ABOUT WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP
42. Rise Up, Men of God!
I’m a Man and happy about it.
“Proud” is not a politically acceptable word in the church, so I will stay with “happy.” Or satisfied. Content. Fulfilled.
In other words, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with being male. Do I make my point? Why should I even have to make the statement?
Somehow, somewhere along the line, the church has picked up the world’s liberation policy regarding women, and men have been wincing in pain, shame, and guilt ever since.
Check me out. No wincing. I’m a man, and that’s fine with me.
The pendulum has swung from men abusing women – and yes that still happens all too often – to men cowing in a woman’s presence or at the mention of her gender. How often do you hear people reading Scripture about fathers or sons or men, punctuated with apologies from the preacher: “You women understand, this includes you too…” “we simply do not mean to leave out the women, because we all know they are equal in every respect to the men,” or some such comment.
I think that much of the bowing to the other gender is good-hearted and unfortunately even necessary, but all too much is governed by a spirit – I mean here an attitude – of fear. Men have become afraid of women, in one of the most bizarre shifts of human behavior ever recorded.
Hey Men! Hellooo!? We’re all right! Male is still in! God is still our Father, not our mother! He that acknowledges the Son (who is also male!) has the Father! And the Spirit too, always a “He” in Scripture.
Place enough female pronouns in the Bible and you have a feminized church. Put together enough feminized churches and you have… well, look around. Some men will not show up at a church run by women because men - and women too - have a yearning for approval by a Father. Women assuming pastoral authority simply cannot project that image.
What changed? Nothing. The leaders and heroes of Israel, the Christian Church historically and up to our present generation were male. Men, don’t be ashamed of this.
Fearful men hold up Deborah, and who can deny Mary her part? Yet Deborah refers to herself as a “Mother” in Israel. And Mary was the greatest mother of them all. Mothering is still wonderful. For mothers.
From a baby to our sending out we are overseen by a woman. Yes! It’s good! We go to school and for those first years, women are by and large our teachers. Nourishing! Great! Our foundations have been laid by women! What woman dares to deny that women have a powerful influence over the human race with no further role than mother?
Oh, many women deny it! And more and more men are chiminmg in too, writing whole books to show they have twisted their thinking to fit the times. Some of the conclusions are shameful.
Hence the shift. The rebellion. The ripping apart of the family order, the workplace order, the order of society. A falling away.
I know there have been exceptions to the male authority rule in recent church history. But even the exceptions to the rule (and I can name them for those interested) believed they were God’s 2nd choice, that men had simply not obeyed, that male is the rule. We can go so far as to say that they were used mightily in their generation. But the regrettable fact is that there was no man to rise up and equal them.
And where are God’s men still in this hour that needs them so? Even in the secular political world, good men are opting out. So in the church. Since the women have proved that they can do it, why not let them do it? these cowards reason.
But the Word of God has not changed and shall not change, though all men become liars. Not the words of Paul to Timothy and Corinth, not the apostolic choices of Jesus, not the pattern of nature from the Garden (yes, before sin entered), not the long line of male heroes of the faith. It’s good to be a man!
But there is “neither male or female,” said Paul! The same Paul said he would not let a female have authority over a male! He also said in the same Galatians passage, that there is “no slave or free.” Then he gave rules for relationships between slaves and their masters! What double-talk is this? Must be two different contexts!
Context one: We are all sons of God through faith in Jesus. No one can keep out the females, the slaves, even the Gentile dogs! No, we are all included, who want to be!
Context two: Within the family of God there is order, just as there is in your family. All persons who wear your last name, sir, are in your family. Equal rights. They all get to stay in your house, eat your food, travel in your vehicles. But not everyone gets to balance the checkbook. Not everyone nurses the new baby. Not everyone changes the flat tires.
Inclusion vs role. Two different subjects.
My words must not be used too broadly. Some females are seeking “equality”, based on faulty theology, some of which I have tried to lay to rest above, but others are seeking superiority, to become like their oppressors!
And oh my, Yes! Have we ever oppressed. We have been an evil lot. But to be a man is still to be God’s first choice for leadership and –ugh- responsibility. Many aspirants to the throne of command opt out when they see that what they have gone after has a price tag. To be number one is to be targeted. It’s lonely and not always so much fun at the top.
But the top, of your family, your church, that’s where you are called, men, like it or not. He (it says “he”) that desires church office, desires a good thing. But he better know that it’s a hard thing too. Jesus, man of all men, has shown us the road upon which the most effective church leaders must travel.
Oh, James and John of today, you will indeed have a special place in the Kingdom, but you will also drink the cup that Jesus drank.
So how about it, men? Ready to arise and take your God-given place? If you don’t, well, God has others He can use.
43. Never Satisfied
Natural man has always been in a push to change his condition. Guided by his evil master, nature always wants to move up, to take charge. It operates from a position of the inferior and tries to prove its worth.
Women want to be like men, not because they view men as something to be desired, but because they perceive men to be higher. A position for which to grasp.
Men want to be other men. Or God. Not in responsibility but in privilege. Children too long for the day when they will be boss.
The planet has been in rebellion from the start. Those who are not fighting for mastery are not doing so because they simply have been convinced that they have no chance. They are conditioned to fail, to be subjugated to others who have gained the top spots. Give these men, or women, the thought that they can win, they can conquer, and they too will begin the ascent to power and glory. Only stronger men and stronger women will stop them.
So much of this world's struggle has seeped into the church. Here we are told Scriptures that suggest we too should go for power and authority. For example, women are told, “In Christ there is no male or female." Conclusion: Everything that men do, women can do, and should do.
Though the context of the passage is salvation and eternal life, the interpretation filtering through is that we must abandon the natural order of men ruling over women, and let
women take charge.
But if we are to abandon the natural order, then the gay community has a point. Why can't a man be like a woman and a woman like a man in every respect?
"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
The fact is, the woman already has incredible power. Everyone on earth is here by a woman. Our formative teachers
were women. Humongous influence.
Another fact is, the believer already has all power in earth and heaven. We need to prove nothing. We act out of superiority, not grasping for someone else's position. Our God already rules in all of heaven, in all His true people on earth, and by appointment, the entire planet soon.
Daily we listen to His Voice, and collectively we bring the plan of God to Earth. Nothing can stop us. Nothing can stop the plan. "Jesus shall reign where'er the sun doth his successive journeys run. His Kingdom stretch from shore to shore, till moons shall wax and wane no more."
So work hard. But relax. Stop striving for something that isn't yours. And embrace that which is.
44. Exceptions to the Rules
God’s Word is pretty plain in places. When God speaks, He means business. No messing with the revelation of God. True, true.
But I’ve discovered in the heart of God a mercy that often allows for exceptions to His very good rules.
The Father and the Son were in perfect agreement about marriage, for example. One man, one woman. Period. This is God’s perfect plan. It works that way. The other ways don’t work. Unless there is grace.
Jesus was adamantly opposed to the rules that had developed over the years since Moses, allowing divorce for just any reason. And with His strong hand He forced that pendulum back to where it belonged, at zero tolerance. Except.
Except fornication. One partner is unfaithful. The marriage vow is broken. What’s a person to do? Mercy says, I make an exception here. Mercy later speaks to one of Jesus’ apostles, Paul, and says that if two unbelievers are suddenly divided in their marriage by the fact that one gets saved, and the other one doesn’t, and the unbeliever wants to leave for that reason, let him or her go. No bondage. Find a believing spouse. Move on.
Our God is perfect and has a perfect plan for everything. But He’s a God of mercy, and exceptions.
I’m only here for the lost sheep of Israel, says Jesus. Then in actions that are shocking to His very Jewish Messianic disciples, He offers His life and health to a Samaritan, a Canaanite, and a Roman centurion!
He was only doing what He saw the Father do. His Father after all had saved the first Canaanite, also a woman. Her name was Rahab. She was doomed to die in Jericho, a cursed woman if ever there was one. But one day she asked to be saved from the coming wrath, and the God of Israel saved her and made her an ancestor of the Christ.
Exceptions. Don’t marry outside the faith, God told His people. Jews, you can’t marry Gentiles. It will defile our race! But God’s hand was heavy on His people, for they had defiled themselves already, without Gentile assistance. And when God saw the heart of a sincere Moabite girl named Ruth, that it was toward His people and toward Him, He saved Ruth, added her to His family, and put her in the line that leads to Jesus too!
Watch out for rules. They weren’t made to be broken, for sure, but a merciful God may just bend one for His own purposes.
I don’t allow a woman to teach men, said Paul. Under normal circumstances that’s a good rule. People want a father’s touch in their church. Women are generally better as assistants to their men and to church leaders. Putting a woman at the helm is not a wise practice, and a woman can bring untold misery to the work of God.
But not all circumstances are normal. I wonder how Paul would react in China today, where male pastors are targeted and therefore often try to keep a low profile while women do the public ministry knowing the penalties against them might be less.
Cowardice, you say? Blatant disobedience, when we are all called to the cross, you say? But of course, you cannot judge until the persecution comes to you. And you may just have that opportunity some day…
I question the growing number of female leaders and teachers in the church even as I am saddened by so many women in the workplace, often taking the jobs of qualified men. It is a backward age, headed for judgment for sure. But I shall never go so far as to say that there are no exceptions to rules, even God’s rules. He must have His way, He is in fact the Lord of the harvest, He will do what He wants. Some women have prospered in leadership ministry, and many souls of our day look back to a woman who guided them through the darkness into God’s marvelous light.
There are exceptions. Some because of men, some because of the purposes of God. Jonah going to Gentile Nineveh, when the rule was only Jews! Naaman being cured, when all the Israelites could not believe in a living God being among them. Jesus working on the Sabbath, when He was the One Who made the rule about “Sabbath Keeping.” Israel’s land being taken from them, when the promise was so clear to Abraham that it was to be theirs forever. God withdrawing His blessing from people he swore to protect forever. People not being healed even in Jesus’ ministry, though He is all powerful and all merciful. Untold billions lost forever in Hell, though God is not willing for even one of them to be lost.
Lots of things in Scripture don’t seem to be according to the original plan. But it is God who made that plan. And He knows the turns to take on the road that will still get Him to the place He had in mind all along. He will get there, you know. And until I know that road perfectly, or you do, it’s probably best that we get out of the driver’s seat and let Him go where He wants without complaining or losing faith.
Yes, we must continue to speak the revealed truth in love, just as it is written. Absent the exception, the rules are still intact. But if there are those who don’t get it, or there is a God who allows exceptions to it that we were not expecting, so be it. Eventually God will have His way.
45. The Great Apostle Junia
Should women teach men in the church?
Should women lead men in the church?
Paul the apostle seemed to say, “No way!” And in this article, it is his teaching upon which we must center.
For, if indeed this apostle was opposed to women, perhaps especially wives, ruling over or teaching men, maybe even their own husbands, in a public assembly, is it likely that he would be lifting up for adulation a female apostle of his day?
I think not.
Nevertheless, consider Junia. Or is it Junias? Aye, this is the question that begs our attention. Answer that, and the debate is over. But can the question be answered? Unfortunately Biblical scholars have not answered it in all these hundreds of years, and the discussion continues.
But what is disheartening to me is to see otherwise sound Bible teachers come to the pulpit and announce that it’s a done deal. Junia was the name, and apostle was her fame. Therefore it’s open season for women to do as they please in any assembly they please.
Let me quote the only verse in the Bible that mentions Junia(s). It is Romans 16:7. I am using the New King James Version:
“Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.”
The NKJV here follows the KJV, as would be expected. The KJV is one of eight versions of the New Testament you will find in the Precise Parallel New Testament. Let me share with you how Junia(s) fares in the others.
First and foremost, though quite unhelpful as a debate stopper, is the Greek itself. Because the name in question is an object in the sentence, it is in the accusative case, and has an ending that could mean it is feminine or masculine. No help here.
Still, I found it of note that Strong’s Concordance, no lightweight in Biblical reference works, does not list the name ‘Iounia (Junia) in its Greek Dictionary section. Instead, the male is assumed (‘Iounias).
As for the other seven translations, the KJV, NAB, and NRSV all say “Junia.”
But the NASB says “Junias,” a male name, as do the other three, all of which have weight attached to their decisions:
The NIV is perhaps the most popular of all English versions in our day. Junias.
The Rheims is the Catholic version. Why is this interesting? Because there is Catholic tradition that Junia (if she really existed) is indeed to be honored, and a feast day has been set up in her name! Strange that the Catholic translators did not get the memo…
Most captivating of all is how explicit is the Amplified Version. The verse is expanded to read (in part), “… Andronicus and Junias…they are men held in high esteem...”
So, though the Biblical evidence for the gender of this name is conclusively inconclusive, it would seem the weight falls more toward a male.
What else do we know about Junia(s) from this verse?
1. A relative of Paul. Saved before Paul was.
2. A fellow-prisoner of Paul. Were they in the same prison dungeon at the same time? A male and a female? Here’s another possible clue as to where we should go with this.
3. The only other clue we have is, alas, also unsatisfying to those looking for resolution here:
“of note among (among is the Greek en, a multi-purpose preposition that can mean a whole lot of things!) the apostles”
Does that mean that the apostles as a group thought that this Junia(s), apostle or no, was a hero of the faith in those days?
Or does it mean that Junia(s) was indeed an apostle, and a truly eminent one, even by Paul’s standards?
But this is where we came in. Paul’s standards. Paul’s standards did not allow a woman to rule over a man, or to teach him. We’re left with clear statements by Paul vs. an unsolvable riddle at the end of one of Paul’s letters.
For me, “clear” trumps “unsolvable” any day. It is simply not proper to attempt to solve a controversy as great as the place of women in the church with another controversy that is totally enigmatic. I believe that in an honest court of law, this evidence would not be admitted. I can hope that honest persons in today’s pulpits will say the same thing.
46. About Deacon Phoebe
No Greek scholar here. But let’s take a look at the Greek word diakonos anyway. Thank you, Mr. Strong. Strong’s Concordance has helped many a brother walk with the learned. He can help us examine this mystery of the woman of Cenchrea.
Diankonos is a lot like the word baptizo. In its original language it is very clear. But translators got hung up over the way the idea evolved in the church, and in both cases had to invent a word. Baptize means nothing. It’s a contrived word created to solve a theological problem. You can have it mean “immerse”, or “sprinkle”, or whatever you want. Not so baptizo in the Greek. The word clearly means to dip or plunge or immerse.
So with diakonos . Deacon means to us an official church servant, elected by the assembly in accordance with church rules and regs. Some churches even use Biblical standards for their choices.
But there are two other words in Scripture that started out as the lowly diakonos: One is minister, the other simply servant. This latter usage is the closest to what the Greek is trying to convey.
That brings us to Phoebe. Phoebe was a diakonos, no question. But because of the playing that translators have done with this one word, we are left to try to discern whether she was an “official” servant, or just a servant servant.
Does it really matter? Unfortunately, yes. Phoebe is being held up by the women’s liberation movement of the church as an example of the fact that women as well as men were elected to church office and even leadership.
She is mentioned only in Romans 16:1-2, by the apostle Paul. Now right away we have a problem. No other apostle discusses the whole male/female issue in terms of leadership, and in the cases where he makes comments, they are always in favor of men-only outcomes. Women should not teach men, nor lead men in the assembly, and obviously not at home, says Paul. And I think he had the Spirit of God…
So it is unlikely that Paul is commending Phoebe to elevate her to leadership. Even a quick examination of the text points away from this.
Phoebe served the Cenchrean church. Cenchrea is and was a seaport near Corinth, in Greece. It is believed that she was asked to carry the letter of Paul to the Romans from her hometown. She was a trusted disciple, and served well her people in Cenchrea. Paul asks the Romans to receive her and bless her with whatever she needs to fulfill this ministry to her church and to him.
And that is it. That is all. She was a true diakonos , one who serves God and other people. Whatever her ministry was, there is no indication that it was limited to the local church, or that in that church she had authority or wanted it. She was simply a sister who wanted to help, and God wanted her to be used in this way. There is no need to give her a title or a position. True servants do not desire this anyway.
There are other reasons Phoebe could not be “official.” An official representative of the local church was required to have a holy wife. It was assumed that a man would have this office. These men were to be rulers of their own homes first, another office not given to women. The rule of the house was to be the pattern for rule in the church. The entire course of nature, in Paul’s thinking, is upset when a woman rules the home or the church. Such was the teaching handed down from that first century and observed with few exceptions until this last one.
For the record, several other persons are called diakonos in the New Testament, none of whom were appointed deacons of the local church: Jesus, Tychicus, Epaphras, Paul, and Timothy are the ones I found. Servants all, but “deacons” none.
Let us continue to speak only where the Spirit has spoken through His chosen apostles and prophets who laid the foundation for the church of Jesus Christ.
47. About Women in Leadership: My Friends Speak Out
And you thought I was all alone on this? That maybe I’m out on this limb? I mean, about women in ministry? Only a few kooks on the fringe who had bad parenting experiences and hated women all their lives? Think again.
There is a mounting pressure from within the Body to correct this grievous predicament that is seeing a woman’s movement snowball into dangerous territory. Feminism, originally borrowed from the world, has ramifications far beyond who will teach Sunday School in your adult class. Gender confusion has historically led to sexual perversion both in and out of the church. I mean, if it doesn’t really matter any longer what is male and what is female, then why struggle over these ancient practices? Why not let liberty have its say? That is why we were set free isn’t it? To do what we want when we want in the church?
Not at all. And one of the groups that addresses this issue is the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood of Louisville, Kentucky. I strongly suggest that God’s people have a listen to what they are saying. Their manners are impeccable, by the way. They have learned how to speak the truth in love and total respect. But they don’t shy away from saying things that haven’t been said forcefully for decades in some circles. Frankly, many men are afraid to speak out.
So let a woman talk: Mary Kassian, Council member, states, “Biblical feminism has become a theological crossing point between traditional conservative evangelical theology and liberalism… Feminism and Christianity are like thick oil and water: their very nature dictates that they cannot be mixed.”
Other Council Members and members of their Board of reference include: John Piper, Beverly LaHaye, Erwin Lutzer (pastor, Moody Church of Chicago), John MacArthur, J.I. Packer, and R.C. Sproul.
These are the names I know on this extensive list before me. I’m sure there are other “big” signatures involved. But you get the point. Serious Bible scholars question the current move in the church to allow women to teach and govern men publicly and at home. It is only one arena of the conflict of the day, but one that can have serious repercussions if something is not done. Church, be aware!
48. From the Spirit to the Apostle to the Believers of All Time
There is a way to find the perfect will of God. And there is a way not to find that will.
There is a way to know exactly what God says and wants. And there is a way to arrive at a network of guesses. Many believers, some even known as “scholars” have fallen into the trap of guesswork, based on culture, history, and semantics. The following comments will be based only on the words given by the Spirit to apostles and prophets.
That royal way of searching is even prescribed in the Scriptures. Psalm 119, for example, says in 176 different ways that the written Word of God is our source.
eg, v. 2: Blessed are those who keep His commandments, who seek Him with the whole heart.
v. 30: Your judgments have I laid before me.
v. 31: I cling to Your testimonies.
v. 42: I trust in Your Word .
v. 75 I know Lord, that Your judgments are right.
Many such sentiments gives the Psalmist. Couple this with the sage words of our beloved apostle Paul to his son in the faith, Timothy,
...the Holy Scriptures...are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine…(II Timothy 3:15, 16),
...and the resultant warning in chapter 4: 1-4 (there is no break in the original document) … I charge you therefore...Preach the Word!...for the time will come when they will not endure sound teaching, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears...they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned to fables…
Thus, the “royal way” of which I speak is to see the clear statements of Scripture, and find in that precious Book examples and patterns, written expressly for us through God’s Holy men.
But the “itching ear” gives rise to that other way of “finding the truth”: the statements of and examples and patterns of men. Every cult uses this method, and alas! many of God’s own fall therein.
The process happens something like this: a pastor or leader, quite content with the Scriptures as they are, nevertheless is turned aside from this contentment by a straying member of the flock, a malcontent, one who has seen the Word and decided it is not for all men of all time.
This fleshly one has further decided that he personally will not obey this word, and that there must be a clearer interpretation, a more “modern” one that fits “our” time.
The pastor wishes to be loyal to his sheep, but without realizing it becomes disloyal to his Master. If the pastor insists on the pure Word of God, the brother of the itching ear will find another church where his interpretation and practice will be more readily accepted.
So Pastor offers to “research” the passage, though he has known for years exactly what it means. He suddenly desires, as Balaam, a second opinion. And lo! Upon “further searching” he discovers that the old truth is just that, old.
He finds “fathers” of the church who have been in favor of the “new” rendering. He discovers that “godly” people from every generation, even his own, have digressed similarly. Certainly these godly ones cannot all be wrong.
Of course in the process of his “discovery”, he ignores the words and lives of those who have continued on in the “old” truth, and found it to be sufficient.
The itching ear has been scratched. But no one thought to ask Mr. Disgruntled whence came his “itch” in the first place. The discernment of the Spirit will reveal that the tendency to want more or less than the prophets have spoken is from the one who appeared in the Garden and spoke to our first parents, “Did God REALLY say that? Oh my, he actually MEANT this!”
His lies are oh so convincing. Only a few care to challenge them and cling for dear life to what God has said.
So why is the Church looking for “explanations” of the passages regarding female leadership in the Church? Who is asking that these explanations be made? Are we being betrayed?
Are we afraid of political powers that now reign in the world? What is wrong with the Scriptures as they are, and as they have been believed all these many years?
Some may feel the preceding comments and questions to be a bit too harsh a way to introduce the subject at hand, which many believe to be a topic of relative insignificance. I stand with the tone given on the following grounds:
1. Every Word of God is pure, Proverbs 30:5. And Jesus, in Matthew 5:19 says that any man who breaks even the least of the commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the Kingdom…
God speaks today. The Holy Spirit still quickens His Word to the hearts of man. Whatever He says is pure and holy. Let no one despise even the smallest of the commandments of God. And yes, in dealing with our present topic, we are dealing with commandments, not suggestions, of true prophets and true apostles. Let every mouth be silenced as He speaks.
2. Consider how important this topic is even in the Word. First there are direct statements in Genesis , she was taken out of man, he shall rule over you, I Corinthians , Let your women keep silence, as the law says, and I Timothy, I do not allow a woman to teach. These concepts are backed up my a multitude of examples throughout Scripture.
3. Consider also the great numbers of women affected by this teaching. As the spirit of lawlessness continues to abound , especially in the Western Church, more and more women will be drawn into this restless desire for authority over men.
4. Consider the effects of this teaching on men. A strong woman in a local church will tend to put male leaders in the background. Many of them will not rise up and take their proper place In the secular world. For example, much male unemployment can be attributed to too many females in the job markets.
5. A feminized church cannot model the marriage of Christ and His own. A feminized church cannot picture the Fatherhood of God. Oh God, give us men!
6. Even if this were a “little truth” (forgive the expression!), is it not a truism that when “little” lies become embedded in a congregation, it will not be long before bigger ones are at home also?
7. If any reader still believes this to be a “minor” issue, let him hear Isaiah’s lament over backslidden Israel (3:12) As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people! Those who lead you cause you to err, and destroy the way of your paths.
Let us now consider the Scriptures. Surely the Lord has not left us without guidance on such a serious matter. Let us go to the beginning of all things. It was here that Jesus sent His disciples when questions arose about marriage. He sends us here too, for the marriage relationship is at the heart of the matter. To understand marriage is to understand the role of the woman at home. And to be secure in that relationship is to solve the church issue too.
Before sin came into the world God created, first, a man. Then in response to man’s need, and out of that man, God created a woman. Woman is from man. Woman was brought to man. Woman was to be a helper for man. That is the Divine order. All else falls short of His glory.
We must remember that this was before the curse. When that curse came, the natural submission of woman to man became law. Now the man was to rule over the woman. She would be at his mercy. It was her enticement that brought man down, so man would bring her down.
Now, in Christ, the curse is done away. Men are to “rule” in love, and women return to natural and holy submission, as before sin came into the world. The error into which women fall in our day is the departing, not only from the days of the curse, but from the very order of creation. This, Paul tells us, cannot be in the true Church.
By the time Paul takes pen in hand to address the issue of female leadership, over 4000 years have passed. But in the great apostle is no desire to remove the ancient landmarks. 2000 years from Paul, we should be similarly steadfast in our resolve to pass to the next generation, unchanging truths.
Paul’s letter to the Corinthians contains a number of straightforward commands.
Flee sexual immorality.
Flee from idolatry.
Earnestly desire the best gifts.
Let all things be done decently and in order.
Few would have a problem with any of that. In the midst of all of this command giving (chapter 14) is this command, of equal authority:
(verse 34) Let your women keep silence in the church. Oh my. We have a serious problem with that one. That was cultural! That was historical! That was temporary! Oh a multitude of “reasons” are elevated to truth status by those who would excuse the woman teacher, for this is not an age when one wants to confront women’s rights!
But Paul’s statement stands. In fact, in many translations, including the Greek rendition available in the Parallel New Testament, part b of verse 33 is connected to verse 34, making the statement even stronger:
“As in all the churches of the saints, let your women keep silence in the Church.” I am assuming that modern translators found textual evidence to be sufficient for such a rendering.
“Silent” means “silent.” “Women” is translated “wives” by some, though the same word is rendered “women” in other passages. Consistency will not allow such random changes.
I Timothy 5:2 commands younger “women” (same word) to marry. Try “wives” there! But even if it were “wives”, the command is generally disobeyed. And why the word “your” ? The letter is addressed to the church. The “your” refers to that church, not to the men of that church only!
They are not permitted to speak. And permission is denied because of God’s original commands in Genesis, not because of some local restraint placed on them by woman-hater Paul. (Such rubbish actually circulates among us!)
In Paul’s mind the opposite of female authority is female submission, and he places it here as being a command from God in “the law”. In the same chapter (verse 21) he refers to Isaiah 28:1 as the “law”. For him "law" is a broad term that encompasses Genesis to Malachi.
Verse 35 mentions a possible incident that may have given rise to this apostolic injunction, but this does not in any way affect the strong language of verse 34. It is possible that women were shaming their husbands by raising their voices in the assembly and boldly questioning the speakers, ignoring the fact that their own husbands could supply them the knowledge needed.
At least this is the gist of the “myth” that has been created to make this verse understandable to us. I am not aware of the historical proof-text from which this story is lifted.
Paul tells them that such action is not called for, that women are to be silent. He settles that Corinthian issue, but in so doing he has settled our issue too, if we will hear him. Silence means no more questions! It follows that this also means, no teaching! If the simple asking of a query is met with such consternation by the man of God, with what spiritual rage would a full-blown lesson be met? Unthinkable!
Keep silent. It is shameful. Is this not clear enough? Much of the New Testament was written to correct a local issue. But for the most part, we do not shrug off the teachings because they were first written to the “early” Christians. We assume the eternality of a Word from God. Why not here?
He goes on to ask, (verse 36, paraphrase) Are you the originators of Scripture? Are you in charge here? Is it to be your feelings and experiences that will dictate the practices of the church of God?
More than that! (verse 37), even if there be among you a “godly” person who basks in his great revelations from Heaven, let him come down out of the clouds long enough to realize that we’re dealing here with the Prophet Moses and the Apostle Paul!
Of course (38), if you’d rather be ignorant, go ahead, but to your own peril.
Those who are convinced that modern woman must have her say in the church, attempt to place Paul against Paul. In the light of Paul’s burning criticism of female practices, they nimbly turn back a few chapters, to 11:4, and point out the phenomenon of the praying and prophesying woman. They say, Here! You see, women DID speak out in the assembly.
It is good for us that Paul himself wrote both of these passages only chapters apart, or
men would be pitting Paul against some other church leader. As it is, we need only to harmonize the thoughts of one man, convinced he did not contradict himself.
In the first place, it would be hard to prove that the woman mentioned here is praying or prophesying in a public assembly. The context is again man and woman relationship, and could easily be seen in the area of the home. Philip had 4 virgin daughters that prophesied, probably often. Prophesy was , in the Old Covenant at least, most often an individual, not a group, experience, and could appear anywhere.
It is of note in passing here that persons who come to this passage looking for relief for poor restricted women only find more restrictions on her liberty in the form of the head covering, another taboo topic for Western preachers.
We can be assured that this whole matter is just as offensive to modern woman as their required silence, but supporters swoop down and grab half a verse from this head-covering chapter for the sake of a needed proof- text.
Let’s suppose that a woman, in the assembly, using the gift of prophecy, is intended here. What is she doing? She is allowing her vessel to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and from there the Holy Spirit is speaking through her. In no way is she assuming authority given to a man. In no way is she striving to be seen or heard or exalted before the Body of Christ. This we must allow to explain the presence of the “prophetess” in Scripture. We will cover this matter later when speaking of Deborah.
In his letter to traveling companion and young minister Timothy, Paul gives instructions as to the set-up of the church’s governmental structure. Before stating the qualifications for a man who would be a church overseer or official servant, Paul specifically spells out the role of women, or “wives” if you prefer. (I Timothy 2:9)
He mentions modesty in dress, and good works. Then, consistent with his word to Corinth and God’s Word to Adam and Eve, he demands silence and submission. He goes a step further here, the step that is only implied to the Corinthians. A woman is never to
1) teach a man, or
2) have authority over a man.
His reasons are not cultural, historical, or temporary. And this is not “wicked Corinth” as some love to explain in his former words to describe the curiously evil people of that town. No, every age is wicked, including, and perhaps especially, our own, as we almost certainly have entered the great apostasy.
Be that as it may, it is Ephesus here addressed. And his reasons are theological, Scriptural, and based in the origins of all things.
1. Adam was formed first, creating the natural order.
2. Woman sinned first, bringing that natural order under law.
These words are so painful to the modern ear. This is a “hard saying” to them. But those who embrace hard sayings should allow it to make them hardened soldiers of Christ, and not allow rebellion to spoil the perfecting work of God.
Would this apostle approve of the present set-up of our churches? Would he favor women on the ruling board of a congregation? How about women teaching in an adult Bible class? I think not. May God give us grace to repent of anything that a Spirit- filled apostle would disapprove.
One method used by those perturbed by Paul’s teaching is to find any dear female of Scripture and call them in as witnesses to their point. Well, I believe I know these women too. I want to ask them to testify on the other side for awhile. Let me show you who these women really were, and how far they were from their modern counterparts.
In I Peter 3: 1-6, the apostle mentions how godly women of old trusted in God, stressed inner and not outward beauty, and were submissive to their own husbands. It is these qualities he looks for in their spiritual descendants, the women of the church.
Sarah is lifted up in Scripture as a woman who called her husband “lord” and could therefore see the lordship of God in her spouse. No church leader here!
Rebekkah, having heard God’s Word to her and her husband, favored Jacob, and did what she could to advance him, but never without full submission to her husband.
There were disobedient women too.
Dinah wandered off from her father’s covering. Zipporah defied the ways of God in Moses. Miriam spoke against that same Moses and was severely chastised.
The most prominent of Old Covenant women is Deborah. If there is a woman in the Bible that gives any credence to “female leadership” advocates, it is this incredible prophetess. Nevertheless a close examination of what the Bible actually records reveals that the entire extent of her work was the receiving of God’s wisdom miraculously for the people who came to her as she “would sit under the palm tree.”
This is how she “judged” the nation, through the wisdom of God, not the arm of fleshly power.
Here is no exalted elder. Here was a simple handmaiden of the Lord who received His messages and passed them on. She is never seen teaching in an assembly, taking authority over men.
When God called for the deliverance of Israel from its enemy, the prophetess called upon a man to do the work. With Deborah at his side, in respect for the Word of prophecy, the battle was won. The most she claims for herself in all of this is that she was “a mother in Israel.” (Judges 5:7)
So the principle is established in Deborah, not broken: In all visible ways, men must lead the people of God. But this dear woman teaches us that women will be used to receive revelation from God, prophecy, since gender is not a factor when the fullness of God is present.
This principle helps us to understand more fully Paul’s seeming “contradiction” in I Corinthians 14. There, women are commanded to be silent for all normal functions of the Church. But when God raises up a woman to speak (chapter 11), when He indeed fulfils the prophecy of Joel to pour His Spirit on His “handmaidens”, and they prophesy the Word of the Lord, or pray empowered by that same Spirit, let not any despise them.
After Deborah and the judges, the kings rule Israel. No women are seen ruling the Kingdom except in gross disobedience.
Jezebel is the domineering wife of Ahab who is obsessed with her own beauty and power. Her daughter Athaliah actually takes over the Kingdom of Judah after killing all but one of the royal heirs. Both of these women died violent deaths for their arrogance.
Oh! The men fared not well either in these days. Evil ruled the land. But the Kingdom had been given to men, was to be carried on by men, and was to culminate eventually in the Man Christ Jesus, Who shall reign forever and ever.
In the life of Jesus Himself, it is only with the most difficult “stretches” that we see any woman, even His mother, raised to “authority” by His command. Women give money to His cause. Women support their apostle husbands. Women tell the story of Jesus to their countrymen. Women praise Him and weep for Him, and women see His resurrected Body and announce such, but no woman rules or teaches any man in all the Gospels.
In the definitive history of our Church, the Book of Acts, one must prove or lose his case when dealing with church “issues.” If one cannot discern even a single female teacher or leader there, it becomes apparent that current female leadership is being driven by another spirit, not God’s.
Roman Catholics want to see Mary elevated in this book. Alas, only one mention of her name, and that in a list with several other disciples.
Then there is Sister Priscilla. 5 times is her name mentioned in the New Testament, 3 in Acts. Always she is seen with her husband. 3 of the 5 times she is mentioned second, 2 times she is mentioned first. It is nearly amusing to see female-authority advocates swoop down on those 2 lone passages as proof positive that women were to have the ascendancy at times.
This blessed couple, Aquila and Priscilla, or if you must, Priscilla and Aquila, were helpers of the Apostle Paul. We see them taking a personal interest in Preacher Apollos, setting him straight on some issues. We see a church in their home.
Of how that church operated and of any other activities of theirs or hers, we have no clue. With this scanty evidence it is not likely we should nominate her for the church board. I am sure Aquila learned from his friend Paul that this is simply not acceptable.
We have run out of history. The godly women of Scripture all submitted to their husbands. The ungodly rebelled and were judged. Women prophesied, but none ruled in Israel or the Church. None were called upon to teach except by Paul who asks older women to teach younger women (Titus 2:4).
Women are called to silence in the public assemblies except in the area of prophecy.
Are there no other female voices to be raised? What of sister Phoebe? A total of 2 verses describe all we know of her. In I Corinthians 16:1-2, we learn that she served the church, she needed assistance in that service, she helped many people, and she helped Paul.
To raise this servant of the Lord to church office and leadership is to, once more, ask Paul to contradict Paul! Is it likely that the apostle, having spoken so forcefully about women leading and teaching, would promote a woman who was doing that very thing? Is there not service that is not public, not authoritative?
Was this a widow woman who, like Dorcas, served the saints by making clothes for the needy? Was she a woman given to prayer? Was she blessing the orphans of Israel or ministering to the sick? All we know is that she served!
The Greek “diakonos”, a term here applied to Sister Phoebe, is translated servant, deacon, minister at various times in Paul’s writings. Paul and Phoebe are both called “diakonos”. Servant. Paul was not an “official” deacon. Nor was Phoebe.
Oh how we love to make a big deal about our titles! But in fact everyone who serves God IS a minister of God, a servant. Young and old and male and female are servants of God!
Ministers. Slaves, if you will. There is no “prominence” attached to this position. It is a lowly office, like the life that Jesus lived. It is washing stinking feet clothed in a towel. It is a call downward, not upward.
Distinct from this general servant-hood is the call for men to be “official” servants, deacons, chosen by the church, as were the original 7 of Acts 6. For these men, service was not given as they desired, but as the elders needed. These men could be called upon at any time to do jobs that the elders were too busy to perform.
Yes, “deacons” could preach and minister in the miraculous, but their calling was to be “on call.”
And why do I shift to “men” when I speak of these servants? Because all of the originals were men. Because the qualifications for their service involves having a godly wife. The idea of a female being exalted over the church was simply not in the mind of the founding apostles, nor should it be in our mind.
In short, Phoebe, our last applicant for pastor, or teacher, or even deacon, will have to be rejected. You may all step down now.
Is there no other woman then who in some way fits into a leadership role? I look through Paul’s other greetings and find a host of women serving Jesus. Junia is mentioned in Romans 16:7 as kinsmen of Paul and “of note” among the apostles. Does that mean the apostles noted them, or that they were themselves apostles? If Junia were indeed an apostle, it really would be noteworthy, because no other women were given this office. It fits no known pattern of the New Testament. Better to say that these fellow prisoners of Paul were noteworthy.
Better even to call them both men, because in many translations “Junia” becomes “Junias.”
No, they just aren’t there. There are MANY women who serve and served Jesus, but in the Sacred Record, none in authority. None. Paul did not allow it. Nor should we.
But wait. Brother John has a word for us. Another great apostle speaks! Actually it is Jesus speaking in Him, and He IS mentioning a woman in a leading position in the local church of her day, in Thyatira (Revelation 2:18 ff) . She is teaching. She obviously has quite a following.
She even calls herself a “prophetess” . Yes, her name is Jezebel. The New Testament Jezebel. A wicked woman has arisen and is teaching God’s people to be immoral idolaters.
No, no, I have not just labeled all modern female leaders “Jezebel.” I said that the only woman teacher of God’s people in all the Bible is a wicked woman. I cannot hold up before my readers any good example of a female leader, for there is none.
Here then is I believe, the whole counsel of God on this matter. Women do have specific tasks to perform in the church. They are to stand behind their husbands, serving him as the Lord. They are to pass the faith on to their daughters and grandchildren and other women who need teaching because of a lack of it at home.
But they must keep silent when the church assembles for worship, prayer and the Word of God. Is there a woman in this wicked age who can hear the voice of God and keep this hard word? I believe that a special reward will be hers when the Lord, Who sees all, returns to claim His own.
