Does the Bible Forbid Women to be Preachers?

How Scripture Portrays Women's Roles in the Church

The Garden Tomb - Rebecca Craig
The Garden Tomb - Rebecca Craig
Few issues have been as divisive within the church as the question regarding the leadership roles of women.

For centuries, 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 have been utilized to uphold the practice of forbidding women to have leadership roles within the church. What few realize, however, is that scripture passages like these seem to fly in the face of other scriptural passages that uphold and edify women’s roles as leaders. So how are people to interpret these passages in light of the rest of scripture?

Paul and the Women of Corinth

If 1 Cor. 14 is to be upheld as a church-wide mandate, Paul has problems within the context of his own letter. In 1 Cor. 11:4, Paul sets out a standard of dress for women who pray and “prophesy.” Now many would argue that to “prophesy” is different than “preaching,” but in the Greek, the word “propheteuo” means “to proclaim God’s message,” “to preach,” and “to speak God’s message intelligibly” (as opposed to speaking in tongues). [1]

Given the need for a covering over their heads, it is apparent that men were present when these women were preaching. Thus, either Paul suddenly gets amnesia when he makes the statement later in chapter 14 that women should remain silent, or Paul is addressing an entirely different issue. The latter seems the most likely, since by chapter 14, the topic of conversation has shifted to the subject of spiritual gifts and, in particular, the inappropriate use of the gift of tongues. Given the ecstatic, frenzied nature of the pagan rituals that many of the Corinthians would have been partial to, maintaining order and putting the best face on the church as possible was of the utmost concern to Paul. If that meant women needed to refrain from the act of speaking in tongues, then so be it.

Problems with False Teachers in Ephesus

The 1 Timothy text finds itself in a similar situation. Timothy’s congregation was located in Ephesus, an equally pagan city that, as referenced earlier in Timothy, had been subject to many false teachers who were leading the congregation astray. Certain women in the church were falling prey to these false teachers, who were then, in turn, teaching the same false doctrines and drawing men away from the true teachings. This was creating a lot of disorder and dissension within the church, and Paul needed to establish some kind of rules to re-establish order in the church at Ephesus.

Other Scripture Passages that Uphold Women’s Leadership Roles in the Church

With these contexts in mind, one can now look at all the other places in the Bible where women were very clearly involved in leadership roles. In fact, Paul gives a litany of women who worked hard in the cause of the gospel in Romans 16, even going so far as to call one of these women, Junia, an apostle! In Philippians 4, Paul again lists several women who struggled beside him in the work of the gospel. Given the “gospel” is telling people about Christ, such work undoubtedly involved preaching and teaching. In Acts 18:25-26, both Priscilla and her husband Aquila take Apollos aside to instruct him on baptism. Priscilla is obviously involved in teaching a man here.

Acts 9:36 tells us of a female disciple, Tabitha (also called Dorcas). Given the definition and purpose of a disciple was to learn and eventually become like the Rabbi they were learning from, if women were not to become teachers or ministers, then they would not have been allowed to be disciples, either. Philip’s four daughters are also referenced as being prophets.

Jesus and Women

In the gospels as well Jesus treats women on a much more equal standing than was the custom of his day. The Samaritan woman was told to go tell the men of her town what she had seen and heard. Mary of Bethany sat at the feet of Jesus just as the male disciples did rather than doing traditional “women’s work” like her sister Martha, and Jesus’ response was that Mary was doing the better thing. And of course, one can’t forget that the very first evangelist to spread the good news of Jesus’ resurrection was, in fact, a woman—Mary Magdalene. If Jesus himself felt a woman was worthy of preaching such wondrous news, it seems shameful that so many churches have stifled this role.

Early Church Schism

In fact, women were very instrumental in the early church—that is until the schism between the Montanists [2] and the Orthodox church over two of Montanus’ female prophets, Maximilla and Prisca, who told of visions of Christ in the form of a woman. Because of this, by the fourth century, female prophetic activity ceased to be officially recognized, as female prophets were now regarded as especially suspicious, despite the history of female prophets throughout the Bible (Philip's daughters, Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, etc.). [3]

In the end, the question that must be asked is: which texts seem the most normative? The majority of the bible which upholds women as preachers and teachers, or these two texts that are pulled out of their context?

[1] UBS Greek Dictionary

[2] Montanism was a 2nd century Christian movement started near Phrygia by Montanus, who claimed to have received direct revelations from the Holy Spirit. For more information on this early Christian movement, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

[3] Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe, eds., Women’s Bible Commentary, (Louisville: Westminister John Knox Press, 1998) p. 477

Rebecca Craig - Rebecca Craig is a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Rebecca earned her master of divinity degree from Luther ...

rss
Advertisement
43 Comments

Comments

Oct 24, 2008 12:18 PM
Guest :
Finally, someone tells the truth about women in ministry!
Rev. Linda
Jan 27, 2009 10:28 PM
Guest :
Someone once said you don't have to work very hard to twist scripture with human reasoning to make it say what you want it to. 2 Timothy 4:3 says "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."

What a shame you have not only failed to accept, but also to even acknowledge the wonderful role God has given women. Anyone who has the Spirit guiding them can clearly see the different roles God has designed for men and women. That's why Paul explains 1 Timothy 2:12 by going back to the beginning, Genesis, so there can be no doubt what he is talking about. Woman was created after man to be his helpmate not his pastor. The woman was deceived, not the man. That's why she must never be in a position of authority.

I hope some day you will open your heart to receive the truth, and that you will be able to accept scripture as God inspired it, instead of the way you desire to interpret it.
Feb 18, 2009 12:10 PM
Guest :
In response to the individual who made the previous comment... wow... who needs to open their heart?? I don't think it's the author of this article, who has obviously spent a great deal of time delving into and wrestling with scripture. Typical male misogyny, though. And what a shame that this individual is so closed-minded that he refuses to see that the Spirit guides women, just like men, into ministry, and that the gospel cannot be contained or limited by gender roles.

Thank you for writing this article, Rebecca. Hopefully others whose hearts aren't so hardened can not only see the wisdom inherent in your words but will eventually understand how un-Christian their interpretation is. What was it Tony Campolo once said? People such as this commenter are "instruments of the devil," because they seek to oppress, which is the work of Satan. FREEDOM however is the work of Christ. God bless you and your ministry.
Mar 27, 2009 2:37 PM
Guest :
I always find it ironic that scripture is being "twisted" when it doesn't agree with how someone else interprets it. Compelling points are being made here that everyone should take note of, though. Thank you, pastor, for your insightful and thoughtful work on these passages.
May 4, 2009 2:14 PM
Guest :
How can the correlation between Adam & Eve and 1 Timothy be brushed aside? There is a clear connection that can not be ignored. If roles are defined because of events in the Garden of Eden then the implications most certainly extend beyond Ephesus. Please explain.
May 4, 2009 9:07 PM
Rebecca Craig :
Thank you for your comment/question - in response... first, the CREATION of Adam and Eve was on even footing. "Male and female he created them" (Gen 1:27) In Gen. 2, the woman is created to be a "helpmate"... just as God is a "helpmate" to man as well - however one would never subject God to a demeaned role as a "helper". Second - if you are talking about the "curse" on Eve and her "desire" for her husband and the fact that her husband shall "rule" over her - one must ask the question as to whether this a descriptive or prescriptive statement? Is God simply pointing out what the natural consequences of sin will be in male/female relationships or is he ordaining it to be this way? I say it is the latter - the consequences of sin result in this desire for both to attempt to dominate. It is the battle of the sexes - who rules the roost? Woman attempts to dominate, man responds by controlling and demeaning her, putting her in her "proper" place. Thus, my third point should also answer this by pointing out that Christ is the great equalizer... male/female relationships were skewed by sin - women "desired" to dominate their husbands, and the male lashback was to rule with an iron fist over women. Christ, however, puts the male/female relationship back into it's proper place - ie: 1 Corinthians 7... the understanding was that men owned a woman's body - and Paul upholds that, but then he turns around and points out that women also own their husband's body... something that would have been a shock to the Jews and Greeks of the first century. Also, the Ephesians 5:21 on text points out how women should treat their husbands, but also points out how men should treat their wives. "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." ONE ANOTHER... this is mutually submissive language. Christ is the great equalizer. The male/female relationship is now on even ground, it is a partnership, not a "domination" by one or the other, as it was meant to be from the beginning.
May 4, 2009 9:08 PM
Rebecca Craig :
oops, I meant to say it is the "FORMER" not the latter in regards to it being a DESCRIPTIVE, not a prescriptive statement.
Jun 1, 2009 7:11 PM
Guest :
Guest;
Re: Jan.27th comment. I to believe the Bible is God's inspired word, but the Lord has dealt with me also concerning scripture in Joel 2:28, (are we not living in the last day's?) and the book of Esther. We can't put God in a shoe box.
Jun 1, 2009 9:19 PM
Rebecca Craig :
Interesting thought/comment regarding Joel 2:28 - God pouring his spirit upon "all flesh". God's spirit here (and at Pentecost where the fulfillment of this passage began according to Peter in Acts 2) knows no boundaries. Old, young, male, female, slave, free - God's spirit doesn't recognize the barriers we put up, and He is not limited in who He uses to proclaim His gospel. Thank you for your comment.
Jun 15, 2009 1:33 PM
Guest :
The roles of women in the church are not demeaning . The church of God has order and as exemplified by Christ's subjection to the Father, so also must the women be subject to the men. Jesus said that He and the Father are one, yet they are equal. A woman can serve in many important roles in the Church, but not as a pastor/elder/bishop. To elevate the roles of women in the church to the roles of pastors is taking a centimeter when you are given an inch.
Jun 17, 2009 5:47 AM
Guest :
I'm still amazed at how people can pick and choose what they want to believe/follow from the bible and then use that oppress others. Example - the person above uses the whole headship thing to defend his stance that women have no right to deliver God's words of grace and love to groups of people - men included. However, this person completely ignores 1 Corinthians, where a woman is told how to dress when she preaches. Not to mention the fact that the idea of "headship" is a completely different issue that has to do with MARITAL relationships, not leadership in the church! (From Ephesians 5, which I actually think Pr. Craig has written about as well) KNOW YOUR CONTEXT and ALL of your scripture, not just bits and pieces of it, before you start spouting off harmful and hateful dogma. It's people like this that probably still think we should be slave owners because the Bible says slaves should respect their masters. Know the Biblical context, people!
Jun 23, 2009 8:27 AM
Guest :
Thank you for this article. In response to the comment:
"The woman was deceived, not the man. That's why she must never be in a position of authority.
I hope some day you will open your heart to receive the truth, and that you will be able to accept scripture as God inspired it, instead of the way you desire to interpret it."

I totally agree! Women should not be in authority at YOUR place of worship: they should NOT be in authority of
1) your music (choir director is probably female)
2) your pot-luck dinners (the man should cook his own food, a kitchen is a dangerous strong-hold of authority)
3) cleaning/decorating the church (getting to dust and sweep and put flowers out to honor God is symbolic of the respect for the Trinity. A woman will do this out of love of God, but you got watch them, because they might trick somebody with those peace lillies.)

Woman is still being deceived by man.
Woman should drive said man to church and drop him off at the front door and come pick him up later. Woman should find a different church from this particular person's.




Aug 12, 2009 2:52 AM
Guest :
I am a woman and want you to read this with that perspective...
What if Paul really did mean women should not speak/instruct during worship services? Would that necessarily mean that women should never have authority to teach or lead others? I don't believe so.
1 Cor 11 doesn't say where the prophesying and praying was taking place, 1 Cor 14 does. Might this mean that women are welcome, even encouraged, to pray and prophesy in all places except for weekly worship services? As for 1 Timothy, might it also refer to worship services, not a sweeping comment that women are never allowed to share knowledge with others?
As for the women leaders, I'm not aware of any examples in the Bible of women leading worship services. The examples given are of women speaking to God's people, not of pastoring a worship service.
Is it possible for women to have a very important role in ministry without leading a worship service? I think so!
I'm a bit confused about why many women are so upset about these passages if indeed the only thing asked of us is not to preach in worship services. Call me old fashioned but I do believe in submission to God and authorities, meaning there are some things I'm not supposed to do. I don't however believe this means being subordinate, less important, or in any way belittled. I can be a strong woman who is every bit as valuable as any man without having to do everything men are allowed to do.
I lead my Bible study (with men in it), counsel male friends, and prophesy (encourage and exhort) men on a regular basis and don't believe God has any problem with this. I would argue however that he might have a problem with us choosing to disregard at least two portions of His word.
May God bless you and your reading and interpretation of His word, whether your interpretation aligns with my own or not.
Aug 12, 2009 3:31 AM
Guest :
I am a woman and want you to read this with that perspective...
What if Paul really did mean women should not speak/instruct during worship services? Would that necessarily mean that women should never have authority to teach or lead others? I don't believe so.
1 Cor 11 doesn't say where the prophesying and praying was taking place, 1 Cor 14 does. Might this mean that women are welcome, even encouraged, to pray and prophesy in all places except for weekly worship services? As for 1 Timothy, might it also refer to worship services, not a sweeping comment that women are never allowed to share knowledge with others?
As for the women leaders, I'm not aware of any examples in the Bible of women leading worship services. The examples given are of women speaking to God's people, not of pastoring a worship service.
Is it possible for women to have a very important role in ministry without leading a worship service? I think so!
I'm a bit confused about why many women are so upset about these passages if indeed the only thing asked of us is not to preach in worship services. Call me old fashioned but I do believe in submission to God and authorities, meaning there are some things I'm not supposed to do. I don't however believe this means being subordinate, less important, or in any way belittled. I can be a strong woman who is every bit as valuable as any man without having to do everything men are allowed to do.
I lead my Bible study (with men in it), counsel male friends, and prophesy (encourage and exhort) men on a regular basis and don't believe God has any problem with this. I would argue however that he might have a problem with us choosing to disregard at least two portions of His word.
May God bless you and your reading and interpretation of His word, whether your interpretation aligns with my own or not.
Aug 12, 2009 7:30 AM
Guest :
While I don't wish to disparage the woman's comments from above, but she's being even more hypocritical than the ones who at least say no to all or yes to all. Because if she's having authority over men in teaching - she's still defying 1 Timothy which doesn't mention a worship service. It's just an in general, I don't allow women to have a authority over a man. Period. And if you say you don't want to ignore parts of God's word, then you need to start stoning people again, because that's in the Levitical Law (except... Jesus refrained from stoning someone... hmmm... could it be that Jesus' understanding of how the law should function isn't always the same as our understanding of how it should function? What about the Sabbath - Jesus said it was okay to do work, as long as it was "good" work.)

But let me tell you a story about our church. We'd been without a pastor for over 2 years. We staunchly refused to even interview female pastors. Finally, our bishop came to us and said, "We've got one candidate - and it's a woman. You can pass and continue to wait, or you can at least interview her." There was a lot of heated debate at our council meeting, believe me. But finally some wise person went, "Well, it's not as though the men are stepping up to the plate, so maybe we should find out what this woman is like before we just say no and watch our church continue to dwindle and die because it has no leadership." So we interviewed her and eventually called her - and she has been the biggest blessing we have ever received. She put any doubts people had about women being capable of leading worship to rest. Her enthusiasm and love for God is contagious. Our church is now growing and on its way to becoming a thriving congregation once again.

She has demonstrated to us what it means to be a follower and servant of Christ. But not let her lead worship? Well, I'll side with those women who have opted to go into ministry. When they stand and face God on judgment day, and he asks the question, "Did you serve my people, love my people, and make Christ known to them?" and they can answer, "yes, Lord - I believe I at least attempted to do all those things..." I have a hard time believing he's going to whip out some of Paul's words and go, "well - you see... you weren't supposed to get up in front of an assembly of people that were gathered in my name and do that because you were a woman." I'd rather be in her position than in the position of those who try and hamper her.
Aug 12, 2009 7:42 AM
Guest :
So... for the woman who is choosing to believe that women shouldn't lead worship...but it's ok to teach, etc... does she still wear a veil over her head whenever she teaches, councils, etc. like Paul says she should? Because she should if she's not going to ignore parts of scripture...
Oct 7, 2009 12:53 PM
Guest :
I agree completely with this entire presentation,its simply the truth.Christianity is not a 'man thing'its a people thing...both genders are equally responible for the preaching and teaching of the word of God
Oct 7, 2009 1:06 PM
Guest :
I agree completely with this entire presentation,its simply the truth.Christianity is not a 'man thing'its a people thing...both genders are equally responible for the preaching and teaching of the word of God
Dec 23, 2009 3:59 AM
Guest :
I was truly moved with this pasage. Women and men are equal because i kno alot of women pastors and they are highly anointed as the male pastors that i know. This is a great passage to open up the eyes of closed minds
Alison
Feb 4, 2010 2:41 PM
Guest :
you people are just tools in the hands of satan to open wide the gate of hell. I can clearly see 2 Timothy 4:3 in fulfillment.how can one see something really clearly written in God's word and simply choose to twist is because of the lost of their heart. please think on this!!!!
Feb 23, 2010 7:56 PM
Guest :
To those who do not agree with the article: We must interpret scripture with scripture. This is one of the most important things that they taught is in Bible College. There are a lot of scriptures that cannot be taken literally without further research. Example: In 1 Timothy 5:23 Paul tells Timothy to, "Drink no longer water, but a little wine for thy stomach's sake . . ." If taken literally, at face value, all Christians would have to stop drinking water, but a little wine would be okay. Further and deeper research is necessary to find out why Paul made this statement to Timothy. The same applies with verses that speak about women remaining silent (in the church), i.e. women preachers. Further investigation is necessary. I believe the author of the article is correct in her research. Good job, Rebecca Craig! Rev. Dennis, Founder/President of Jubilee Bible Training Center, Philippines.
Feb 23, 2010 9:38 PM
Guest :
I have recently been doing research on this subject, because many women here in the Philippines have been asking my opinion. I told them my opinion did not matter, but I would find out what the scriptures had to say. It is the Word of God that really matters to me. I had never researched this before, because it was a non-issue to me. I believed that God could use whoever He wanted to proclaim the Gospel -- men and women. I was amazed at all the references that I found that pointed to women being used in ministry inside and outside the church. The Christian male chauvinists really need to change their opinion on this subject. And remember it is the traditions of men that make the Word of God of no effect (Matthew 15:6). Rev. Dennis, Jubilee Bible Training Center, Philippines.
Feb 25, 2010 3:46 AM
Guest :
Give me one example in the Bible where it ACTUALLY SAYS that a woman PREACHED? If there's no example, then case closed.
Feb 25, 2010 7:34 AM
Rebecca Craig :
I gave these examples in my article, but will repeat them: Mary Magdalene preached the good news of Christ's resurrection to the disciples. The Samaritan woman went and preached about her encounter with Jesus to her fellow towns people. Deborah was a prophet and a judge - she not only preached God's word/will but made judiciary decision for ALL of Israel - as well as both wrote and sang about how God made her and Israel victorious over their enemies. Philip's daughters were prophets (and if you read your prophets, you'll know that prophets = preachers) Huldah was a prophet (in fact - you don't have Huldah's authority AS a prophet over even kings - and you would not have the book of Deuteronomy in the Bible. Her authority in such matters of what constituted God's Word was held above the priests of Josiah's day as well as over King Josiah himself and was instrumental in getting Josiah to enact his sweeping religious reforms throughout Judah). Isaiah's wife was a prophet. Miriam was a prophet - who led worship. Priscilla taught men (we don't have an account of her specifically preaching, but we do have an account of her teaching Apollos).
Feb 25, 2010 10:53 AM
Guest :
Does it say "preached", or does it say spake, or prophesied? There is a fine line between them. I said "specifically" the word "preach". Don't go to your Websters Dictionary either to define the word (that's not "God-breathed"). Check the original texts (Greek/Hebrew).
Feb 25, 2010 7:58 PM
Rebecca Craig :
In which English translation of the Bible? Unfortunately what you're trying to does not work - for the English translation "preach" is translated from several different Greek verbs in scripture and if you're not willing to look at the original language - you're not being faithful to the original intent of the text and relying solely on one groups word-choice when they translated it - which may appear as a different word in a different translation (for example, in Jonah 1:2, the NIV says "preach" but the NRSV says "cry out" and Matthew 23:3, the NIV says "preach," but the NRSV says "teach." Likewise in Amos 7:16, the NIV uses "prophesy" and the NRSV uses "preach" - the words are interchangeable)

In Mark 16 (and Matthew 28), when Mary Magdalene goes to tell the disciples about Christ's resurreciton, the word used is "apagello" which is one of the words that is translated as "preach" - "She went and "apagello" (proclaimed, told, preached to) those who had been with him..." Acts 20:20 uses the exact same verb "apagello" and is translated in the NIV as follows: "You know that I have not hesitated to PREACH anything that would be helpful to you but have taught you publicly and from house to house." (The NRSV chose to use the word "proclaim" instead of preach)

You say there is a distinction between "speaking" and "preaching" and "prophesying" - well, not in the Greek. In English, the following Greek verbs get translated in scripture as "preach": "euangelisasthai" (which means "to preach good tidings" or "to preach good news" and is where we get our word "evangelize" from); "propheteo" (which means "to speak the word of God," or "to preach the word of God"); "lego" which simply means "to speak" (but is the word that gets translated in English as "preach" and "teach" in Matthew 23:3) ; "kerusow" which means "to proclaim, to make known, to preach"; "apagello" which means "to tell, to proclaim, to make known, preach"; "katagello" which means "proclaim, make known, preach; teach, advocate"

It's an interpreter's discretion which word in English they choose to utilize.

Acts 2:17: Your sons and DAUGHTERS will "propheteo" (proclaim God's message, preach; prophesy, predict; speak God's message intelligibly)
Feb 25, 2010 8:18 PM
Rebecca Craig :
And if you don't think "propheteo" doesn't get translated as "preached" look at Ezekiel 20:46, 21:2 - both the NRSV and NIV translate "prophteuson" (the imperative aorist active 2nd person singular form of the verb "propheteo") as "PREACH" as well as in Amos 7:16 (NRSV translates it as "preach") from the Greek Septuagint
Feb 25, 2010 8:39 PM
Rebecca Craig :
And in Acts 21:9, we are told, according to the NIV, Philip had "four unmarried daughters who prophesied." Again, the word used is the participle present active nominative feminine plural of the Greek verb "propheteo" ( which in English means: proclaim God's message, preach; prophesy, predict; speak God's message intelligibly)
Feb 26, 2010 6:00 AM
Guest :
Ok ok, you can change the word to whatever you think it means is all your telling me. How come in the Old Testament there was no woman elevated to priesthood? How come there are no examples of a woman leading a church service in the New Testament?
Feb 26, 2010 7:12 AM
Rebecca Craig :
First off, I'm not "changing" the words - I am simply giving what the Greek words mean. If you have an issue with that, then please feel free to take it up with the Greeks and/or the people who put together Greek/English lexicons.

Second - Zipporah actually did function as a priest when she circumcised Moses (or perhaps their son - the Hebrew isn't clear which one she circumcised) But at any rate - Zipporah performed the duties of a priest in that instance and God did not condemn her or say what she did was wrong - instead, he spared Moses' life because of her "priestly" actions. Women also served at the tent of meeting. Now while no woman was "officially" ever made a "priest" speaks primarily to the culture at the time. If we ask why women weren't made priests, we might also ask why was stoning used for adultery in the OT, but Jesus refrained from stoning the adulteress woman? Additionally, all unclean foods from the OT were made clean in the NT - just because something didn't happen in the Old Testament has no bearing on what Christ did or how he redefined things.

Yes, in the OT, women's roles culturally were minimized - there are a few, like Deborah, who were raised up as judges and prophets (which, you should note Deborah is the ONLY judge who is also called a prophet), but culturally speaking that was simply not the "norm."

But "norms" from either the Old Testament or the culture were not something Jesus worried about... in fact, Jesus tended to challenge the "norms" of society, and especially challenged the religious leaders of his day and how they functioned. Jesus is the one who came in and started equalizing the roles when he stated Mary of Bethany was "doing the better thing" by sitting at his feet learning right along with the other disciples rather than doing "women's work" like her sister Martha. He's the one who sat at the well and talked with the Samaritan woman who then went and told her townspeople about him. And let's face it - Jesus could have appeared to whomever he wanted to at his resurrection in order to start spreading his good news - why didn't he go directly to Peter if only men were qualified to deliver such proclamations? Why have a woman be the first to deliver the gospel message?? Jesus is not only here to undo the the sinful acts from the Garden of Eden, but was sent to undo EVERYTHING that resulted from fall - including the fact that men now dominate and suppress women rather than living with them by their side as their equal as it was from the beginning. Ephesians 5:21 and following is all about undoing the broken relationship between men and women that occurs in Genesis 3. It speaks of mutual submissiveness, and how both men and women are to "serve one another out of reverence for Christ." Paul only spends 3 verses explaining this to the women, because they already get it. Then he spends 9 verse explaining to men that this mutual submissiveness extends to them as well - they are to serve their wives just as their wives serve them.

Paul continues to elevate the status of women within Christianity as opposed to what the culture states in several places - he sexually elevates them in 1 Corinthians by telling husbands that they have no right to deny their wives in the bedroom (a shocking statement to Greeks and Jews alike who viewed a woman's sexuality as his property - Paul turns the tables and says "Ok, but she owns yours then, too.") And let's not forget Junia is called an apostle. (But an apostle who can't preach or teach? That would be new...) Jesus and Paul's elevation of women within Christianity, unfortunately, did not necessarily play out culturally.

Since Christians were not at liberty to overturn the societal structures of their time, Paul addresses how Christians might live out their corporate life within those strictures in Colossians 3:18-22. While in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, society revealed a different reality. Women fulfilled a certain "role" within the Greco-Roman society. Thus, women were encouraged to keep their place within that social order, just as slaves were encouraged to fulfill their societal role as slaves with obedience and hard work. This does not mean, however, that slavery is God's intention for people or that slavery is "right." Same goes for women's roles.

Plus - the role of "priest" is now gone (even though humans have been reluctant to give up the title/role - God did) - read the book of Hebrews - it addresses the issue of "priesthood." "Priests" as intermediaries are no longer necessary - Christ is our High Priest, the curtain has been torn, the Holy of Holies has come out - and God's Spirit and presence, rather than being only for a privileged few is now for all - men and women. This is also what Joel and Peter talk about when they say that his spirit has been poured out on men and women alike, slave and free, young and old - all barriers have been cut down and broken. God works through all people regardless of their age, gender or class status. The role of a priest as intermediary between humans and God was taken over by Christ and now we are ALL, men and women, slave and free, young and old, called to proclaim/preach/teach Christ.
Feb 26, 2010 8:27 AM
Guest :
First of all, I didn't mean you changed the word but that you picked the word that you want it to mean, because the english has several words for what one greek word means. You also didn't give me an example of a woman leading or preaching in a church service in the NT. Another thing about the gift of prophesy, is prophesy and preaching interchangable? If so then anyone who has the gift of phrophesy also has the qualifications to preach/pastor. Also about qualifications, is it the same qualifications for men and women to be pastor/biships/elders? If so, you would need a sex change and get married to a woman. I'm not trying to demean or supress a woman or make her unequal, just saying that men and women have different roles in the church. Each role is as just important.
Feb 26, 2010 8:54 AM
Rebecca Craig :
We have few accounts of what actually happened in a worship service (hence why we have so many different ways in which we worship) All we have are Paul's letters that comment on certain activities going on in particular congregations, but not a description of who is leading the service, etc. The only accounts of a worship service being conducted that we have that states who is leading/speaking are Jesus in the Gospels, Paul in Acts 20:7, and Apollos in Acts 18 - these are the only places we see an actual worship service going on that describes someone preaching/teaching. (All other preaching takes place usually in some kind of public forum that is outside the synagogue - or even if it is inside the synagogue, that's all we're told was that they went to the synagogue - no further description is given) Thus, other than Jesus, Paul and Apollos preaching in the synagogues - we have no examples of worship services. All we get told when We don't know who else was preaching or teaching - male or female. Just because Paul does something and he was a man doesn't mean no one else ever got up and preached and taught. We know Apollos preached in the synagogue - but he was corrected in his preaching by Priscilla and Aquila. While we don't have an account of Priscilla standing up and preaching - how could Priscilla do any correcting of preaching if she wasn't allowed to also preach/teach? What authority would she have to do this correcting? She wouldn't - so she would HAVE to be in a position of authority in order to correct a man on how he preached and taught.
Feb 26, 2010 9:03 AM
Rebecca Craig :
And it's obvious they were preaching/teaching in both Corinth and Ephesus. Again - Paul is explicit in 1 Corinthians in telling the women how they should dress when they get up and "propheteo" - speak the word of God. Translate it how you want, prophesying, preaching, proclaiming - doesn't really matter - the point is they were standing up in front of the congregation and speaking God's Word. They were not being silent nor was Paul telling them at this juncture to BE silent - he only tells the Corinthian women to be silent when he gets to the issue of speaking of tongues later on in Corinth. But logic would dictate that since he outlined the proper attire for them to get up in front of the congregation to speak - that whatever "silence" he was referring to did not have to do with the practice of prophesying/preaching the Word of God. In fact, that's what Paul wants EVERYONE to do - prophesy/preach, rather than speaking in tongues because it's distracting and confusing to outsiders.
Feb 26, 2010 10:52 AM
Guest :
Why didn't you answer my question about qualifications to be a pastor/elder/bishop in 1 Timothy 3? How come it always uses male pronouns?
Feb 26, 2010 11:58 AM
Rebecca Craig :
Sorry, just an oversight, did not see the question. Well, 1 Timothy 3 makes no provisions for female deacons any more than it makes provisions for female pastors or bishops - yet, Romans 16:1 calls Phoebe a deacon (diakonon). So, apparently - just because 1 Timothy 3 didn't make the provision for it and doesn't mean it didn't still happen.
Feb 26, 2010 12:01 PM
Rebecca Craig :
...and I am leaving to take a group of HS kids on a weekend mission trip and will not be able to answer more questions for several days. Thank you for your questions.
Feb 27, 2010 9:20 AM
Guest :
It doesn't even talk about a deacon until verse 8. What about when it talks about an Overseer or Bishop (Pastor)?
Feb 28, 2010 3:14 PM
Rebecca Craig :
Who cares whether it's talked about in verse 1 or verse 8? That argument doesn't even make sense because it's all part of the same section regarding church leaders and it says "deacons should be MEN worthy of respect" and talks about their wives, etc. and even says "likewise" - insinuating the deacons are "like" the bishops and under the same stipulations. But again - the problem with making this whole section being for ONLY men for all times and all places is that we have Phoebe in Romans being called a deacon. How can that be reconciled unless 1 Timothy is simply speaking to what the "norm" probably was in the church in Ephesus (and, given the problems they were having with the women leaders in Ephesus, it makes sense that 1 Timothy would make no provisions for female leaders given the context of the issues they were having). Remember - most of these letters in the NT are in response to specific questions the congregations had of Paul - thus, he's addressing whatever their specific concerns were and whatever their specific congregational issues were.

As for male pronouns, etc... Even today - we talk about certain "roles" utilizing primarily male terminology. While we've attempted to change things to like "chair-person" instead of "chariman" - the norm is still to use the word "man" when referring to the position, even though both genders are usually "chairmen." Or calling mailmen mailmen, even though we know we have female mail carriers. We utilize the word "fellowship" assuming both men and women are able to be in "fellowship" with one another, but the word "fellow" is a distinctly male term.
Mar 18, 2010 5:48 AM
Guest :
Let's not try to equate what is not. We all know that the word prophet in the scriptures doesn't always refer to a preacher/leader. A woman could have the gift of prophesy but can never be a preacher says the Bible. Let's stop finding our way around God's Word to suit our lust that's Balaamism.
Num 12:6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
Num 12:7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
Num 12:8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?
Paul said in 1 cor14
1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Mar 18, 2010 5:05 PM
Rebecca Craig :
At some point, I would really welcome someone actually engaging the arguments I make rather than proof-texting and spouting off other non-relevant scriptural passages that are being taken out of context as well. To actually go through, point by point, and refute the points I've made rather than just saying things like "everyone knows" - really? You say, "prophesying doesn't mean preaching." Yet, you have yet to prove convincingly in any way that aside from your own personal desire for it to NOT mean that when it suits your fancy (and your example from Numbers is very VERY flawed and again, taken out of context, which I will get to in a moment). Now, I have no problem applying the word "preaching" anywhere it says prophesying in English and it comes out with exactly the same meaning everywhere it gets applied - and vice versa. But you want to draw a distinction between the two terms in English - based on what? Where is the distinction between what it means to "prophesy" vs what it means to "preach" made in the Bible other than an English interpreter's decision to use one word over another when they translate it? And who's making the distinction between prophesying and preaching? (Because, you can't even make the distinction in English - if you look up the English definition of "prophesy" as well you'll find "to give instruction on religious matters: PREACH" Check Mirriam Webster. Only the people who want to remove women from the act of "preaching" because they can't deny the words in Greek that get used in conjunction with women are making this distinction, because they have to drum up some reason why it's different in order for it to align with their ideas that women can "never" be preachers - which the Bible has already refuted THAT statement. But scripture itself does not go there and the Greek words will not go there either. Additionally, you have not yet addressed Mary Magdalene's role of delivering the good news and how that is somehow NOT preaching? Or how being a prophet in general differs from being a preacher. (Again, I'll address your Numbers quote in a moment) Or how Deborah could hold the highest possible position of authority as a judge, ruler, prophet (the ONLY judge called a prophet, btw) and military leader over all of Israel... in fact, the men refused to even go into battle unless Deborah went with them... and still claim that God never raises up women to lead men...just NEVER happens that a woman would hold authority over a man...God would NEVER do that... nope. Never. Well... except for Deborah. Additionally, you only draw distinctions of who/what a prophet is when it involves women - not when the prophets are men. Was Amos not a preacher? Was Hosea not a preacher? Isaiah? Jeremiah? They are all called "prophets." But did they not "preach"? They spoke the Word of God, they gave sermons left and right. Forget the issue of women for a minute... Show me a man who called a prophet who was not also a preacher. (I'll stipulate that perhaps not all preachers are prophets, but all prophets are definitely preachers) What is a preacher doing that is different or even "greater" than what a prophet does? Give sermons... check. Represents God... check. Corrects and instructs on religious matters... check. OK, oh, but then a prophet gets the added distinction of being able to go, "Hey, I'll prove I'm from God - watch this fire come down from heaven..." Not too many "preachers" I know have that ability. So when you say women can be prophets - hey, they're trumping mere preachers!

But now to address your other statements...
Mar 18, 2010 5:12 PM
Rebecca Craig :
#1 - Regarding the Numbers text you decided to quote to back up your point that prophets/preachers/leaders are not equal... first off, the whole issue in Numbers 12 is that Aaron and Miriam are annoyed that Moses has married a Midianite/Cushite woman, not a Hebrew woman, and thus want to remove him as their leader. They, too, have been called prophets and God has spoken through them, and they have held authority and taught and preached and performed signs, etc... so why is Moses so special? This is the question Miriam and Aaron are asking. (And is the question in Numbers 16 that Korah asks as well, only this time, he challenges not only Moses, but Aaron, too - Korah takes on all the Levites challenging what right they have to be the leaders in general) Well, God tells Miriam and Aaron why Moses is so special - because Moses is more than just a prophet/preacher/teacher... God had a VERY special and unique relationship with Moses that he would not have with any other person until Jesus comes onto the scene 1200 years later. According to the argument you are trying to make then, no one but Moses could ever be in authority or could ever be a "preacher." If that's the standard to become a preacher, you're stating that all the male preachers out there have had that "face to face" and one-on-one meeting with God in person just like Moses did? Of course not. They are "called" in the same way women are called. (Which, by the way - you don't know what kind of meeting I had with God/Christ - on this matter - whether it was a vision, a dream, a face to face... or something else.. so you can throw all those stipulations out that you want, you haven't bothered to find out if maybe I meet them because you're too consumed with the assumption that I haven't!) But at any rate... God only has a few people in the world throughout history that he has done that with, and Moses really was the only one until Jesus (all others had an "angel of the Lord" who would represent God, but never would God come face to face. The closest is Elijah when he's hiding out in the cave and the Lord passes by, but he still does not reveal himself in the same manner he did with Moses - and, when he DOES meet with Elijah, he's actually demoting Elijah, removing his prophetic status as it were, and handing over his authority as a prophet over to Elisha because Elijah says, "I'm done doing this, God. Jezebel's gonna get me!" Elijah had essentially lost his faith at that point, despite the climactic showdown he'd just had between God and Baal - and God won decisively) But does that negate all the other prophets/preachers in the Bible because God spoke to them through visions and dreams rather than having that one-on-one face-to-face conversation? Of course it doesn't.

And just because Moses was a man, did that mean that only men could lead Israel from that point forward once Moses was gone? Apparently not since, as I already pointed out... Deborah was a leader that God raised up to lead all of Israel. You have issues with women leaders - talk to God - He is the one who raises them up! You cannot get around "the Deborah factor." Quite frankly - the discussion should end right there. Her role can't be denied or refuted. She had authority over men. She commanded armies of men. You don't get that much higher authoritatively than that! Was she "greater" than Moses? Of course not - no one but Jesus was ever a greater prophet/leader than Moses. But for that time and place, a woman was the highest military, political AND religious authority that existed. Thus your comparison or attempt to "proof text" your point with the Numbers text is a false analogy and comparison. It's like comparing apples to oranges. Using God's relationship with Moses as the "standard" for what constitutes all leaders in the faith? Then chuck the rest of the prophets and the Old Testament out the window because that doesn't happen again until Jesus - who is finally the one greater than Moses.
Mar 18, 2010 5:13 PM
Rebecca Craig :
#2 - "Baalism" is not the practice of ordaining women or allowing them to preach. It's following another god who is not the Living God, who is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In its strictest form, "Baalism" is following the god Baal, the god of thunder, rain and fertility. What was the problem with Jezebel? Not that she was a woman, but that she supported the practices of Baal (including child sacrifice) and Asherah in Israel and led them astray to follow these other gods. THAT is Baalism. That is what is detestable to God. Baalism is not having a difference of opinion in interpreting scripture that we both attribute to the same God and Lord of all the earth!
Mar 18, 2010 5:32 PM
Rebecca Craig :
#3 - you say I "lust" after this??? OH what judgment you just passed!! And what false witness you have just borne! Thus I have to wonder... have YOU ever been called by God? Have you ever experienced the agony and gone through all the stages of excuses (just like Moses, Jonah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc.) of why you are not worthy, of why you should not be called to this, of pointing out to God all the difficulties and problems you will face, of why you really don't need to make your life far more difficult than it already is by embarking upon the world of ministry?

If you have ever gone through that then you know, going into the ministry is rarely a "want" or a "desire" - most definitely not a lust! - for most who are truly called by God - male or female. "Lust" and "desire" are the LAST things on earth a true calling from God is. Show me a prophet who didn't attempt to turn it down in some fashion or who wasn't constantly being ridiculed and told to shut up by the people he preached to or against. I count myself in good company in that regard. Am I truly called to this? As Jesus said - a house divided against itself cannot stand. Test what I say to see if it is from God or from the Devil... If I am speaking God's word and helping bring people into the faith - how then can be I doing the work of the devil? Would I not be leading them to blaspheme God, and to reject Christ if it were not God working through me? Would I not be claiming "There are other ways to salvation, let me show you..." rather than telling people about Christ? Getting back to your "Baalism" comment - if I were trying to lump being a follower of Christ and a follower of Buddha or Allah as being on equal footing... then THAT would be Baalism. That, however, is NOT what I do.

Who, I wonder then, is really the one leading people astray? Who is the one following "itching ears"? Is it me, who witnesses to what God has done in Christ and faithfully engages scripture as a WHOLE - (remember Jesus' criticism of those who wanted to deny the resurrection - "You err because you do not know your scripture" - and these were men who prided themselves on knowing their scripture!) OR... is it people who try to stop the spreading of the gospel because it comes from the mouth of a woman? Who takes pieces of scripture and tries to apply them across the board with no regard for other parts of scripture and ignores the intent and context? Which of us truly is the one hindering God's Word and work from being done in the world?

Just think for two seconds what you're accusing people of before you go spouting off. I tried saying no to the calling - multiple times - but God had other ideas. I tried to run from it. God kept sending a worm and eating away my shade tree. I said, "Send someone else." And God said, "nope, I've made up my mind." I even said - "I can't because you said yourself I couldn't in the Bible." AHA! I thought I had the trump card on God there! I tried using YOUR argument! And He said - "Oh really? Is that what *I* said? Read it again...ALL of it again... though I will remove your blinders this time."

Thus, I answer to Him - not you. Because He can make my life a whole lot more miserable and difficult than your caustic, misogynistic and Pharisaical comments and interpretation ever could. I'm not a feminist - I don't do this because I want to prove I can. I do it because I've been called to it. And I've tried not answering the call - and the results were not pretty. Thus, I'd far rather deal with your scorn and ridicule than God's anger because I ignored Him.

You think women in the ministry enjoy having to debate and defend themselves non-stop against the Pharisees and Sadducees and scribes like you all day every day who are continually out to stop them from sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ? Not really. It would be far easier to back down and go "you're right, I can ignore God because your interpretation tells me I should..." Life would be MUCH easier for me if I would just go back to my old life and could use the 1 Timothy and 1 Cor. texts as an excuse - would make a lot more money and not deal with this grief, that's for sure. And I could live my life the way I wanted to once again rather than the way God has called me to... But like with Jeremiah - God's Word is like a fire in the bones, and it cannot be contained and cannot be shut up no matter what you say against us or how you try to stop us. Throw us in a cistern, stone us, crucify us, proof-text and pull scripture out of context all you want, for the devil was GREAT at doing that... just read the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. The devil knew his Bible and threw scripture out there randomly to make his points, and would not actually argue Jesus' counter points or engage his rebuttals, but would only throw out a new scriptural text...and Jesus countered every time saying, "but, it also says..." and went with the overarching witness rather than a few carefully procured texts pulled out of context.

For instance, no one yet has addressed the examples I've put forth - like Mary Magdalene. YOU (not God) say a woman can "never" be a preacher? Really? Oops - then Mary Magdalene is going straight to hell for preaching the good news of Christ's resurrection to a bunch of men - as she was instructed to do by Jesus himself. THAT is preaching. What do you think we women do as preachers? Try to get people to deny Christ? To get people to stray from the faith? No - we stand up there and tell people what Mary Magdalene told people - there's good news! Sin and death have been swallowed up by Christ - for He has risen from the dead and he promises us new life as well through faith in him! You're right... How DARE a woman proclaim and preach such a thing! Oh, but wait... a woman was the FIRST to do exactly that as commanded by Christ. Jesus set the precedent already. I think I'll go with Him on this one...
43 Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement