corinthian church.

5) The women aren’t the only ones to be silent. The word “silent” is used for each of the groups that Paul is calling on to act decently and in good order. That includes the prophets, the tongue speakers and the women. With the prophets and the tongue speakers, Paul doesn’t have in mind for them to never speak in church, but to exercise their gifts with appropriate control—to take turns. Could Paul be saying the same thing to the women? It’s not that they should never speak, but to do so when appropriate. In other words, prophets, tongue speakers and women participate for sure, but do so in an orderly way so that it builds up the Body.

Which raises the question Wouldn’t Paul be including women in his ground rules for the use of spoken tongues and prophecies in public worship? Or did Paul only have in mind men participating when He wrote, Whenever you come together, each one has a hymn, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Everything is to be done for building up? Once again, earlier in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul had already given instructions on how women are to prophesy. Paul, therefore, is not against women speaking in public worship, but the way these women were speaking in public worship. And the spirit of this passage is certainly not to discourage people from participating in public worship, but to encourage them, including the women, while following certain communal guidelines that promote order and edification.

6) In verses 33b-35 Paul is quoting the antagonists in Corinth. Therefore, if Greek had "quotation marks", Paul would have used them here. In effect, verse 36 would start with an astonished "What!?" or "Nonsense!" or "Come on! or "Who are you kidding?!" This is gathered from the little Greek disjunction “η".

Here’s how it would read:

“As in all the churches of the saints, the women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but are to submit themselves, as the law also says. If they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home, since it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” η—What?! Did the word of God originate from you? η—Come on! Did it come to you only?

In other words, Paul just can’t believe that someone would make such an argument using the law to prohibit women from speaking in the church because as he already stated he wanted both men AND women using their gifts in addressing the church. Besides, what law from the Old Covenant prohibits women from addressing God’s people? We just saw that God used many women to address His people in the Old Covenant.

Paul uses this disjunction, indicating a strong reaction, even rejection, to what proceeds it, several times in 1 Corinthians. David Hamilton has compiled these other exclamations of disapproval in 1 Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 1:13 - η (No way!) Were you baptized into the name of Paul?
1 Corinthians 6:2 - η (What?) Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?
1 Corinthians 6:9 - η (Nonsense!) Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?
1 Corinthians 6:16 - η (No way!) Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body?
1 Corinthians 6:19 - η (What?) Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?
1 Corinthians 7:16 - Or η (What?) how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
1 Corinthians 9:6 - Or η (Nonsense!) is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?
1 Corinthians 9:7 - η (No way!) Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk?
1 Corinthians 9:8 - η (What?) Doesn’t the Law say the same thing?
1 Corinthians 9:10 - η (No way!) Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he?
1 Corinthians 10:22 - η (Nonsense!) Are we trying to arouse the Lord’s jealousy?
1 Corinthians 11:22 - Or η (What?) do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?
1 Corinthians 14:36a - η (Nonsense!) Did the word of God originate with you?
1 Corinthians 14:36b - Or η (What?) are you the only people it has reached?

(From Why Not Women: A Fresh Look at Scripture on Women in Missions, Ministry, and Leadership by Loren Cunningham and David Joel Hamilton—YWAM, 2000, pp. 190-191)

John Calvin comments on 1 Corinthians 14:

The discerning reader should come to the conclusion, that the things which Paul is dealing with here, are indifferent, neither good nor bad; and that they are forbidden only because they work against seemliness and edification (Quoted by C.K. Barrett, p. 333).

1 Timothy 2:11-15 (NIV)

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Once again, we find ourselves in one of the much-debated passages. Is Paul saying that women are not allowed to teach or have authority over a man ever? Many say yes. Historically, the church has agreed, especially considering Paul's reference to the creational order.

Others point out that there is only one main verb in the passage—A woman should LEARN. All other verbs and adverbs are subordinate to it. So what if a woman learns in quietness and full submission? Would she then be permitted after learning to teach and have authority over men? They suggest she would.

They deal with the reference to the Fall not as an order of creation, but as an order of education. Yes, Adam was formed first and then Eve. But does this make him superior? Our original look at the creation account clearly shows that is not the case.

Maybe the reference to being formed first is a reference to the fact that Adam received the command directly from the Lord and Eve received it second hand through Adam. This would not make her morally inferior, just educationally handicapped. Which is the main point of this passage in 1 Timothy in the first place. Look at what happened when Eve had a faulty education. The whole world was led into sin. Too bad she hadn't learned her lesson better. Or too bad Adam hadn't taught the lesson better. So just like Eve, unqualified people can get the church into a lot of trouble. But what happens if they become qualified? What happens if they learn their lessons? Can they then teach?

Let the footnotes from the "Life Application Bible" summarize the thought on this passage:

Some interpret this passage to mean that women should never teach in the assembled church. However, other commentators say that Paul's words "I never let" can be more literally translated "I am not allowing".
As to women being silent in church meetings, the word silence here is often translated "be in quietness," expressing an attitude of being composed and not unruly (See 1 Timothy 2:2). A different Greek word is used to mean "complete silence".
Some scholars see these verses about Adam and Eve as an illustration of what was happening in the Ephesian church. Just as Eve had been deceived in the Garden of Eden, so the women in the church were being deceived by false teachers. And just as Adam was the first human created by God, so the men in the church in Ephesus should be first to speak and teach, because they had had more experience in learning the things of God. This view, then, stresses that Paul's teaching here is not universal, but applies to churches with similar problems. Other scholars, however, contend that the roles Paul points out are God's design for his created order. He established these roles to maintain harmony in both the family and the church.

Here are two other things that would suggest that Paul is not saying that women can never teach men, but that they first need to learn before they teach men or anyone, for that matter.

1 Timothy 2:2 (NIV)

And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.

In the same chapter, Paul had the perfect opportunity to clearly state that only men should be entrusted with teaching, but he doesn’t. Instead of using the Greek word for men only (aner), he uses the Greek word for people or humans (anthropos). Paul wanted all hands on deck when it came to teaching. “Timothy, teach reliable men AND women so they can teach others.”

This only makes sense because that’s how the church Timothy is now leading got started. It was Paul, Aquila AND Priscilla who founded the church in Ephesus. And it was Priscilla and Aquila (note Paul’s order once again) who taught Apollos in Ephesus (See Acts 18:26). Paul is not against women teachers and leaders. Far from it. He wants every reliable person, whether man or woman, to be taught and qualified to teach others. Priscilla was one such women and she played a huge role not only in Ephesus, but in the early church.

1 Timothy 3:1-13 (NIV)

Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.
In the same way, deacons are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well. Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

A big issue in this passage is the reference to women—In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. The word for “women” here can also mean “wives”. As we have just read, the New International Version translates it twice as wives and once as women. The word can easily go either way.

If Paul meant wives, then this would be a reference to the wives of the men who are deacons. These wives are to have the listed character qualities. But why doesn’t Paul make a similar statement about the wives of the overseers? Didn’t their character matter? Or is Paul saying that the qualifications apply to both the wives of the deacons and the wives of the overseers? It is true that this comment on the wives is sandwiched between two comments on deacons, making that the most obvious referent. But could it apply to both the wives of the deacons and the overseers?

But what if Paul meant women? Then this would be a clear reference to women deacons. It would read, In the same way, women who are deacons…. Or what if we expand the referent to include overseers as well just as we did with the wives? Then it would read, In the same way, women who are overseers and deacons ….

Because Paul greeted Phoebe as the deacon of the church in Cenchreae (See Romans 16:1-2) and because Priscilla had already “overseen” the teaching ministry of Apollos and taught him more clearly the way of God (See Acts 18:26), we can be certain that Paul assumed that there would be at least women deacons and maybe even women overseers. If you also include Junia who was probably an apostle (See Romans 16:7) and the many women who prophesied, including Philip’s daughters (See Acts 21:9) you get the picture that women were highly involved in the ministry and leadership of the early church. The importance of 1 Timothy 3, then, is to stress that it’s not just spiritual gifting that matters in the selection of these ministry roles, but that personal character matters as well. For Paul, character counts, not gender.

YOUR STARTING POINT?

Where you start your reflection on women in ministry will impact your conclusions. If you start with Paul’s problematic passages, more than likely you won’t move beyond his problematic passages. They will color the rest of your reading of the Bible. They will be the filter through which you interpret the rest. If that’s the case, more than likely you won’t allow women into all leadership roles.

But what if you start with Romans 16, for example? What if this is the normal state of affairs in the early church—men and women in ministry together. Then Paul’s problematic passages become something like a cast and crutches for a broken leg or broken fellowship and leadership. If your church is experiencing that sort of break, by all means use the cast and crutches until it is healed up. But if the break isn’t there, if the problem doesn't exist in your Body, why would you use the cast and crutches of Paul’s restrictions. They’re not necessary. Your Body is healthy. If you don’t have the problem, you don’t need the solution. Instead, men AND women can walk side by side in Christ in ministry.

Another place to start is in Creation where there is no sense of male domination. That shows up in the Fall and it’s not a blessing, but a curse.

Or what if we start in the New Covenant with Jesus’ treatment of women and with the Spirit being poured out on all people, both men AND women. How can we then restrict leadership from women?

And finally, what if Galatians 3:28 is the Kingdom Manifesto? What if we start with the fact that we are fully united in Christ. Then Paul’s problematic passages were addressing problems and not the healthy state of affairs for men and women in ministry. Once again, if you don’t have the problem, you don’t need Paul’s solution.

SUMMARY

There's a line in "Joy to the World!" that I love:

He comes to make His blessings flow far as the curse is found.

If male domination is part of the curse and not necessarily part of God's good creation, then shouldn't our re-creation in Christ begin the process of reversing this area of the curse? Shouldn't we allow both men and women to express their full freedom in Christ using whatever gifts He sovereignly dispenses for His glory and for the upbuilding of the church?

Galatians 3:28 (NIV)

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.