PART 1 -- Introduction & understanding the mandate of the Lord in Genesis
I decided to title this series of posts “Scriptural Basis for the Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church” because I believe that it is exactly the legitimacy that is being challenged. In the dictionary, legitimacy is defined as, “allowed according to rules or laws, real, accepted, official”.
While there are so many churches out there limiting the role of women in leadership positions in the church (and even sometimes outside of the church), I believe that there is ample Biblical evidence to prove that this practice is harmful and is wrong. In other words, while I certainly believe that men and women are different in many ways and their genders are distinct and preserved, I see no support for limiting the functional roles of women because of their gender.
I would argue that in many places worldwide, and in many churches here in my home land of the United States of America, there is an illegitimate hierarchical, gender-based structure in place that has been and continues to limit women from functioning in their full God given capacity.
It is my desire to walk you through the Biblical truths that I believe support women in leadership and legitimize their full function and participation in advancing the Kingdom of God.
Before I get started I think it’s worth noting that I am writing this as a Bible believing born-again Christian and I am primarily writing this for an audience of the same description. I am not here to validate the authority of the Bible. If you continue to read, you must accept that I am writing with a full acceptance of the authority of scripture and it is upon which I am basing all my points. Also, clearly I am not the only one speaking and writing on this matter. I so appreciate all of the men and women who have gone before me and have helped to break things open. My only desire is to join efforts with all of them and fully demolish this stronghold of the enemy.
I want to start off laying a basic foundation, so we will begin in the beginning of the Bible, right in the Creation narrative found in Genesis 1:27-28.
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.(Genesis 1:27-28)
In these passages we can draw out and see many truths about who God created us to be. And since no one seems to be arguing about anything to do with the male gender, I will focus my discussion on the female. In verse 27, we can see that women were created in the image of God. While it tells us that mankind was created in God’s image, it further specifies both male and female were created by God in His image. So, in the beginning, there was no hierarchical structure that male was better than female. (or that female was better than male). Both were created in the image of God and together they would reflect the image of God on earth.
We also see in verse 28 that God blessed them. He didn't just bless the male, He didn't just bless the female, He blessed both of them. Then God spoke. He didn't just speak to the male, He didn't just speak to the female, He spoke to both of them. What God was about to say equally applied to both male and female. Next, I like to look at the verbs- the action words- of what God said to them. There seem to be 5 of them: Be (fruitful), increase, fill, subdue, and rule. These words will give us some insight into what God wanted of both men and women. It allows us to see His original intent and plan.
So what do these words mean? Let’s take them one at a time. Most of them are straight forward but you never really know for sure until you look them up. I like to be thorough and I want to teach you to do the same.
The first verb: BE. If you use what is called an “Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible”, you can look up the word in the original Hebrew and see that this verb is tied into the next word, fruitful. So what we are really defining here is what it means in the original text to “be fruitful”. It is the Hebrew word “parah” and there isn't much mystery to it, it simply means “bear fruit, cause to bear fruit, make fruitful or show fruitfulness”. Hmmm- let’s look up “fruitful” in our modern day dictionary just to see if it shines any additional light on this command. When I do that using Miriam- Webster’s I see that it says that fruitful means “abundantly productive, or conducive to an abundant yield.”
Using the same study methods, we continue on…
The second verb: INCREASE. Well, I think we all know what that means. It means to multiply or make more. And that’s exactly what it means in the original Hebrew (“rabah”) too.
The third verb: FILL. Again, straight forward, in original Hebrew (“male”) it means “to fill”. When we look up “fill” in dictionary we see some cool stuff: “to occupy the whole of”, “to spread through”, or “to put into as much as can be held or conveniently contained.”
The fourth verb: SUBDUE. This is the Hebrew word “kabash” and in the original Hebrew it means “to subject, subdue, force, keep under, bring into bondage”. In our current dictionary it means “to get control of by using force” or “to conquer and bring into subjection”.
The fifth verb: RULE. In Hebrew this is the word “radah”. It means “to rule, have dominion, dominate, tread down.” In our current dictionary we associate the word rule with “the exercise of authority or control” and “dominion”.
Okay, so perhaps that last part seemed a little detailed for you. Maybe not. Either way, there’s a reason I took the time to go through it all. I want you to see that when God created male and female in His image, to reflect Himself here on earth He also spoke to both of them and told them both to do all of the above.
Did you happen to notice that in the “to do” list for the woman (and man) were words like: “Subject”, “Force”, “Control”, “Dominate”, Rule”, “tread down”, and “exercise authority”?
God’s original plan was for male and female side by side to reflect God’s image here on earth. To take control of the earth, to dominate it, to rule over it. They were never meant to rule over each other, or dominate each other, they were meant to be fruitful and multiply with each other and fill the earth. In doing so, and being made in God’s image they were then to sustain the dominion of God throughout the earth.
Let’s take another look at those verses now and hopefully they come alive in a new way or solidify what you've already known.
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.(Genesis 1:27-28)
So that was how it all began. That was and is and always will be God’s plan for women (and men). So as I end today’s teaching here I want you to know that if you are a woman, you are indeed (1) created in the image of God (2) created to reflect God’s image here on Earth and (3) completely and legitimately able to exercise authority here on Earth.
There is absolutely no difference in the mandate from God to male or female. There is indeed a distinction of gender but there is no distinction of functional roles or purpose. If you believe a man can have authority on earth than you must believe a woman can as well. If you believe a man can rule and lead, then you must believe a woman can as well. We need both men and women to be fully functioning side by side in partnership in order to fully reflect God's image and purpose for us here on Earth. Keep this original creation of God and mandate of God in mind as we continue forth. Today’s teaching was pretty easy/short and sweet. But we know that things didn't stay this way and sin entered the picture and the curse of sin became a factor. But don’t worry- God’s original plan is still in place no matter what you've been taught about scripture limiting the roles of women and I plan to prove it to you.
Copyright © Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
While there are so many churches out there limiting the role of women in leadership positions in the church (and even sometimes outside of the church), I believe that there is ample Biblical evidence to prove that this practice is harmful and is wrong. In other words, while I certainly believe that men and women are different in many ways and their genders are distinct and preserved, I see no support for limiting the functional roles of women because of their gender.
I would argue that in many places worldwide, and in many churches here in my home land of the United States of America, there is an illegitimate hierarchical, gender-based structure in place that has been and continues to limit women from functioning in their full God given capacity.
It is my desire to walk you through the Biblical truths that I believe support women in leadership and legitimize their full function and participation in advancing the Kingdom of God.
Before I get started I think it’s worth noting that I am writing this as a Bible believing born-again Christian and I am primarily writing this for an audience of the same description. I am not here to validate the authority of the Bible. If you continue to read, you must accept that I am writing with a full acceptance of the authority of scripture and it is upon which I am basing all my points. Also, clearly I am not the only one speaking and writing on this matter. I so appreciate all of the men and women who have gone before me and have helped to break things open. My only desire is to join efforts with all of them and fully demolish this stronghold of the enemy.
I want to start off laying a basic foundation, so we will begin in the beginning of the Bible, right in the Creation narrative found in Genesis 1:27-28.
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.(Genesis 1:27-28)
In these passages we can draw out and see many truths about who God created us to be. And since no one seems to be arguing about anything to do with the male gender, I will focus my discussion on the female. In verse 27, we can see that women were created in the image of God. While it tells us that mankind was created in God’s image, it further specifies both male and female were created by God in His image. So, in the beginning, there was no hierarchical structure that male was better than female. (or that female was better than male). Both were created in the image of God and together they would reflect the image of God on earth.
We also see in verse 28 that God blessed them. He didn't just bless the male, He didn't just bless the female, He blessed both of them. Then God spoke. He didn't just speak to the male, He didn't just speak to the female, He spoke to both of them. What God was about to say equally applied to both male and female. Next, I like to look at the verbs- the action words- of what God said to them. There seem to be 5 of them: Be (fruitful), increase, fill, subdue, and rule. These words will give us some insight into what God wanted of both men and women. It allows us to see His original intent and plan.
So what do these words mean? Let’s take them one at a time. Most of them are straight forward but you never really know for sure until you look them up. I like to be thorough and I want to teach you to do the same.
The first verb: BE. If you use what is called an “Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible”, you can look up the word in the original Hebrew and see that this verb is tied into the next word, fruitful. So what we are really defining here is what it means in the original text to “be fruitful”. It is the Hebrew word “parah” and there isn't much mystery to it, it simply means “bear fruit, cause to bear fruit, make fruitful or show fruitfulness”. Hmmm- let’s look up “fruitful” in our modern day dictionary just to see if it shines any additional light on this command. When I do that using Miriam- Webster’s I see that it says that fruitful means “abundantly productive, or conducive to an abundant yield.”
Using the same study methods, we continue on…
The second verb: INCREASE. Well, I think we all know what that means. It means to multiply or make more. And that’s exactly what it means in the original Hebrew (“rabah”) too.
The third verb: FILL. Again, straight forward, in original Hebrew (“male”) it means “to fill”. When we look up “fill” in dictionary we see some cool stuff: “to occupy the whole of”, “to spread through”, or “to put into as much as can be held or conveniently contained.”
The fourth verb: SUBDUE. This is the Hebrew word “kabash” and in the original Hebrew it means “to subject, subdue, force, keep under, bring into bondage”. In our current dictionary it means “to get control of by using force” or “to conquer and bring into subjection”.
The fifth verb: RULE. In Hebrew this is the word “radah”. It means “to rule, have dominion, dominate, tread down.” In our current dictionary we associate the word rule with “the exercise of authority or control” and “dominion”.
Okay, so perhaps that last part seemed a little detailed for you. Maybe not. Either way, there’s a reason I took the time to go through it all. I want you to see that when God created male and female in His image, to reflect Himself here on earth He also spoke to both of them and told them both to do all of the above.
Did you happen to notice that in the “to do” list for the woman (and man) were words like: “Subject”, “Force”, “Control”, “Dominate”, Rule”, “tread down”, and “exercise authority”?
God’s original plan was for male and female side by side to reflect God’s image here on earth. To take control of the earth, to dominate it, to rule over it. They were never meant to rule over each other, or dominate each other, they were meant to be fruitful and multiply with each other and fill the earth. In doing so, and being made in God’s image they were then to sustain the dominion of God throughout the earth.
Let’s take another look at those verses now and hopefully they come alive in a new way or solidify what you've already known.
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.(Genesis 1:27-28)
So that was how it all began. That was and is and always will be God’s plan for women (and men). So as I end today’s teaching here I want you to know that if you are a woman, you are indeed (1) created in the image of God (2) created to reflect God’s image here on Earth and (3) completely and legitimately able to exercise authority here on Earth.
There is absolutely no difference in the mandate from God to male or female. There is indeed a distinction of gender but there is no distinction of functional roles or purpose. If you believe a man can have authority on earth than you must believe a woman can as well. If you believe a man can rule and lead, then you must believe a woman can as well. We need both men and women to be fully functioning side by side in partnership in order to fully reflect God's image and purpose for us here on Earth. Keep this original creation of God and mandate of God in mind as we continue forth. Today’s teaching was pretty easy/short and sweet. But we know that things didn't stay this way and sin entered the picture and the curse of sin became a factor. But don’t worry- God’s original plan is still in place no matter what you've been taught about scripture limiting the roles of women and I plan to prove it to you.
Copyright © Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 2 -- Understanding more from Genesis of God's original plan & the fall
Part 1 explained and went through God’s original creation and mandate to male and female. One of the things we learned is that the two of them together were made in God’s image and that they were both given the mandate (the directive with authority from God) to multiply and fill the earth and rule over it. I noted how there was no difference in the mandate given to the male vs. the female. They were one in the same. And everything was “very good” until sin entered.
Ch 2 of Genesis gives us a more detailed description of the creation of male and female. Male was created first by God and then female was created next by God. Female was created by God and fashioned around a rib that was removed from the first man’s (Adam) side. (As a side note (no pun intended), it is interesting that God created woman out of a portion of man’s side and not out of his head or not out of his foot.)
Anyway- back to scripture!
In Ch 3 we learn about “The Fall of Mankind” and how sin entered into the picture. There is no argument that the woman was indeed deceived by the serpent (Satan) and she sinned by eating from the tree that God had forbidden them to eat from. (God actually told Adam but I assume it got passed along to Eve because she did say to the serpent that God said she wasn’t supposed to eat from that tree. Genesis 3:3) So she was deceived and disobeyed God and sinned. Adam, who was actually with Eve during all of this (Genesis 3:6) also ate from the tree, and in doing so he also sinned and disobeyed God. Now we have sin in the Earth, and we are about to find out the consequences of that sin.
This isn’t a paper going through the intricacies of sin- so I will keep moving along staying on target for how this all relates to women in leadership and ministry in the church.
In Genesis Ch 3 we see God speaking to Adam, Eve (although she is not named that until v 20) and interestingly enough, the serpent/Satan as well. God speaks to them and lays out what we Christians have come to know as “the curse”. Let’s go through it.
Here’s what the Bible says in Genesis 3:14-19. It’s actually a long passage chock full of very interesting things so let’s go through it a few verses at a time. Hang in there with me because this is also going to play an important role down the road in understanding and validating women in leadership and ministry.
“So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, “Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”(Genesis 3:14-15)
What I’d like to point out here is how the enmity was put between the serpent /Satan and the woman. It wasn’t put between the serpent/Satan and man. So what exactly is enmity?
The actual Hebrew word is “eybah” and it means enmity or hatred. If we look up the definition of enmity we see it means “the state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.” Wow. That’s intense and continual hatred. And indeed, that is what we will see play out for a long while. God continued on however and said that while this enmity will continue on between the woman’s offspring and Satan’s, in the end, He told the serpent/Satan that the woman’s offspring would crush Satan’s head basically with his heel. In other words, this enmity will not go unchecked forever. There will come a time, somewhere throughout the offspring, where Satan will be crushed and God’s human offspring will win.
I do want to double back however and just call attention to the fact that this intense hatred and active hostile opposition was focused toward the woman and not the man. The man will get his own consequences too, but I think it is important that we see this little portion of truth for what it is.
Next in verse 16 God tells the woman, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”
Now remember in Part 1 when we talked about God’s original plan for man and woman, husband and wife and how they were given the mandate to rule together? Before sin, there was no suggestion of one of them ruling over the other one- that was never God’s plan. However, as a consequence of sin, we see that now God was letting them know that the husband would rule over the wife. This does not mean God’s heart changed or His original plan changed, this just means that sin brings with it consequences that are opposite to God’s desire. (Side note: This is precisely why God doesn’t want us to sin because He wants the best for us. He doesn’t want us caught up in the natural consequences that will follow behavior that is contrary to His will.)
The words used in the above verse are specifically talking about husband and wife. That a husband will rule over his wife. They are not saying “men will rule over women”. Once again, it’s important to point this out early on because we will be coming back to these very verses when we start going through the NT verses that “appear” to limit women in their leadership roles. However, it is accurate to interpret this verse as saying, as a consequence of sin, “husbands will rule over their wives” and we certainly have ample evidence that this occurred (and still does in some places) while the “curse” was in effect.
Verses 17-19 show the consequences of sin for Adam. While they are important to read through for Biblical study they don’t directly relate to the relevance of women in ministry so I will skip by them. I’d recommend skimming the passage anyway just so you know that it wasn’t just the serpent/Satan and the woman that had consequences to their sin. The man got some too and as you may know from Romans the line of sin is always traced back to Adam, not Eve. Yes, that has to do with the patriarchal society and the lineage records that were common, but the Bible does say in Romans 5:12
“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—“
That “one man” the Bible is talking about here is Adam. There are many more verses that say the same but again, it is not entirely relevant to our topic at hand.
So, in summary, after reading through this today I hope you can take hold of the fact that God’s original plan or His heart toward His creation did not change due to sin but He indeed spoke to them the consequences of their sin. All three of them, Satan, Eve and Adam were given direct consequences as a result of their sin (and I guess for Satan for his tampering with God’s beloved creation!). Even after these consequences, which are often referred to collectively as “the curse” (side note: Satan was really the only one cursed by God if you read the actual words) there was no justification or model in place for men to rule over women. There was however a consequence that the husband would rule over the wife.
As we continue forth, mostly jumping to Jesus and the New Testament writing of Paul, we will see how things did not stay this way.
Ch 2 of Genesis gives us a more detailed description of the creation of male and female. Male was created first by God and then female was created next by God. Female was created by God and fashioned around a rib that was removed from the first man’s (Adam) side. (As a side note (no pun intended), it is interesting that God created woman out of a portion of man’s side and not out of his head or not out of his foot.)
Anyway- back to scripture!
In Ch 3 we learn about “The Fall of Mankind” and how sin entered into the picture. There is no argument that the woman was indeed deceived by the serpent (Satan) and she sinned by eating from the tree that God had forbidden them to eat from. (God actually told Adam but I assume it got passed along to Eve because she did say to the serpent that God said she wasn’t supposed to eat from that tree. Genesis 3:3) So she was deceived and disobeyed God and sinned. Adam, who was actually with Eve during all of this (Genesis 3:6) also ate from the tree, and in doing so he also sinned and disobeyed God. Now we have sin in the Earth, and we are about to find out the consequences of that sin.
This isn’t a paper going through the intricacies of sin- so I will keep moving along staying on target for how this all relates to women in leadership and ministry in the church.
In Genesis Ch 3 we see God speaking to Adam, Eve (although she is not named that until v 20) and interestingly enough, the serpent/Satan as well. God speaks to them and lays out what we Christians have come to know as “the curse”. Let’s go through it.
Here’s what the Bible says in Genesis 3:14-19. It’s actually a long passage chock full of very interesting things so let’s go through it a few verses at a time. Hang in there with me because this is also going to play an important role down the road in understanding and validating women in leadership and ministry.
“So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, “Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”(Genesis 3:14-15)
What I’d like to point out here is how the enmity was put between the serpent /Satan and the woman. It wasn’t put between the serpent/Satan and man. So what exactly is enmity?
The actual Hebrew word is “eybah” and it means enmity or hatred. If we look up the definition of enmity we see it means “the state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.” Wow. That’s intense and continual hatred. And indeed, that is what we will see play out for a long while. God continued on however and said that while this enmity will continue on between the woman’s offspring and Satan’s, in the end, He told the serpent/Satan that the woman’s offspring would crush Satan’s head basically with his heel. In other words, this enmity will not go unchecked forever. There will come a time, somewhere throughout the offspring, where Satan will be crushed and God’s human offspring will win.
I do want to double back however and just call attention to the fact that this intense hatred and active hostile opposition was focused toward the woman and not the man. The man will get his own consequences too, but I think it is important that we see this little portion of truth for what it is.
Next in verse 16 God tells the woman, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”
Now remember in Part 1 when we talked about God’s original plan for man and woman, husband and wife and how they were given the mandate to rule together? Before sin, there was no suggestion of one of them ruling over the other one- that was never God’s plan. However, as a consequence of sin, we see that now God was letting them know that the husband would rule over the wife. This does not mean God’s heart changed or His original plan changed, this just means that sin brings with it consequences that are opposite to God’s desire. (Side note: This is precisely why God doesn’t want us to sin because He wants the best for us. He doesn’t want us caught up in the natural consequences that will follow behavior that is contrary to His will.)
The words used in the above verse are specifically talking about husband and wife. That a husband will rule over his wife. They are not saying “men will rule over women”. Once again, it’s important to point this out early on because we will be coming back to these very verses when we start going through the NT verses that “appear” to limit women in their leadership roles. However, it is accurate to interpret this verse as saying, as a consequence of sin, “husbands will rule over their wives” and we certainly have ample evidence that this occurred (and still does in some places) while the “curse” was in effect.
Verses 17-19 show the consequences of sin for Adam. While they are important to read through for Biblical study they don’t directly relate to the relevance of women in ministry so I will skip by them. I’d recommend skimming the passage anyway just so you know that it wasn’t just the serpent/Satan and the woman that had consequences to their sin. The man got some too and as you may know from Romans the line of sin is always traced back to Adam, not Eve. Yes, that has to do with the patriarchal society and the lineage records that were common, but the Bible does say in Romans 5:12
“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—“
That “one man” the Bible is talking about here is Adam. There are many more verses that say the same but again, it is not entirely relevant to our topic at hand.
So, in summary, after reading through this today I hope you can take hold of the fact that God’s original plan or His heart toward His creation did not change due to sin but He indeed spoke to them the consequences of their sin. All three of them, Satan, Eve and Adam were given direct consequences as a result of their sin (and I guess for Satan for his tampering with God’s beloved creation!). Even after these consequences, which are often referred to collectively as “the curse” (side note: Satan was really the only one cursed by God if you read the actual words) there was no justification or model in place for men to rule over women. There was however a consequence that the husband would rule over the wife.
As we continue forth, mostly jumping to Jesus and the New Testament writing of Paul, we will see how things did not stay this way.
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 3 -- Understanding how the Lord used Deborah of the Old Testament, Judge & Prophetess.
While there are many notable and history changing women mentioned in the Old Testament, I want to briefly stop at one woman by the name of Deborah. I feel like she is the perfect woman to examine in our discussion of the legitimacy of women in leadership. She enters into the record of scripture in the Book of Judges. Let me remind you this is a “post fall, pre-Jesus death and resurrection” time period. Also, let me remind you, this is scripture in the Bible!
Before we look specifically at what the scriptures say about Deborah, I want to make sure everyone understands what the Book of Judges is about and what exactly a “judge” was back then, in this context.
The Hebrew word which is used for judges (As in Judges 2:16 “Then the LORD raised up judges who saved them out of the hands of these raiders. “) is the word “shaphat” and it means, ”to judge, govern, vindicate, punish”. It also means “to act as law giver, to decide controversy, to rule, to execute judgement”. In a few sentence summary, Judges is a book that chronicles the history of Israel under each successive Judge. There was only one Judge at a time and they basically led the country in many ways, one main way being strategic military defense against any foreign invaders. God would deliver Israel from the enemy, the people would praise God, then people would forget God, enemies would begin to attack again and God would save them, they would return to God...repeat...repeat.
All of the judges were men EXCEPT ONE- Deborah!
So we can’t gloss over her. We can’t say God never uses women because clearly He does as we have example of one right here in Deborah. And this is Old Testament times! Deborah is one of my favorite women to teach about so let’s look at what the Bible tells us about her and her role in history.
Judges 4:4 says “Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time.”
So from this introduction we learn that Deborah, first and foremost, is a woman. If it’s not clear from her name (which I bring up because sometimes there is controversy over whether a name is male or female) then it is made crystal clear from the statement that she is a wife. Next, we learn that she is a prophet (if you want to go with prophetess I have no issue with that either). The Hebrew root word used here is “nabiy” which means “speaker, spokesman, or prophet”. In Webster’s dictionary a prophet is defined as “someone who delivers messages believed to have come from God” or “one regarded by a group of followers as the final authoritative revealer of God's will” .
Continuing on, we see that Deborah was leading Israel at the time. The word for leading is actually the same word used for judging (“shaphat”) which we defined above.
From this one passage alone we can see that God put a woman in leadership over an entire nation and that woman’s leadership included: judging, governing, vindicating, punishing, law giving, ruling, and settling controversy. Deborah also was a prophet so she spoke with authority and revealed God’s will.
If we continue reading in the next verses we see a number of things that further show how God used a woman even in Old Testament times.
She held court, she settled disputes (which goes hand in hand with part of her “job description” above). She also summoned a military leader named Barak, prophesied speaking a command of the Lord to him to enter into a particular battle and the victory would be his. Barak replied saying to Deborah, “if you go with me I will go, but if you do not go with me, I won’t go”. Interesting…but that’s a story for another day.
Deborah agrees to go with him but of course, because Barak handled it this way, the ultimate victory, he is told, will go to a woman (spoiler: it’ll be Jael, another woman!)
And it does indeed all work out.
Okay, so this is what I’d like to point out in addition to what I already focused on.
Remember how Deborah was married? Yes, she was married and it wasn’t to Barak! And yet here we have an example, a positive, holy, God inspired and creative example of a woman in ministry/leadership without her husband. She went into battle with Barak, not her husband, and in keeping God’s ways the victory was still won for Israel.
Now, before anyone thinks I am writing a paper to encourage women to find men other than their husbands to enter into battle with, or before you think I’m discouraging wives from working in unity and partnership with their husbands to bring forth God’s plans, let me be clear….I’m not doing either of those. I am however emphatically pointing out a truth of scripture where a woman (In this case a married woman) in leadership functioned properly in her role and function and a man partnered with and respected her leadership and insight from God and it saved a nation and revealed God in a big way!
This is just one example of how God’s desire/heart was never to stop using women but we will find many more examples of God raising up women to lead and also further His Kingdom on the earth. When we compare Deborah’s function to the original mandate given to both male and female, we can see that Deborah was really operating in line with that original purpose and plan. Male and female side by side ruling over and subduing the enemy.
A lot of pastors these days won’t preach on Deborah. They’ll tell you about Samson or Gideon but rarely Deborah. She doesn’t seem to fit into their mold and beliefs that restrict women in leadership. I argue that you can’t make a statement about women and leadership and say it is “from God” if we have an example right here that contradicts any limitation. I would argue that you can’t ignore Deborah. You can’t try to twist her story or make it disappear. It is right there in all of our Bibles and it reflects God’s heart for women. Why aren’t little girls and boys sitting in Sunday School hearing about this remarkable woman leader? Really, why aren’t they?
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
Before we look specifically at what the scriptures say about Deborah, I want to make sure everyone understands what the Book of Judges is about and what exactly a “judge” was back then, in this context.
The Hebrew word which is used for judges (As in Judges 2:16 “Then the LORD raised up judges who saved them out of the hands of these raiders. “) is the word “shaphat” and it means, ”to judge, govern, vindicate, punish”. It also means “to act as law giver, to decide controversy, to rule, to execute judgement”. In a few sentence summary, Judges is a book that chronicles the history of Israel under each successive Judge. There was only one Judge at a time and they basically led the country in many ways, one main way being strategic military defense against any foreign invaders. God would deliver Israel from the enemy, the people would praise God, then people would forget God, enemies would begin to attack again and God would save them, they would return to God...repeat...repeat.
All of the judges were men EXCEPT ONE- Deborah!
So we can’t gloss over her. We can’t say God never uses women because clearly He does as we have example of one right here in Deborah. And this is Old Testament times! Deborah is one of my favorite women to teach about so let’s look at what the Bible tells us about her and her role in history.
Judges 4:4 says “Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time.”
So from this introduction we learn that Deborah, first and foremost, is a woman. If it’s not clear from her name (which I bring up because sometimes there is controversy over whether a name is male or female) then it is made crystal clear from the statement that she is a wife. Next, we learn that she is a prophet (if you want to go with prophetess I have no issue with that either). The Hebrew root word used here is “nabiy” which means “speaker, spokesman, or prophet”. In Webster’s dictionary a prophet is defined as “someone who delivers messages believed to have come from God” or “one regarded by a group of followers as the final authoritative revealer of God's will” .
Continuing on, we see that Deborah was leading Israel at the time. The word for leading is actually the same word used for judging (“shaphat”) which we defined above.
From this one passage alone we can see that God put a woman in leadership over an entire nation and that woman’s leadership included: judging, governing, vindicating, punishing, law giving, ruling, and settling controversy. Deborah also was a prophet so she spoke with authority and revealed God’s will.
If we continue reading in the next verses we see a number of things that further show how God used a woman even in Old Testament times.
She held court, she settled disputes (which goes hand in hand with part of her “job description” above). She also summoned a military leader named Barak, prophesied speaking a command of the Lord to him to enter into a particular battle and the victory would be his. Barak replied saying to Deborah, “if you go with me I will go, but if you do not go with me, I won’t go”. Interesting…but that’s a story for another day.
Deborah agrees to go with him but of course, because Barak handled it this way, the ultimate victory, he is told, will go to a woman (spoiler: it’ll be Jael, another woman!)
And it does indeed all work out.
Okay, so this is what I’d like to point out in addition to what I already focused on.
Remember how Deborah was married? Yes, she was married and it wasn’t to Barak! And yet here we have an example, a positive, holy, God inspired and creative example of a woman in ministry/leadership without her husband. She went into battle with Barak, not her husband, and in keeping God’s ways the victory was still won for Israel.
Now, before anyone thinks I am writing a paper to encourage women to find men other than their husbands to enter into battle with, or before you think I’m discouraging wives from working in unity and partnership with their husbands to bring forth God’s plans, let me be clear….I’m not doing either of those. I am however emphatically pointing out a truth of scripture where a woman (In this case a married woman) in leadership functioned properly in her role and function and a man partnered with and respected her leadership and insight from God and it saved a nation and revealed God in a big way!
This is just one example of how God’s desire/heart was never to stop using women but we will find many more examples of God raising up women to lead and also further His Kingdom on the earth. When we compare Deborah’s function to the original mandate given to both male and female, we can see that Deborah was really operating in line with that original purpose and plan. Male and female side by side ruling over and subduing the enemy.
A lot of pastors these days won’t preach on Deborah. They’ll tell you about Samson or Gideon but rarely Deborah. She doesn’t seem to fit into their mold and beliefs that restrict women in leadership. I argue that you can’t make a statement about women and leadership and say it is “from God” if we have an example right here that contradicts any limitation. I would argue that you can’t ignore Deborah. You can’t try to twist her story or make it disappear. It is right there in all of our Bibles and it reflects God’s heart for women. Why aren’t little girls and boys sitting in Sunday School hearing about this remarkable woman leader? Really, why aren’t they?
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 4 -- Foundational considerations regarding original context
Before jumping to the New Testament, in this 4th part of the series, I want to make a few statements that I think are basic, well-agreed upon statements. And then of course I’ll try to make them come alive in a relevant way. If you miss having specific verses and such, no worries, just understand that I have to lay some foundation here and I really don’t want to write a 15 part series. We’ll get back to line upon line soon enough!
So, the first point is that there is a time period of roughly 400 years between the Old Testament time period and the beginning of the New Testament. In other words, a lot happened in history that isn’t recorded here. Sometimes it is referred to as “the silent years”, but regardless of what you want to call it, the events of the New Testament take place 400 years after the events recorded in Malachi, the last book of the Old Testament. The reason I bring this up is because it is important for us to understand that Jesus was not born into the same culture of Malachi, or other Old Testament culture. Sure, some of it was the same, but a lot of stuff happened throughout those 400 years, and the culture changed a lot. (For instance, have you ever stopped to notice that there were no Pharisees or Sadducees in the Old Testament but there are in the New Testament?) While there is no record of these 400 years in the Bible per se, they certainly did take place in reality and there are countless records of them in history books. (Remember hearing about Alexander the Great and then the Roman Empire? Yeah…that was during this time. Want to know what the Jewish Festival of Lights/Hanukah is all about? Yep-this time period too!)
I was thinking a modern equivalent would be like if we read something the Pilgrims wrote as they landed in America, and then turned the page to read something that was written right now! (2014). I think we can all agree that a lot has happened in the history of our country since 1620. While many things remain the same, our culture is entirely different. We have things like planes and automobiles and computers and internet. We have microwave popcorn and traffic lights and space shuttles. We no longer have slaves (if you want to argue, I’ll rephrase it to we no longer have legal slaves), women can vote and races can marry. It is a “different world”. Keep this in mind as we read scripture from the gospels and epistles of Paul.
Second, the 4 gospels all record the basic story of Jesus and his life from birth to death and resurrection. Do you ever wonder why we have 4 gospels? I mean, why do we need 4 different accounts of the same thing? Most scholars agree that each gospel is written in a particular way for a particular people group/audience. While all 4 Gospels are indeed for everyone, the nuances of each individual book seemed to be geared more toward one of the dominant people groups at the time. You can check this out on your own and make sure it’s not just “Eileen’s idea” (trust me, its not…but be “Berean” and verify what I’m saying also!)
Of the four gospels, Matthew seems to be written with the Jews in mind. Mark seems to be written with the Romans in mind, and Luke with the Greeks in mind. John appears to be the most universal of all, appealing to all equally. Let me say with 100% clarity that I believe all four of the gospels, as well as the rest of the Bible, is the divinely inspired word of God and is useful to all of us. I would just like you to understand that there were different groups of people that were the prime audience of New Testament writings. The three main groups were the Jews, the Romans and the Greeks.
When we get to the other books of the New Testament, specifically the epistles written by Paul, it is important to note that these were actual letters written to a specific group of people, in a specific setting at a specific time. Does this mean that I am saying that these books of the Bible are irrelevant to us now? No, that’s not what I am saying. Again, I believe ALL scripture is relevant to us today. What I am saying, or starting to lay a foundation for saying later (haha), is that we must understand the original context of the book (of the Bible) that we are reading. The principles expressed will hold true over time if the context holds true.
In other words, if you today find yourself in a situation similar to the situation at the time of the writing and the circumstances are the same, then the truth taught way back then will still apply to your situation today. However, if you are not in a similar situation and the circumstances surrounding you are different, then the advice given back then very likely will not apply to your situation today. Now keep in mind that the Bible is God’s word and God’s word covers many “layers”. What do I mean by “layers”, well, God’s word speaks to specific situations but also speaks more general truths that aren’t as specific.
Let me explain what I mean by this. First a general example for now and then I’ll bring in many scriptural examples as we progress.
General example: I give a little boy 20 nutter butter cookies. (In case you are unfamiliar with these cookies, they contain peanut butter) Another little boy and little girl come over and they have nothing to eat and are clearly very hungry. I would advise the first boy to share his cookies with both the second boy and the girl. I would advise this because it reflects God’s heart to do so. It is consistent with His heart for us to “prefer others over ourselves”, “God loves a cheerful giver” and numerous other scriptural truths throughout the whole breadth of the Bible.
However, let’s say that the circumstances change a little whereas the entire situation is the same except the little girl has a life threatening peanut allergy. In this case, my best advice would be to share these particular cookies with the second boy but do not by any means share them with the girl. In fact, I would be pretty emphatic about it and would have no other practice given these circumstances. This advice would still reflect the heart of God and would be supported by many passages of scripture as well. And yet, the advice given, if one does not take into account the specific circumstances, could produce some wildly wrong conclusions of how God wants us to treat others. Some conclusions might be that (a) we are only required or advised to share with ONE other person (b) we should only share with males and not females (c) it is okay to be mean to some and not others (d) girls should never eat peanuts/nutter butter cookies, (e) etc.
Getting back to my “layers” comment above, if we familiarized ourselves with all the various circumstances of the scenarios above, we would be able to draw a specific truth from the above examples which is to never give food containing peanuts to someone with a life threatening peanut allergy. But we would also see that there is a general truth that “sharing is good”. In the future, if I found myself in a similar situation where I had 2 cookies and 2 hungry people in need, I could ask myself, “is this situation the same as the first example? the second example? Do either of these people have peanut allergies? Do my cookies even have peanuts in them?” In asking these questions I would be able to discern if I am able to apply the specific truth or if I am to just apply the general truth because the specific circumstances are different than the original.
Going one step further, let’s say that I get three letters in my inbox regarding this very issue.
One email is from one location involving a girl with a peanut allergy and a boy who has peanut butter cookies. I write a return letter advising “Do not by any means give the girl your cookies”.
Another is from a second, entirely different location and involves a girl who has no allergies and a boy who has peanut butter cookies. I write a return letter advising, “By all means, share your cookies with her”.
Third email is from yet another location and involves a girl who has peanut butter cookies and a boy who is hungry and has no allergies. I write back advising once again “By all means, share your cookies with him”.
I take the time to write all this out (wow it was a lot of writing!) to drive home the point of how important it is to know the original context of the letters being written by Paul. As we move forward we will see how Paul’s letters were written to many different churches that were facing very different situations. We will see that of all the letters written by Paul and all the verses relating to women, there are but only a few that seem to bring any restriction to women. To take one part of one letter that he wrote (that stands in contrast to what he has written in other letters!) and try to apply it universally and out of context is just not smart. It would be the same as taking our above example and concluding that a boy should never share his cookies with a girl. The only problem is, if you look above, you’ll see I actually advised that the boy should share his cookies with the girl in the second situation! Hmmm, so when we see that there is apparently conflicting advice written by the same apostle (Paul) we are best to take our time and look at the whole volume of scripture and all its circumstances as we seek the true heart of God toward women.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
So, the first point is that there is a time period of roughly 400 years between the Old Testament time period and the beginning of the New Testament. In other words, a lot happened in history that isn’t recorded here. Sometimes it is referred to as “the silent years”, but regardless of what you want to call it, the events of the New Testament take place 400 years after the events recorded in Malachi, the last book of the Old Testament. The reason I bring this up is because it is important for us to understand that Jesus was not born into the same culture of Malachi, or other Old Testament culture. Sure, some of it was the same, but a lot of stuff happened throughout those 400 years, and the culture changed a lot. (For instance, have you ever stopped to notice that there were no Pharisees or Sadducees in the Old Testament but there are in the New Testament?) While there is no record of these 400 years in the Bible per se, they certainly did take place in reality and there are countless records of them in history books. (Remember hearing about Alexander the Great and then the Roman Empire? Yeah…that was during this time. Want to know what the Jewish Festival of Lights/Hanukah is all about? Yep-this time period too!)
I was thinking a modern equivalent would be like if we read something the Pilgrims wrote as they landed in America, and then turned the page to read something that was written right now! (2014). I think we can all agree that a lot has happened in the history of our country since 1620. While many things remain the same, our culture is entirely different. We have things like planes and automobiles and computers and internet. We have microwave popcorn and traffic lights and space shuttles. We no longer have slaves (if you want to argue, I’ll rephrase it to we no longer have legal slaves), women can vote and races can marry. It is a “different world”. Keep this in mind as we read scripture from the gospels and epistles of Paul.
Second, the 4 gospels all record the basic story of Jesus and his life from birth to death and resurrection. Do you ever wonder why we have 4 gospels? I mean, why do we need 4 different accounts of the same thing? Most scholars agree that each gospel is written in a particular way for a particular people group/audience. While all 4 Gospels are indeed for everyone, the nuances of each individual book seemed to be geared more toward one of the dominant people groups at the time. You can check this out on your own and make sure it’s not just “Eileen’s idea” (trust me, its not…but be “Berean” and verify what I’m saying also!)
Of the four gospels, Matthew seems to be written with the Jews in mind. Mark seems to be written with the Romans in mind, and Luke with the Greeks in mind. John appears to be the most universal of all, appealing to all equally. Let me say with 100% clarity that I believe all four of the gospels, as well as the rest of the Bible, is the divinely inspired word of God and is useful to all of us. I would just like you to understand that there were different groups of people that were the prime audience of New Testament writings. The three main groups were the Jews, the Romans and the Greeks.
When we get to the other books of the New Testament, specifically the epistles written by Paul, it is important to note that these were actual letters written to a specific group of people, in a specific setting at a specific time. Does this mean that I am saying that these books of the Bible are irrelevant to us now? No, that’s not what I am saying. Again, I believe ALL scripture is relevant to us today. What I am saying, or starting to lay a foundation for saying later (haha), is that we must understand the original context of the book (of the Bible) that we are reading. The principles expressed will hold true over time if the context holds true.
In other words, if you today find yourself in a situation similar to the situation at the time of the writing and the circumstances are the same, then the truth taught way back then will still apply to your situation today. However, if you are not in a similar situation and the circumstances surrounding you are different, then the advice given back then very likely will not apply to your situation today. Now keep in mind that the Bible is God’s word and God’s word covers many “layers”. What do I mean by “layers”, well, God’s word speaks to specific situations but also speaks more general truths that aren’t as specific.
Let me explain what I mean by this. First a general example for now and then I’ll bring in many scriptural examples as we progress.
General example: I give a little boy 20 nutter butter cookies. (In case you are unfamiliar with these cookies, they contain peanut butter) Another little boy and little girl come over and they have nothing to eat and are clearly very hungry. I would advise the first boy to share his cookies with both the second boy and the girl. I would advise this because it reflects God’s heart to do so. It is consistent with His heart for us to “prefer others over ourselves”, “God loves a cheerful giver” and numerous other scriptural truths throughout the whole breadth of the Bible.
However, let’s say that the circumstances change a little whereas the entire situation is the same except the little girl has a life threatening peanut allergy. In this case, my best advice would be to share these particular cookies with the second boy but do not by any means share them with the girl. In fact, I would be pretty emphatic about it and would have no other practice given these circumstances. This advice would still reflect the heart of God and would be supported by many passages of scripture as well. And yet, the advice given, if one does not take into account the specific circumstances, could produce some wildly wrong conclusions of how God wants us to treat others. Some conclusions might be that (a) we are only required or advised to share with ONE other person (b) we should only share with males and not females (c) it is okay to be mean to some and not others (d) girls should never eat peanuts/nutter butter cookies, (e) etc.
Getting back to my “layers” comment above, if we familiarized ourselves with all the various circumstances of the scenarios above, we would be able to draw a specific truth from the above examples which is to never give food containing peanuts to someone with a life threatening peanut allergy. But we would also see that there is a general truth that “sharing is good”. In the future, if I found myself in a similar situation where I had 2 cookies and 2 hungry people in need, I could ask myself, “is this situation the same as the first example? the second example? Do either of these people have peanut allergies? Do my cookies even have peanuts in them?” In asking these questions I would be able to discern if I am able to apply the specific truth or if I am to just apply the general truth because the specific circumstances are different than the original.
Going one step further, let’s say that I get three letters in my inbox regarding this very issue.
One email is from one location involving a girl with a peanut allergy and a boy who has peanut butter cookies. I write a return letter advising “Do not by any means give the girl your cookies”.
Another is from a second, entirely different location and involves a girl who has no allergies and a boy who has peanut butter cookies. I write a return letter advising, “By all means, share your cookies with her”.
Third email is from yet another location and involves a girl who has peanut butter cookies and a boy who is hungry and has no allergies. I write back advising once again “By all means, share your cookies with him”.
I take the time to write all this out (wow it was a lot of writing!) to drive home the point of how important it is to know the original context of the letters being written by Paul. As we move forward we will see how Paul’s letters were written to many different churches that were facing very different situations. We will see that of all the letters written by Paul and all the verses relating to women, there are but only a few that seem to bring any restriction to women. To take one part of one letter that he wrote (that stands in contrast to what he has written in other letters!) and try to apply it universally and out of context is just not smart. It would be the same as taking our above example and concluding that a boy should never share his cookies with a girl. The only problem is, if you look above, you’ll see I actually advised that the boy should share his cookies with the girl in the second situation! Hmmm, so when we see that there is apparently conflicting advice written by the same apostle (Paul) we are best to take our time and look at the whole volume of scripture and all its circumstances as we seek the true heart of God toward women.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 5 -- Understanding 1st century Jewish cultural attitude toward women, Jesus' attitude toward women & initiating the concept: the Cross is the beginning of redemption for women.
(Just a reminder that as the title suggests- this is Part 5 in an ongoing series. Each “part” is just a small installment in the larger view of the scriptural evidence for the legitimacy of women in leadership within the church.)
As we come into the New Testament scriptures, we are immediately introduced to first century culture. We are given four gospel accounts which teach us about Jesus, His time here on Earth, and His death and ultimate physical resurrection back into Heaven. I am assuming that most of my readers here are familiar with the gospels, but if not, definitely read through one or more of them!
Throughout these historical accounts, we learn that there are now several groups that are often mentioned: Pharisees, Sadducees, Greeks, Romans, gentiles, Jews, slaves, women….and others I’m sure. This lets us know that times have changed a bit since we left OT times (as mentioned in Part 4). During the time between the end of the OT and the beginning of the NT 400 years passed. One of the main historical things that happened in Palestine/Israel and really a large sweeping area surrounding it, was the rule of Alexander the Great. He was Greek, and as He began conquering different land masses and regions, Hellinization took place. That just means that the Greek culture and world view began to take over and permeate the other cultures. This was happening in the region of the Jews and some of the Jews were more relaxed and open to it even though they still identified with Mosaic law and this group (for this and other reasons) became known as the Sadducees. A different group was completely opposed to any Greek influence and desired to cling strictly to the Mosaic law. This group became known as the Pharisees. (These were not the only differences between Pharisees and Sadducees).
Both the Pharisees and Sadducees believed in the Mosaic Law- the commandments God gave to Moses, but the Pharisees also began to add to those laws an “oral Law”, which they believed was verbal instruction that God gave to Moses accompanying the written Law. They held both of these Laws to be of equal value even though the oral Law was completely created by man to help explain and further hedge up the written Law. The intent of the Pharisees was noble, but their actions of creating more laws (to help keep the Mosaic laws) ended up missing the true heart of God and they found themselves being harshly criticized by Jesus and at odds with Him.
So by this time in the culture, we have a large, ruling group of Jewish people (the Pharisees were not just a religious group but also a political group) who have hyper-inflated God’s written Law (all 613 rules of it) with many, many additional rules and requirements, as well as their explanations of what the laws really mean. This bundle of Oral Law is now written down and known as the Talmud in Judaism, in case you want to look into it more. While it is said to be 2,711 pages in length, one estimate says that it would be over 6,000 pages in standard print. So you can see, that’s a lot of explaining and extra additions to the Mosaic Law and this is why Jesus always called them out on it! Keep in mind, Jesus never sinned and yet he did break several laws according to the Pharisees. But it was their man-made laws He broke, not God’s.
Just look at Matthew Chapter 23 to see how Jesus felt about the Pharisees’ practice. It’s the whole “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees” chapter. You’ll see it begins with Jesus telling His disciples and the crowds (in v 1-2) “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat…” and it continues on in such a powerful, very clear rebuke of them. God gave laws to Moses but never told the Pharisees to make up all these additional rules and to hold themselves in such false righteousness and pride. Please, go get you Bible or pull it up on your computer now and read through this chapter! I want you to see for yourself how huge this man- made religious system was and how much Jesus hated it. (Jesus still loved the Pharisees themselves and many did repent and believe in Him, but Jesus hated the “spirit” of the Pharisees as it was NOT the Spirit of God leading their “Law”)
Jesus just called out many of the Pharisee’s man made rules but let’s look at just a few of these man made Pharisaical rules that I was able to find that were part of their Oral Law at the time. These, again, are just a FEW of the many that pertain to women. (I am not a Hebrew scholar, and do not claim to fully understand the intricacies of the Talmud but the citations are listed as I found them and these are pretty easy to search out and confirm on your own.)
“May the words of Torah be burned, than that they should be handed over to women.” Sotah, 10a
“Whoever teaches his daughter Torah teaches her obscenity.” Sotah 21b
“One is not so much as to greet a woman.” (Talmud Berakhoth 43b)
Perhaps another illustration would be to compare how in Leviticus (part of Mosaic Law from God) it talks about how a woman is unclean for 7 days from the start of her monthly period. However, in the Talmud, numerous additions are made which extend this to 14 days and also a ceremonial cleansing bath.
Another example comes in the form of a morning prayer. This prayer is still said every morning by many (not all) Jews around the world.
"Blessed are you, O God for not having made me a Gentile.
Blessed are you, O God, for not having made me a slave.
Blessed are you, O God, for not having made me a woman."
(teaser alert: Keep this in mind when Paul writes to the Galatians, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”)
So, you start to get a feel for how Judaism was not exactly the same thing as the Mosaic Law handed down from God to Moses for the Jewish people.
Alright so, in the midst of all this Jesus is born and begins his public ministry about 30 years later.
Keeping in mind my earlier point and also a key tenet of Christianity, Jesus never sinned. He walked on Earth as man but He was and is God. While on Earth, He kept in perfect step with the heart of God. The best way for us to see the heart of God…the same God who spoke to the man and woman in Genesis 1…is to see Jesus. To see how He acted, to see what He did, to see what He didn’t do, and to listen to what He said.
Simply put, the people living on the Earth when Jesus was about to begin his ministry were either Jews or Gentiles. And those who were Jews were doing their best to hold true to what they believed was their Jewish faith. However, as I’ve already made clear the Pharisees had added their own “Law” to God’s Law and aggressively monitored others adherence to it, so in practicality, a large amount of vocal and powerful Jews were now really just following a religion called Judaism. This is why we are about to see a radical shift because Jesus was not on the earth to communicate the heart of Judaism…He was on the Earth to communicate the heart of God and reconcile mankind (which includes male and female) back to God and His original mandate to them.
Let’s look at how Jesus treated women. For time sake, I’m assuming most of you will be familiar with these, but if not, I’ve listed at least one reference next to each example. (note: there are plenty more scriptures than I’ve listed to support these)
Jesus spoke to women directly. (John 11 Martha after Lazarus’ death, John 4:7-26, woman at the well)
Jesus healed women. (Matthew 7:14-15, Peter’s mother in law with fever)
Jesus let women learn and hear His teachings. (Luke 10:38-42, Mary and Martha speak and listen to Jesus)
Jesus allowed women to speak to Him and he listened and responded. (Matthew 15:21-28, faith of a Canaanite woman)
Jesus allowed women to touch him. (Matthew 9:20-22, woman with the issue of blood)
Jesus defended women. (John 8:1-11, woman accused of adultery brought to be stoned)
Jesus included women in his parables. (Luke 15: 8-10, woman and lost coin)
Jesus chose and trusted a woman to be the first witness of His resurrection. (John 20:10-18)
Jesus sent a woman to be the first evangelist/carrier/messenger of the Gospel message. (John 20:17)
(With the exception of the last example listed above, these are not speaking directly to leadership. Don't worry, I am just setting the stage and this is important to see God's heart toward women and contrast it with the man-made rules that were in place at the time limiting and degrading women.) Jesus had no problem speaking to women and allowing them also to speak. He wasn't afraid to touch them and He allowed them to sit and learn. He was displaying the full heart of God and His actions were 100% consistent with the character of God. This is important to remember when we start looking at some of the epistles that Paul wrote. We will want to make sure that we keep the heart of God in tact as we evaluate the words that are written. If we have to choose, we will want to make sure that our interpretation of what Paul is saying is consistent with the character of God and not the character of the Pharisees and their church culture.
Before I end today's section, I will just add that many will use Jesus’ selection of 12 men to be his disciples/apostles (apostle means "sent one", so they started as disciples and became apostles) as reason to conclude that women cannot be in ministry. To me that is such a ridiculous and almost irrelevant point, (just because He chose men doesn't mean women aren't allowed in ministry) but, since many like to make it, I would simply say that indeed Jesus chose men PRE-cross and PRE-redemption. When He was here on Earth He worked within the tradition as much as possible without violating the heart of God. However, once IT WAS FINISHED through His work on the Cross- redemption could begin. After He died the first person He chose to reveal Himself to/the first person He SENT was a woman! (This was a radical shift and “risky move” as culturally the word of women was not considered an acceptable witness.) But God.
Jesus had come to Earth, died on the Cross in exchange for all of our sins for all of time, and rose again, defeating death, to return to Heaven. In doing all of this, He reconciled all of us who will believe in Him back to God, and paid the debt of sin which had been in effect since the first sin in the Garden of Eden. Canceling the sin and canceling the curse of that sin, He made a way for God’s original plan to be released on the Earth.
It might be a good time to go back to Genesis 1 (Or Part 1 of this series) and re-read God’s original plan for Earth and mankind. I think Mary leaving the tomb and going to tell the disciples definitely displays those mandates given to man and woman in Genesis 1.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
As we come into the New Testament scriptures, we are immediately introduced to first century culture. We are given four gospel accounts which teach us about Jesus, His time here on Earth, and His death and ultimate physical resurrection back into Heaven. I am assuming that most of my readers here are familiar with the gospels, but if not, definitely read through one or more of them!
Throughout these historical accounts, we learn that there are now several groups that are often mentioned: Pharisees, Sadducees, Greeks, Romans, gentiles, Jews, slaves, women….and others I’m sure. This lets us know that times have changed a bit since we left OT times (as mentioned in Part 4). During the time between the end of the OT and the beginning of the NT 400 years passed. One of the main historical things that happened in Palestine/Israel and really a large sweeping area surrounding it, was the rule of Alexander the Great. He was Greek, and as He began conquering different land masses and regions, Hellinization took place. That just means that the Greek culture and world view began to take over and permeate the other cultures. This was happening in the region of the Jews and some of the Jews were more relaxed and open to it even though they still identified with Mosaic law and this group (for this and other reasons) became known as the Sadducees. A different group was completely opposed to any Greek influence and desired to cling strictly to the Mosaic law. This group became known as the Pharisees. (These were not the only differences between Pharisees and Sadducees).
Both the Pharisees and Sadducees believed in the Mosaic Law- the commandments God gave to Moses, but the Pharisees also began to add to those laws an “oral Law”, which they believed was verbal instruction that God gave to Moses accompanying the written Law. They held both of these Laws to be of equal value even though the oral Law was completely created by man to help explain and further hedge up the written Law. The intent of the Pharisees was noble, but their actions of creating more laws (to help keep the Mosaic laws) ended up missing the true heart of God and they found themselves being harshly criticized by Jesus and at odds with Him.
So by this time in the culture, we have a large, ruling group of Jewish people (the Pharisees were not just a religious group but also a political group) who have hyper-inflated God’s written Law (all 613 rules of it) with many, many additional rules and requirements, as well as their explanations of what the laws really mean. This bundle of Oral Law is now written down and known as the Talmud in Judaism, in case you want to look into it more. While it is said to be 2,711 pages in length, one estimate says that it would be over 6,000 pages in standard print. So you can see, that’s a lot of explaining and extra additions to the Mosaic Law and this is why Jesus always called them out on it! Keep in mind, Jesus never sinned and yet he did break several laws according to the Pharisees. But it was their man-made laws He broke, not God’s.
Just look at Matthew Chapter 23 to see how Jesus felt about the Pharisees’ practice. It’s the whole “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees” chapter. You’ll see it begins with Jesus telling His disciples and the crowds (in v 1-2) “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat…” and it continues on in such a powerful, very clear rebuke of them. God gave laws to Moses but never told the Pharisees to make up all these additional rules and to hold themselves in such false righteousness and pride. Please, go get you Bible or pull it up on your computer now and read through this chapter! I want you to see for yourself how huge this man- made religious system was and how much Jesus hated it. (Jesus still loved the Pharisees themselves and many did repent and believe in Him, but Jesus hated the “spirit” of the Pharisees as it was NOT the Spirit of God leading their “Law”)
Jesus just called out many of the Pharisee’s man made rules but let’s look at just a few of these man made Pharisaical rules that I was able to find that were part of their Oral Law at the time. These, again, are just a FEW of the many that pertain to women. (I am not a Hebrew scholar, and do not claim to fully understand the intricacies of the Talmud but the citations are listed as I found them and these are pretty easy to search out and confirm on your own.)
“May the words of Torah be burned, than that they should be handed over to women.” Sotah, 10a
“Whoever teaches his daughter Torah teaches her obscenity.” Sotah 21b
“One is not so much as to greet a woman.” (Talmud Berakhoth 43b)
Perhaps another illustration would be to compare how in Leviticus (part of Mosaic Law from God) it talks about how a woman is unclean for 7 days from the start of her monthly period. However, in the Talmud, numerous additions are made which extend this to 14 days and also a ceremonial cleansing bath.
Another example comes in the form of a morning prayer. This prayer is still said every morning by many (not all) Jews around the world.
"Blessed are you, O God for not having made me a Gentile.
Blessed are you, O God, for not having made me a slave.
Blessed are you, O God, for not having made me a woman."
(teaser alert: Keep this in mind when Paul writes to the Galatians, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”)
So, you start to get a feel for how Judaism was not exactly the same thing as the Mosaic Law handed down from God to Moses for the Jewish people.
Alright so, in the midst of all this Jesus is born and begins his public ministry about 30 years later.
Keeping in mind my earlier point and also a key tenet of Christianity, Jesus never sinned. He walked on Earth as man but He was and is God. While on Earth, He kept in perfect step with the heart of God. The best way for us to see the heart of God…the same God who spoke to the man and woman in Genesis 1…is to see Jesus. To see how He acted, to see what He did, to see what He didn’t do, and to listen to what He said.
Simply put, the people living on the Earth when Jesus was about to begin his ministry were either Jews or Gentiles. And those who were Jews were doing their best to hold true to what they believed was their Jewish faith. However, as I’ve already made clear the Pharisees had added their own “Law” to God’s Law and aggressively monitored others adherence to it, so in practicality, a large amount of vocal and powerful Jews were now really just following a religion called Judaism. This is why we are about to see a radical shift because Jesus was not on the earth to communicate the heart of Judaism…He was on the Earth to communicate the heart of God and reconcile mankind (which includes male and female) back to God and His original mandate to them.
Let’s look at how Jesus treated women. For time sake, I’m assuming most of you will be familiar with these, but if not, I’ve listed at least one reference next to each example. (note: there are plenty more scriptures than I’ve listed to support these)
Jesus spoke to women directly. (John 11 Martha after Lazarus’ death, John 4:7-26, woman at the well)
Jesus healed women. (Matthew 7:14-15, Peter’s mother in law with fever)
Jesus let women learn and hear His teachings. (Luke 10:38-42, Mary and Martha speak and listen to Jesus)
Jesus allowed women to speak to Him and he listened and responded. (Matthew 15:21-28, faith of a Canaanite woman)
Jesus allowed women to touch him. (Matthew 9:20-22, woman with the issue of blood)
Jesus defended women. (John 8:1-11, woman accused of adultery brought to be stoned)
Jesus included women in his parables. (Luke 15: 8-10, woman and lost coin)
Jesus chose and trusted a woman to be the first witness of His resurrection. (John 20:10-18)
Jesus sent a woman to be the first evangelist/carrier/messenger of the Gospel message. (John 20:17)
(With the exception of the last example listed above, these are not speaking directly to leadership. Don't worry, I am just setting the stage and this is important to see God's heart toward women and contrast it with the man-made rules that were in place at the time limiting and degrading women.) Jesus had no problem speaking to women and allowing them also to speak. He wasn't afraid to touch them and He allowed them to sit and learn. He was displaying the full heart of God and His actions were 100% consistent with the character of God. This is important to remember when we start looking at some of the epistles that Paul wrote. We will want to make sure that we keep the heart of God in tact as we evaluate the words that are written. If we have to choose, we will want to make sure that our interpretation of what Paul is saying is consistent with the character of God and not the character of the Pharisees and their church culture.
Before I end today's section, I will just add that many will use Jesus’ selection of 12 men to be his disciples/apostles (apostle means "sent one", so they started as disciples and became apostles) as reason to conclude that women cannot be in ministry. To me that is such a ridiculous and almost irrelevant point, (just because He chose men doesn't mean women aren't allowed in ministry) but, since many like to make it, I would simply say that indeed Jesus chose men PRE-cross and PRE-redemption. When He was here on Earth He worked within the tradition as much as possible without violating the heart of God. However, once IT WAS FINISHED through His work on the Cross- redemption could begin. After He died the first person He chose to reveal Himself to/the first person He SENT was a woman! (This was a radical shift and “risky move” as culturally the word of women was not considered an acceptable witness.) But God.
Jesus had come to Earth, died on the Cross in exchange for all of our sins for all of time, and rose again, defeating death, to return to Heaven. In doing all of this, He reconciled all of us who will believe in Him back to God, and paid the debt of sin which had been in effect since the first sin in the Garden of Eden. Canceling the sin and canceling the curse of that sin, He made a way for God’s original plan to be released on the Earth.
It might be a good time to go back to Genesis 1 (Or Part 1 of this series) and re-read God’s original plan for Earth and mankind. I think Mary leaving the tomb and going to tell the disciples definitely displays those mandates given to man and woman in Genesis 1.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 6 -- Understanding the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in relationship to women.
I want to move into the book of Acts today. For most people, when you think of the book of Acts, you think about Holy Spirit. And that’s what I want to look at today. Is there a different Holy Spirit for men than there is for women? Did the Holy Spirit fall upon and empower only men and not women? What do other passages tell us about Holy Spirit and do any of those include any gender specifications? What does the Holy Spirit have to do with us ministering/serving God?
When Jesus spoke to his disciples, he told them that He would be leaving soon but that it is good for them, because when He leaves, The Counselor will come and live with/in them. This was a reference to the Holy Spirit.
Now, the Holy Spirit is God and was in existence at the beginning of Genesis and was part of the “us” and the “our” when God said, “Let us make man (male and female) in our own image”. But we see a renewed focus on Him when Jesus is speaking to his disciples.
Jesus even breathes into them and says “receive the Holy Spirit” in John 20:22.
Later, after that fact, the resurrected Jesus instructs them “do not leave Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit comes upon you….” (Acts 1:4) Why would He say that knowing that He himself already breathed in them and told them to receive the Holy Spirit?
It is because he knew that there is a different function of the Holy Spirit that had yet to be poured out. It is because he knew that while they had the Holy Spirit inside of them because they believed in Jesus as Messiah, there was still an “equipping” and “empowering” from the Holy Spirit that they would need in order to carry forth the ministry and establish the Church.
In Acts Ch 1 we learn in v 14 that the women were present along with the apostles and also Jesus’ brothers and Mother. So when we read Acts 2 about the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Spirit did indeed come upon them and empower and equip them) we can answer some of the initial questions presented in this paper.
Acts 2:1-21 says
"When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language.7 And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.” 12 And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” 13 But others mocking said, “They are filled with new wine.”
14 But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 15 For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:
17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 even on my male servants[c] and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy 19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; 20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. 21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Here we can see a few things. First, that they were all gathered (apostles, mother, brothers and the women) in one place. Second, “tongues of fire” came to rest upon each of them (males and females, young and old, no limitations). And third, they were all filled with the Holy Spirit (again no distinctions or limitations based on gender or anything else). Starting at v 14 we see Peter realizing that this is what the Old Testament prophet Joel was talking about and he quotes Joel. I want to point out that v 17 states that sons and daughters shall prophesy and v 18 the Holy Spirit was poured out on male and female servants.
This is what was happening indeed. The Holy Spirit was poured upon and also filled both males and females equally without any distinction. This was incredible which is probably why “impulsive” Peter (my description) just had to jump up and proclaim it!
While this is a short little study on Holy Spirit I bring it up to show that from the very beginning of Holy Spirit being poured out the women were right there with the men and were 100% included and 100% recipients of the Holy Spirit and all the power and privilege that entails. Nowhere in scripture is there any differentiation of a Holy Spirit for men and a different one for women. Just like there is one God the Father for all mankind, and one Jesus for all mankind, there is on Holy Spirit for all mankind. And just like Jesus’ death on the cross did not just offer salvation and payment of sins for only males, the Holy Spirit did not just offer gifts and empowering only to the males of the world. The whole point of the Holy Spirit coming upon them (and us) is to empower and equip them (and us) for ministry. If you want to argue that women cannot be in certain ministry roles, then you would need to show that the Holy Spirit given to women is somehow a limited version, lacking some of the power and giftings that is present in the Holy Spirit assigned to men.
Scripture does not make this distinction.
So when we discuss the topic of scriptural legitimacy for women in leadership within the church, there really are just two passages in the all the vast writings of Paul’s epistles (and the entire Bible) that are isolated and used to make a point that women are not to lead or speak in church. However, it is my assertion that these verses have been wrongly understood and taught and that it is not at all what Paul intends to convey, nor is it the heart of God toward the role of women. We will get to those passages in the next two parts and I will lay out my arguments for the legitimacy of women in leadership even when considering those passages.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
When Jesus spoke to his disciples, he told them that He would be leaving soon but that it is good for them, because when He leaves, The Counselor will come and live with/in them. This was a reference to the Holy Spirit.
Now, the Holy Spirit is God and was in existence at the beginning of Genesis and was part of the “us” and the “our” when God said, “Let us make man (male and female) in our own image”. But we see a renewed focus on Him when Jesus is speaking to his disciples.
Jesus even breathes into them and says “receive the Holy Spirit” in John 20:22.
Later, after that fact, the resurrected Jesus instructs them “do not leave Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit comes upon you….” (Acts 1:4) Why would He say that knowing that He himself already breathed in them and told them to receive the Holy Spirit?
It is because he knew that there is a different function of the Holy Spirit that had yet to be poured out. It is because he knew that while they had the Holy Spirit inside of them because they believed in Jesus as Messiah, there was still an “equipping” and “empowering” from the Holy Spirit that they would need in order to carry forth the ministry and establish the Church.
In Acts Ch 1 we learn in v 14 that the women were present along with the apostles and also Jesus’ brothers and Mother. So when we read Acts 2 about the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Spirit did indeed come upon them and empower and equip them) we can answer some of the initial questions presented in this paper.
Acts 2:1-21 says
"When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language.7 And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.” 12 And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” 13 But others mocking said, “They are filled with new wine.”
14 But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 15 For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:
17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 even on my male servants[c] and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy 19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; 20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. 21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Here we can see a few things. First, that they were all gathered (apostles, mother, brothers and the women) in one place. Second, “tongues of fire” came to rest upon each of them (males and females, young and old, no limitations). And third, they were all filled with the Holy Spirit (again no distinctions or limitations based on gender or anything else). Starting at v 14 we see Peter realizing that this is what the Old Testament prophet Joel was talking about and he quotes Joel. I want to point out that v 17 states that sons and daughters shall prophesy and v 18 the Holy Spirit was poured out on male and female servants.
This is what was happening indeed. The Holy Spirit was poured upon and also filled both males and females equally without any distinction. This was incredible which is probably why “impulsive” Peter (my description) just had to jump up and proclaim it!
While this is a short little study on Holy Spirit I bring it up to show that from the very beginning of Holy Spirit being poured out the women were right there with the men and were 100% included and 100% recipients of the Holy Spirit and all the power and privilege that entails. Nowhere in scripture is there any differentiation of a Holy Spirit for men and a different one for women. Just like there is one God the Father for all mankind, and one Jesus for all mankind, there is on Holy Spirit for all mankind. And just like Jesus’ death on the cross did not just offer salvation and payment of sins for only males, the Holy Spirit did not just offer gifts and empowering only to the males of the world. The whole point of the Holy Spirit coming upon them (and us) is to empower and equip them (and us) for ministry. If you want to argue that women cannot be in certain ministry roles, then you would need to show that the Holy Spirit given to women is somehow a limited version, lacking some of the power and giftings that is present in the Holy Spirit assigned to men.
Scripture does not make this distinction.
So when we discuss the topic of scriptural legitimacy for women in leadership within the church, there really are just two passages in the all the vast writings of Paul’s epistles (and the entire Bible) that are isolated and used to make a point that women are not to lead or speak in church. However, it is my assertion that these verses have been wrongly understood and taught and that it is not at all what Paul intends to convey, nor is it the heart of God toward the role of women. We will get to those passages in the next two parts and I will lay out my arguments for the legitimacy of women in leadership even when considering those passages.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 7 -- Understanding the real meaning of 1 Timothy 2:8-15.
Before I start laying out my evidence for why this passage does not limit women in leadership, let me make some general statements again.
First, I’d like to say that when it comes to the Bible and truly understanding the intent of scripture, things are “never an issue unless they’re an issue”. What do I mean by that? I mean that if you, or for men, a daughter or wife, are not being called to leadership as a woman, then these verses which appear to limit women (and are being used by many to do just that) are not an “issue” to you. You are fine to just go with the “normal” teaching that seems to say women are equal in value but not in function in God’s kingdom. However, if you are called to leadership within the body and you know God has given you giftings consistent with leadership then these passages become a big issue.
So while many people are content to not delve deeper, I was not. Years ago, as a woman called to leadership in the Body, I needed to know that I have legitimate ground to stand on. I could clearly see God’s heart for women throughout the Bible. I could clearly see how He used women in leadership positions. But what was I to do with these two verses (the other one will be part 8) that seem to be the most troubling and most readily used to wipe all women out of church leadership in one fail swoop?
My answer was, I needed to study these verses. And then, as I’m doing now, I need to teach the truth. I know that when I am done writing this and you are done reading this there may still be some who disagree. That is okay with me. (Sad, but okay) This is not a salvation issue. This is not an issue to break fellowship over.
It is however a necessary discussion and an ultimate lifeline to many women who are currently searching for one! So even if you are not personally struggling with this issue of being limited, I want to encourage you to care enough to read through these points and keep an open mind. Worldwide, the teaching that has come forth from what I believe has been a misunderstanding of these verses, has wreaked and continues to wreak great havoc on women. It is not God’s heart that women be limited in ministry roles within the church. Remember, it is the same Father, same Jesus, and same Holy Spirit for both men and women.
I am certainly not the first to discuss this issue in this way, I have learned from those who have gone before me and have continued my own study on these passages. I want to write in an easy, understandable way so you can see where things may have “gone wrong”.
So let’s look at 1 Timothy 2 now.
We will see at the beginning of 1Timothy that this is a letter written from Paul to Timothy who is currently in Ephesus. (This is the same Ephesus that is addressed in the letter to the Ephesians). It is written for the purpose of correcting false doctrine/myths and the people bringing that false teaching into the church. These are key points to the understanding of what Paul writes. There is so much to unravel here so please bear with me as we go along point by point. In the end, I will summarize and you should have a clear picture of the passage and what Paul was really warning them about.
The passage in question is the following, 1 Timothy 2:8-15 (but primarily v. 11-12 which I’ve bolded)
8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
You can see in verses 8-10 Paul was addressing both men and women. It is interesting how no one questions any of these previous verses when speaking about church practice/decorum. I have been in churches where not one man was lifting up holy hands during praise and worship or prayer time. And I’ve been to several churches where if you didn’t show up with a little bling you are judged and sometimes even told that you aren’t “giving your best to God”. Why people are not all upset about that but decide to hold up verses 11 and 12 as some sort of conclusive evidence against women in leadership/authority is beyond me. And to be sure that you don’t misunderstand my point here, it is not that I think we DO need to focus on the above verses. It’s rather that IF someone is going to make such a doctrinal across the board decision based on v11 and 12, I sure hope they are doing the same with v 8-10 (and as you’ll soon see, v 13-15) as well.
But they don’t. So this should be our first “yellow flag” that something may be a bit askew. But trust me, there’ll be plenty more.
If we move along to v 11 and 12, the way they read in the NIV (and many other versions) is as they are highlighted in bold print above.
Let’s look at v 11 first. One of the first things you’ll notice is that Paul switches from the plural “women”, to the singular “woman”. In this verse, we find the only actual grammatical command which is “a woman should learn”. Now he’s going to go on to describe how they should learn, but this is radical for this time. In a day and age where women were not held in high esteem in most areas and certainly were still in a patriarchal church culture, Paul’s statement that a woman should learn was massively affirming to women. (This makes sense because this is exactly how Jesus treated women when he was here on Earth. Jesus allowed women to learn and interact with Him and Paul is following that example in his own ministry.)
He then continues by saying what, in many versions, is translated above as “in quietness and full submission”. I see no problem with this. Even I, as a University instructor, would expect this same learning style from both my male and female students. However, let me give you some more understanding/proof. The words used here in the original Greek for quietness and full submission are:
Quietness= “hesychia” which means just that, quietness or silence.
Submission= “hypotage” which means act of subjecting or obedience.
Why the translators chose to translate the word “hypotage” as “submission” is just an example of the patriarchal influence that makes its way into our current translations. (But that is another topic for another day and my point here is just to point out the true meaning of what Paul is saying.)
So Paul is saying that a woman should learn but should do so in quietness and obedience…basically, respectfully.
Thus far, there is nothing permitting any restriction of a woman learning so long as it is done in a respectful, non-distracting and obedient way.
Moving on then to v 12, we see Paul writes (as currently translated) “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man. She must be quiet” That is the NIV translation. Others say “have authority” and “must be silent”. Either way, they seem to be saying generally the same thing. The problem is that these translations are both somewhat erroneous if we look back to the original Greek. And the manner in which the errors are made has led to a horrible misunderstanding of Paul’s words and the heart of God toward women.
In the original Greek we will see a number of things that play a role in the understanding of this tricky passage. First off, keep in mind, Paul is using the single form “woman” in this verse, whereas in the passages before and after v 11-12, he uses the form “women” (plural). Since this letter was written to correct false teachings and teachers, he likely had a specific woman in mind that Timothy may have written him about. But even if he didn’t, let’s keep going…
Paul is clearly trying to tell Timothy that he does not permit something. But what is the something that he does not permit?While in our versions it looks like there is actually two things he is forbidding: (a) a woman from teaching and (b) a woman from having authority over a man, when you study the original Greek you see that is not actually the case at all.
(I’m not trying to write a doctoral thesis here, I’m trying to write the truth of the passage in an understandable, retainable way that will help you see what Paul is really trying to say. I want to give you enough evidence though so even if this gets a little complicated, just hang in there with me please. It will become clearer as we go on.)
Instead of Paul forbidding two things, he’s really just forbidding one and I’m going to give you proof of this in a minute. But I want you to get the concept so you don’t get confused when we delve into grammar. The best example I have heard (not my original idea but also not sure who would get the credit for it) of this type of grammar in today’s language might be something like “I do not permit a woman to run and chew gum”. You see, there are two verbs here linked together with a conjunction but they now carry a whole new idea and/or meaning than they do separately. It would be okay for a woman to run. And it would be okay for her to chew gum. But to “run and chew gum” would be dangerous. In our Biblical text, the “to teach” that Paul uses is directly coupled with the next word which refers to “having authority”. So the point is, it’s just one concept.
Paul is not saying women (plural) can’t teach, nor is he saying a woman (single) can’t teach, but he IS saying that a woman (singular) can’t teach “something”….so let’s look first at that word that is being translated as “authority”.
The word used in verse 12 for authority is actually the Greek verb authenteos (from the root authentein). Interestingly enough, it is the only place in the Bible where we see this word. That becomes interesting seeing as how Paul talks a lot about authority in his other letters but in every other instance where Paul is talking about authority, he uses the Greek word “exousia”. This 1 Timothy passage is the only time he uses a different word. Do you think perhaps there was a reason for this? The answer to that somewhat rhetorical question is yes, there is.
The word that Paul did use in this passage, “authenteos”, to describe what he was forbidding, actually has quite a different meaning. It actually means: “one who with his own hands kills another or himself, one who acts on his own authority, autocratic, an absolute master, or exercise dominion over.” It always as aggression associated with it and often sexual connotations too, believe it or not.
So take note. That is very different than “exousia” which means “the power of choice, physical and mental power, the power of authority (influence) and right (privilege), the power of rule or government”.
So we have to erase the notion from our minds that Paul is even talking about normal Christian power and authority and rule here. He’s not. If he was, he would have used “exousia” which he used every other time.
An additional point to consider and one I was eluding to before was that many scholars believe that the grammatical structure of this sentence actually has what is called a hendiadys (don’t panic- I had to look it up myself!) which means that two words are joined by a conjunction to make a single point. So the verb for “teach” which is “didaskein” and the verb “authentein” (which was falsely translated as having authority but really means to kill or aggressively or even sexually dominate) are actually combined to form a single point/concept.
In this case, a better translation of what Paul was saying in this verse would go something like, “I do not permit a woman to teach in a domineering way” or “I do not permit a woman to teach or persuade using sexual or aggressive advances.”
So, if that’s the case, if that’s what Paul really meant, we should be able to find some more evidence to back this up. Well, real quick before I tell you about the next bit of evidence, let’s take a quick look at the verses that follow. You never want to isolate a verse or two and try to interpret out of context. You always want to keep it in context and look for other clues and cues that will allow you to understand its true meaning and intent.
So if we look at v. 13-15 we will see some very interesting things. First we can see that Paul seems to launch into a brief review of Genesis, highlighting the fact that Adam was formed first before Eve, and that Adam was not deceived, but it was Eve who was deceived and sinned. Okay, sort of an interesting follow up, Paul. What does v 15 say? Wow, now Paul says something really weird…that women will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love and holiness, with self control.
I want to just pause here for a moment. I want to ask YOU if anything seems weird with any of those statements. Any conflict within? Any agreement in your spirit? Any idea why in the world Paul would be saying all of that?
I hope you will agree with his statements about Adam being formed first and not being the first deceived. That is all true and supported by Genesis. I also hope you will disagree with the statement that seems like it says women will be saved through childbearing. I mean, it actually does say that, but does it mean that women are really saved that way? What about young girls or women who never have children, are they doomed to hell? The Bible clearly teaches that there is one way of true salvation and that is through belief in Christ Jesus. Paul himself teaches that! So clearly, Paul was getting at something else. But what?
Let’s look at the social and cultural context of the time frame in which this letter was sent. This will clarify not only the child bearing passage but also v 11-14 as well.
Remember what I said up front. This is a letter, an actual letter, written by Paul and being sent to Timothy who is currently overseeing a church in a city called Ephesus. There is a purpose in his writing this letter (which is given to us in Ch 1 v 3-7. ) and that is to come against the false teaching/false doctrine that was being taught in the church. The passage we are looking at is situated within a larger text (the entire epistle/letter) yet shares the same purpose- to correct false doctrine or teachings/myths that were circulating through the church.
So what exactly was going on in Ephesus at this time? What was being taught? What was the predominant cultural thought process and practice that Paul seemed to feel a need to come against and correct? I will tell you.
(By the way, I know this is a super long post but you cannot even imagine how much I am condensing it from all the hours of research, study and prayer I’ve put into unraveling this mystery! So please hang in there and keep reading! This is where your understanding will really break open!)
Ephesus was a Greek city that we can read about historically but also that we are first introduced to in Acts. Information on the church in Ephesus is actually found in Acts, Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy and Revelation. And as I mentioned above, we also have numerous historical texts that have recorded the history of this popular ancient city.
When we combine the information from these different sources we can begin to understand the setting in which this letter to Timothy was written. We can understand some of the false teaching and myths that were circulating at the time and we can see the issues that Paul was trying to address.
One of the first things we need to understand is that Ephesus was a Greek city and really was the 4th largest city at the time. It was highly populated and was also a main city that travelers would pass through en route to other places. As a Greek city, they had a strong foundation and belief in the gods and goddesses. Unlike many other cities, their primary “god” was not a god at all …it was a goddess. This goddess went by the name Diana or Artemis (of Ephesia….there actually is a different Artemis, so just clarifying that).
If we research this historically, outside of Biblical accounts, we learn that people traveled from all over to visit Ephesus and the great temple that was erected for Diana/Artemis. In fact, the temple was so large and so popular that it was actually one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.
If we look to Acts Ch 19 we can read a lot more about Ephesus and the worship of goddess Diana/Artemis. I won’t print the whole passage here but please get out your Bibles or pull it up online and read the chapter for yourself. You will see that in v. 24 a silversmith named Demetrius made a lot of money by making and selling silver shrines of Diana/Artemis. You’ll see he wasn’t alone either. Many other men also made a good living this way. In verse 27 you’ll see the breadth of this worship of Diana/Artemis as we read that “all Asia and the world worship” her. Furthermore, in verse 34 you will see the local Ephesians cried out for two hours “Great is Diana of the Ephesians!” That is devotion. Unfortunately, it was not to the One True God.
If you read further in historical texts about this goddess, one of the first things you will learn is that the temple featured an image/statue of her carved from wood which was always kept adorned and decorated with jewelry. (Tuck that little nugget away for now and keep reading.) You will also come to understand that the Ephesians (and many others in the world- as shown above through Scripture) believed that they were the “temple guardian of the great goddess Diana/Artemis which fell down from Zeus” (or the sky).
In this mythological belief, Diana/Artemis was the source of all life, male and female. Female was created first and then male came forth. Females also dominated males. They not only dominated them but violently, aggressively and sexually did so. From many different sources we learn that worship at the temple of Diana/Artemis became, well, I’m sorry to say, all out violent sexually perverse sessions (even orgies) where women were elevated above men and even worshipped for having more power and authority than men.
Also, the Ephesian Artemis/Diana was also known as the goddess of childbearing. Visitors traveled from far and wide to worship at the temple when they were about to give birth as they wanted the protection of the goddess.
So now that you have some of this background information (which you can all verify on your own!) we can go back to this somewhat tricky passage in 1 Timothy and take a fresh look at what Paul was really trying to convey.
To remind you, we had concluded that he certainly was trying to warn Timothy that a woman (singular) should not be allowed to teach “something”…but what exactly was the something?
With this new background information of the cultural and religious (non-Christian) climate of Ephesus, let’s take another look at the passage in question.
8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
I will remind you once again, this whole letter was written to Timothy to correct “false teachings and myths” (1 Timothy 1: 4) that were making their way into the church and also to specifically correct (v 6-7) the people that were trying to be teachers of the law but who teach these things with no understanding.
So if we look at verses 8-10 above in Ch 2 of 1 Tim, we see Paul is addressing men and women and as far as the women go, he doesn’t want them adorning themselves with jewelry but rather with good character and deeds. The church that Paul was building and speaking into through Timothy was built on Jesus Christ, not Diana/Artemis. The adorning of the goddess, and oneself to be like the goddess, was not something Paul wanted the women doing. It wasn’t a statement made for all women of all time in all settings, it was a statement made to the women who were smack dab in the cultural hub of pagan worship of the goddess Diana/Artemis. It was to set them apart. To teach them and remind them that “we don’t do that here”…”this isn’t the goddess’s temple”.
Next if we look at verses 11-12, we can see why Paul likely switched to a singular form, “woman” when he writes, I do not permit a woman to teach in an aggressive, domineering way. I don’t permit her to teach in a violent or sexual manner that overrides man’s authority. (remember God's true authority rests equally on men and women. We saw this in Genesis 1 and 2) Again, he is directly coming against the cultural norm which was huge by the way, that says women have power over men and can use this power to seduce, kill, or dominate men violently to get their way.
It is extremely likely that there was “a” woman who was bringing this false teaching into the church. (Some early translations actually say “the woman”, instead of “a woman”.) It’s also possible there was more than one. Again this letter was written to correct exactly this kind of thing, “false teachings and myths” and the people who were teaching them.
Paul then continues on with this thought, almost as if he wants to drive home the point to not let anyone be teaching this crazy “women dominate and have more authority than men practice”. He goes on to attack another lie of the great cultural Diana/Artemis worship and in doing so is really kind of telling Timothy (who can then tell others) here is your proof…
Verses 13-14
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Here is the beauty of what Paul is saying and what many people fail to ever understand. Paul was there to preach the truth. In places where men were falsely elevated above women he spoke such things as “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female”. But here in Ephesus where the reverse was true and the women were falsely elevated above men, Paul was not afraid to speak into that situation and destroy that falsehood also.
This is where my whole “nutter butter cookie analogy” from Part 4 or 5 comes back into play. Sometimes, you can have what seems like contrasting or conflicting advice, but really it isn’t. It all is relevant to the situation and the circumstances at hand.
Continuing on, Paul finishes up his attack on this invading lie/myth by dismantling yet another one of the false strongholds of the Ephesians minds. He says in verses 15…
But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Here Paul is trying to tell them that they do not need to be running to the temple goddess when they are pregnant or wanting to be pregnant or about to give birth and that women are safe and protected by God Himself and they just need to focus on developing inner character that puts Him first.
WHEW!!!! That was a lot to type out and a lot for you all to read. So, we’re almost done with this section. Let me just try to summarize for you.
(1) 1 Timothy 2:8-15 has been taught almost exclusively through a patriarchal lens because of the way it was translated into our “modern” Bibles. In doing so, it becomes a very choppy, disjointed passage that seems to have Paul giving advice that he clearly doesn’t even follow regarding women in ministry.
(2) When we go back to the original structure of the passage and the grammatical components we see the meaning that has been taught to us all these years is not exactly accurate. It is open to discussion and re-examination as we move forward as the Church.
(3) Paul wrote thousands of words to many different locations and people groups and this one passage that seems to limit women in the church has been blown way out of proportion, taken out of context and stated- not really even taught because there’d be no evidence- over and over again in churches worldwide. The main word it hinges on, “authentein”, is used only once in the entire Bible and is therefore considered (from a scholarly view) absolutely useless for doctrinal foundation. Furthermore, as shown above, “authentein” is not even properly translated in our modern Bibles.
(4) An ample understanding of the culture at Ephesus and of the surrounding scripture in the New Testament brings clarity into what is otherwise a choppy, confusing and inconsistent statement from Paul.
In conclusion, I hope you have learned a little by reading through this. As I’ve said from the beginning, I am writing this whole series in a way that makes it practical and easy to understand. I have not used citations for all the extra Biblical research I’ve done but I can guarantee I have done it! And you can easily verify anything written here on your own. I do however plan to go back through and add general citations or recommended sources for you to peruse in the weeks and months to come. I just wanted to get this part up as it has been a while since I posted. (I will say that all of the above are my own words and my own thoughts and this is my original work.)
I hope you are now equipped with a greater understanding and defense of the legitimacy of women in ministry within the church. We still have one more tricky passage to go through before we wrap up this series. I invite you to join me to the end!
And remember, if you are reading this and you don’t agree, that is your choice and it is okay. Differing opinions on this matter will always exist even within the true Body of Christ. (Just like it did with slavery which is nearly impossible for us to comprehend now!) I am just presenting my evidence here for why I believe what I believe and I thank you for visiting my page and considering its merit.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
First, I’d like to say that when it comes to the Bible and truly understanding the intent of scripture, things are “never an issue unless they’re an issue”. What do I mean by that? I mean that if you, or for men, a daughter or wife, are not being called to leadership as a woman, then these verses which appear to limit women (and are being used by many to do just that) are not an “issue” to you. You are fine to just go with the “normal” teaching that seems to say women are equal in value but not in function in God’s kingdom. However, if you are called to leadership within the body and you know God has given you giftings consistent with leadership then these passages become a big issue.
So while many people are content to not delve deeper, I was not. Years ago, as a woman called to leadership in the Body, I needed to know that I have legitimate ground to stand on. I could clearly see God’s heart for women throughout the Bible. I could clearly see how He used women in leadership positions. But what was I to do with these two verses (the other one will be part 8) that seem to be the most troubling and most readily used to wipe all women out of church leadership in one fail swoop?
My answer was, I needed to study these verses. And then, as I’m doing now, I need to teach the truth. I know that when I am done writing this and you are done reading this there may still be some who disagree. That is okay with me. (Sad, but okay) This is not a salvation issue. This is not an issue to break fellowship over.
It is however a necessary discussion and an ultimate lifeline to many women who are currently searching for one! So even if you are not personally struggling with this issue of being limited, I want to encourage you to care enough to read through these points and keep an open mind. Worldwide, the teaching that has come forth from what I believe has been a misunderstanding of these verses, has wreaked and continues to wreak great havoc on women. It is not God’s heart that women be limited in ministry roles within the church. Remember, it is the same Father, same Jesus, and same Holy Spirit for both men and women.
I am certainly not the first to discuss this issue in this way, I have learned from those who have gone before me and have continued my own study on these passages. I want to write in an easy, understandable way so you can see where things may have “gone wrong”.
So let’s look at 1 Timothy 2 now.
We will see at the beginning of 1Timothy that this is a letter written from Paul to Timothy who is currently in Ephesus. (This is the same Ephesus that is addressed in the letter to the Ephesians). It is written for the purpose of correcting false doctrine/myths and the people bringing that false teaching into the church. These are key points to the understanding of what Paul writes. There is so much to unravel here so please bear with me as we go along point by point. In the end, I will summarize and you should have a clear picture of the passage and what Paul was really warning them about.
The passage in question is the following, 1 Timothy 2:8-15 (but primarily v. 11-12 which I’ve bolded)
8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
You can see in verses 8-10 Paul was addressing both men and women. It is interesting how no one questions any of these previous verses when speaking about church practice/decorum. I have been in churches where not one man was lifting up holy hands during praise and worship or prayer time. And I’ve been to several churches where if you didn’t show up with a little bling you are judged and sometimes even told that you aren’t “giving your best to God”. Why people are not all upset about that but decide to hold up verses 11 and 12 as some sort of conclusive evidence against women in leadership/authority is beyond me. And to be sure that you don’t misunderstand my point here, it is not that I think we DO need to focus on the above verses. It’s rather that IF someone is going to make such a doctrinal across the board decision based on v11 and 12, I sure hope they are doing the same with v 8-10 (and as you’ll soon see, v 13-15) as well.
But they don’t. So this should be our first “yellow flag” that something may be a bit askew. But trust me, there’ll be plenty more.
If we move along to v 11 and 12, the way they read in the NIV (and many other versions) is as they are highlighted in bold print above.
Let’s look at v 11 first. One of the first things you’ll notice is that Paul switches from the plural “women”, to the singular “woman”. In this verse, we find the only actual grammatical command which is “a woman should learn”. Now he’s going to go on to describe how they should learn, but this is radical for this time. In a day and age where women were not held in high esteem in most areas and certainly were still in a patriarchal church culture, Paul’s statement that a woman should learn was massively affirming to women. (This makes sense because this is exactly how Jesus treated women when he was here on Earth. Jesus allowed women to learn and interact with Him and Paul is following that example in his own ministry.)
He then continues by saying what, in many versions, is translated above as “in quietness and full submission”. I see no problem with this. Even I, as a University instructor, would expect this same learning style from both my male and female students. However, let me give you some more understanding/proof. The words used here in the original Greek for quietness and full submission are:
Quietness= “hesychia” which means just that, quietness or silence.
Submission= “hypotage” which means act of subjecting or obedience.
Why the translators chose to translate the word “hypotage” as “submission” is just an example of the patriarchal influence that makes its way into our current translations. (But that is another topic for another day and my point here is just to point out the true meaning of what Paul is saying.)
So Paul is saying that a woman should learn but should do so in quietness and obedience…basically, respectfully.
Thus far, there is nothing permitting any restriction of a woman learning so long as it is done in a respectful, non-distracting and obedient way.
Moving on then to v 12, we see Paul writes (as currently translated) “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man. She must be quiet” That is the NIV translation. Others say “have authority” and “must be silent”. Either way, they seem to be saying generally the same thing. The problem is that these translations are both somewhat erroneous if we look back to the original Greek. And the manner in which the errors are made has led to a horrible misunderstanding of Paul’s words and the heart of God toward women.
In the original Greek we will see a number of things that play a role in the understanding of this tricky passage. First off, keep in mind, Paul is using the single form “woman” in this verse, whereas in the passages before and after v 11-12, he uses the form “women” (plural). Since this letter was written to correct false teachings and teachers, he likely had a specific woman in mind that Timothy may have written him about. But even if he didn’t, let’s keep going…
Paul is clearly trying to tell Timothy that he does not permit something. But what is the something that he does not permit?While in our versions it looks like there is actually two things he is forbidding: (a) a woman from teaching and (b) a woman from having authority over a man, when you study the original Greek you see that is not actually the case at all.
(I’m not trying to write a doctoral thesis here, I’m trying to write the truth of the passage in an understandable, retainable way that will help you see what Paul is really trying to say. I want to give you enough evidence though so even if this gets a little complicated, just hang in there with me please. It will become clearer as we go on.)
Instead of Paul forbidding two things, he’s really just forbidding one and I’m going to give you proof of this in a minute. But I want you to get the concept so you don’t get confused when we delve into grammar. The best example I have heard (not my original idea but also not sure who would get the credit for it) of this type of grammar in today’s language might be something like “I do not permit a woman to run and chew gum”. You see, there are two verbs here linked together with a conjunction but they now carry a whole new idea and/or meaning than they do separately. It would be okay for a woman to run. And it would be okay for her to chew gum. But to “run and chew gum” would be dangerous. In our Biblical text, the “to teach” that Paul uses is directly coupled with the next word which refers to “having authority”. So the point is, it’s just one concept.
Paul is not saying women (plural) can’t teach, nor is he saying a woman (single) can’t teach, but he IS saying that a woman (singular) can’t teach “something”….so let’s look first at that word that is being translated as “authority”.
The word used in verse 12 for authority is actually the Greek verb authenteos (from the root authentein). Interestingly enough, it is the only place in the Bible where we see this word. That becomes interesting seeing as how Paul talks a lot about authority in his other letters but in every other instance where Paul is talking about authority, he uses the Greek word “exousia”. This 1 Timothy passage is the only time he uses a different word. Do you think perhaps there was a reason for this? The answer to that somewhat rhetorical question is yes, there is.
The word that Paul did use in this passage, “authenteos”, to describe what he was forbidding, actually has quite a different meaning. It actually means: “one who with his own hands kills another or himself, one who acts on his own authority, autocratic, an absolute master, or exercise dominion over.” It always as aggression associated with it and often sexual connotations too, believe it or not.
So take note. That is very different than “exousia” which means “the power of choice, physical and mental power, the power of authority (influence) and right (privilege), the power of rule or government”.
So we have to erase the notion from our minds that Paul is even talking about normal Christian power and authority and rule here. He’s not. If he was, he would have used “exousia” which he used every other time.
An additional point to consider and one I was eluding to before was that many scholars believe that the grammatical structure of this sentence actually has what is called a hendiadys (don’t panic- I had to look it up myself!) which means that two words are joined by a conjunction to make a single point. So the verb for “teach” which is “didaskein” and the verb “authentein” (which was falsely translated as having authority but really means to kill or aggressively or even sexually dominate) are actually combined to form a single point/concept.
In this case, a better translation of what Paul was saying in this verse would go something like, “I do not permit a woman to teach in a domineering way” or “I do not permit a woman to teach or persuade using sexual or aggressive advances.”
So, if that’s the case, if that’s what Paul really meant, we should be able to find some more evidence to back this up. Well, real quick before I tell you about the next bit of evidence, let’s take a quick look at the verses that follow. You never want to isolate a verse or two and try to interpret out of context. You always want to keep it in context and look for other clues and cues that will allow you to understand its true meaning and intent.
So if we look at v. 13-15 we will see some very interesting things. First we can see that Paul seems to launch into a brief review of Genesis, highlighting the fact that Adam was formed first before Eve, and that Adam was not deceived, but it was Eve who was deceived and sinned. Okay, sort of an interesting follow up, Paul. What does v 15 say? Wow, now Paul says something really weird…that women will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love and holiness, with self control.
I want to just pause here for a moment. I want to ask YOU if anything seems weird with any of those statements. Any conflict within? Any agreement in your spirit? Any idea why in the world Paul would be saying all of that?
I hope you will agree with his statements about Adam being formed first and not being the first deceived. That is all true and supported by Genesis. I also hope you will disagree with the statement that seems like it says women will be saved through childbearing. I mean, it actually does say that, but does it mean that women are really saved that way? What about young girls or women who never have children, are they doomed to hell? The Bible clearly teaches that there is one way of true salvation and that is through belief in Christ Jesus. Paul himself teaches that! So clearly, Paul was getting at something else. But what?
Let’s look at the social and cultural context of the time frame in which this letter was sent. This will clarify not only the child bearing passage but also v 11-14 as well.
Remember what I said up front. This is a letter, an actual letter, written by Paul and being sent to Timothy who is currently overseeing a church in a city called Ephesus. There is a purpose in his writing this letter (which is given to us in Ch 1 v 3-7. ) and that is to come against the false teaching/false doctrine that was being taught in the church. The passage we are looking at is situated within a larger text (the entire epistle/letter) yet shares the same purpose- to correct false doctrine or teachings/myths that were circulating through the church.
So what exactly was going on in Ephesus at this time? What was being taught? What was the predominant cultural thought process and practice that Paul seemed to feel a need to come against and correct? I will tell you.
(By the way, I know this is a super long post but you cannot even imagine how much I am condensing it from all the hours of research, study and prayer I’ve put into unraveling this mystery! So please hang in there and keep reading! This is where your understanding will really break open!)
Ephesus was a Greek city that we can read about historically but also that we are first introduced to in Acts. Information on the church in Ephesus is actually found in Acts, Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy and Revelation. And as I mentioned above, we also have numerous historical texts that have recorded the history of this popular ancient city.
When we combine the information from these different sources we can begin to understand the setting in which this letter to Timothy was written. We can understand some of the false teaching and myths that were circulating at the time and we can see the issues that Paul was trying to address.
One of the first things we need to understand is that Ephesus was a Greek city and really was the 4th largest city at the time. It was highly populated and was also a main city that travelers would pass through en route to other places. As a Greek city, they had a strong foundation and belief in the gods and goddesses. Unlike many other cities, their primary “god” was not a god at all …it was a goddess. This goddess went by the name Diana or Artemis (of Ephesia….there actually is a different Artemis, so just clarifying that).
If we research this historically, outside of Biblical accounts, we learn that people traveled from all over to visit Ephesus and the great temple that was erected for Diana/Artemis. In fact, the temple was so large and so popular that it was actually one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.
If we look to Acts Ch 19 we can read a lot more about Ephesus and the worship of goddess Diana/Artemis. I won’t print the whole passage here but please get out your Bibles or pull it up online and read the chapter for yourself. You will see that in v. 24 a silversmith named Demetrius made a lot of money by making and selling silver shrines of Diana/Artemis. You’ll see he wasn’t alone either. Many other men also made a good living this way. In verse 27 you’ll see the breadth of this worship of Diana/Artemis as we read that “all Asia and the world worship” her. Furthermore, in verse 34 you will see the local Ephesians cried out for two hours “Great is Diana of the Ephesians!” That is devotion. Unfortunately, it was not to the One True God.
If you read further in historical texts about this goddess, one of the first things you will learn is that the temple featured an image/statue of her carved from wood which was always kept adorned and decorated with jewelry. (Tuck that little nugget away for now and keep reading.) You will also come to understand that the Ephesians (and many others in the world- as shown above through Scripture) believed that they were the “temple guardian of the great goddess Diana/Artemis which fell down from Zeus” (or the sky).
In this mythological belief, Diana/Artemis was the source of all life, male and female. Female was created first and then male came forth. Females also dominated males. They not only dominated them but violently, aggressively and sexually did so. From many different sources we learn that worship at the temple of Diana/Artemis became, well, I’m sorry to say, all out violent sexually perverse sessions (even orgies) where women were elevated above men and even worshipped for having more power and authority than men.
Also, the Ephesian Artemis/Diana was also known as the goddess of childbearing. Visitors traveled from far and wide to worship at the temple when they were about to give birth as they wanted the protection of the goddess.
So now that you have some of this background information (which you can all verify on your own!) we can go back to this somewhat tricky passage in 1 Timothy and take a fresh look at what Paul was really trying to convey.
To remind you, we had concluded that he certainly was trying to warn Timothy that a woman (singular) should not be allowed to teach “something”…but what exactly was the something?
With this new background information of the cultural and religious (non-Christian) climate of Ephesus, let’s take another look at the passage in question.
8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
I will remind you once again, this whole letter was written to Timothy to correct “false teachings and myths” (1 Timothy 1: 4) that were making their way into the church and also to specifically correct (v 6-7) the people that were trying to be teachers of the law but who teach these things with no understanding.
So if we look at verses 8-10 above in Ch 2 of 1 Tim, we see Paul is addressing men and women and as far as the women go, he doesn’t want them adorning themselves with jewelry but rather with good character and deeds. The church that Paul was building and speaking into through Timothy was built on Jesus Christ, not Diana/Artemis. The adorning of the goddess, and oneself to be like the goddess, was not something Paul wanted the women doing. It wasn’t a statement made for all women of all time in all settings, it was a statement made to the women who were smack dab in the cultural hub of pagan worship of the goddess Diana/Artemis. It was to set them apart. To teach them and remind them that “we don’t do that here”…”this isn’t the goddess’s temple”.
Next if we look at verses 11-12, we can see why Paul likely switched to a singular form, “woman” when he writes, I do not permit a woman to teach in an aggressive, domineering way. I don’t permit her to teach in a violent or sexual manner that overrides man’s authority. (remember God's true authority rests equally on men and women. We saw this in Genesis 1 and 2) Again, he is directly coming against the cultural norm which was huge by the way, that says women have power over men and can use this power to seduce, kill, or dominate men violently to get their way.
It is extremely likely that there was “a” woman who was bringing this false teaching into the church. (Some early translations actually say “the woman”, instead of “a woman”.) It’s also possible there was more than one. Again this letter was written to correct exactly this kind of thing, “false teachings and myths” and the people who were teaching them.
Paul then continues on with this thought, almost as if he wants to drive home the point to not let anyone be teaching this crazy “women dominate and have more authority than men practice”. He goes on to attack another lie of the great cultural Diana/Artemis worship and in doing so is really kind of telling Timothy (who can then tell others) here is your proof…
Verses 13-14
For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Here is the beauty of what Paul is saying and what many people fail to ever understand. Paul was there to preach the truth. In places where men were falsely elevated above women he spoke such things as “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female”. But here in Ephesus where the reverse was true and the women were falsely elevated above men, Paul was not afraid to speak into that situation and destroy that falsehood also.
This is where my whole “nutter butter cookie analogy” from Part 4 or 5 comes back into play. Sometimes, you can have what seems like contrasting or conflicting advice, but really it isn’t. It all is relevant to the situation and the circumstances at hand.
Continuing on, Paul finishes up his attack on this invading lie/myth by dismantling yet another one of the false strongholds of the Ephesians minds. He says in verses 15…
But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Here Paul is trying to tell them that they do not need to be running to the temple goddess when they are pregnant or wanting to be pregnant or about to give birth and that women are safe and protected by God Himself and they just need to focus on developing inner character that puts Him first.
WHEW!!!! That was a lot to type out and a lot for you all to read. So, we’re almost done with this section. Let me just try to summarize for you.
(1) 1 Timothy 2:8-15 has been taught almost exclusively through a patriarchal lens because of the way it was translated into our “modern” Bibles. In doing so, it becomes a very choppy, disjointed passage that seems to have Paul giving advice that he clearly doesn’t even follow regarding women in ministry.
(2) When we go back to the original structure of the passage and the grammatical components we see the meaning that has been taught to us all these years is not exactly accurate. It is open to discussion and re-examination as we move forward as the Church.
(3) Paul wrote thousands of words to many different locations and people groups and this one passage that seems to limit women in the church has been blown way out of proportion, taken out of context and stated- not really even taught because there’d be no evidence- over and over again in churches worldwide. The main word it hinges on, “authentein”, is used only once in the entire Bible and is therefore considered (from a scholarly view) absolutely useless for doctrinal foundation. Furthermore, as shown above, “authentein” is not even properly translated in our modern Bibles.
(4) An ample understanding of the culture at Ephesus and of the surrounding scripture in the New Testament brings clarity into what is otherwise a choppy, confusing and inconsistent statement from Paul.
In conclusion, I hope you have learned a little by reading through this. As I’ve said from the beginning, I am writing this whole series in a way that makes it practical and easy to understand. I have not used citations for all the extra Biblical research I’ve done but I can guarantee I have done it! And you can easily verify anything written here on your own. I do however plan to go back through and add general citations or recommended sources for you to peruse in the weeks and months to come. I just wanted to get this part up as it has been a while since I posted. (I will say that all of the above are my own words and my own thoughts and this is my original work.)
I hope you are now equipped with a greater understanding and defense of the legitimacy of women in ministry within the church. We still have one more tricky passage to go through before we wrap up this series. I invite you to join me to the end!
And remember, if you are reading this and you don’t agree, that is your choice and it is okay. Differing opinions on this matter will always exist even within the true Body of Christ. (Just like it did with slavery which is nearly impossible for us to comprehend now!) I am just presenting my evidence here for why I believe what I believe and I thank you for visiting my page and considering its merit.
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THE LEGITIMACY OF WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE CHURCH
PART 8 -- Understanding the true meaning and essence of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35.
As we come to the end of our examination of the scriptural evidence for Women in Leadership within the church, I hope that you are learning new things and being challenged and encouraged in your walk with God. Today, I want to look at one last passage that is often used to limit women within the church. This one is found in 1 Corinthians, an epistle (letter) written once again by Paul. He is writing this particular letter in response to a letter he has received from the Corinthian church. His goal in writing back to them is to clarify some issues that have been causing disputes among them. As you read through the letter you see Paul addressing things such as: divisions in the church, incest, court cases, abuse of freedom and disorderly church gatherings. We also see him replying to other issues the Corinthians wrote him about, such as marriage, pagan festivals, prophesy, tongues, and the behavior of women.
As always, it is important to have a little historical background on the people and region that Paul is writing to. Corinth was the second largest populated city, second only to Rome. It was a major hub of trade and its population consisted of not just Romans but also Jews, Orientals, Greeks, Egyptians, and others. Corinth was also known for shameful and immoral living and thus was a very challenging place to try to have Christianity take root. Against the odds, years earlier, Paul had indeed successfully planted the church but now all sorts of twisted doctrine and perverted messages were beginning to take hold causing many disputes and disagreements. It was time for Paul to speak order into the church once again.
If you remember from previous sections of this series, many of the Jews had created their own rules that went above and beyond any rules God Himself ever gave the people. These rules were ultimately gathered into what was known as the Oral law and were eventually written down in what is now called the Talmud. So in the midst of the Corinthian church we have the “real rules” from written scripture (God given) and those who were violating them, and, we also have the “fake man made rules” from oral law (man made) and those that were violating those “rules”. The church was at odds as to how to bring correct order and needed some apostolic direction from Paul.
Now, the reason I reviewed that little point is because we will see that a lot of the questions that Paul replies to involve him clarifying the difference between their “oral law” and the laws and heart of God Himself. When we refer, or when Paul refers to God’s Law, he is referring to Old Testament scripture and Paul’s usual style if he refers to the Law is to then quote it or say “as it is written”. (Check out the previous chapters of 1 Corinthians to see that this is true.)
Okay- moving on to the verses in question, let’s take a look at 1 Corinthians14:34-35. They read as follows out of the NIV:
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”
As I have stated before, it is my goal in writing this series to write in a way that can be easily understood by anyone. I also am diligent to provide full and honest reasoning and theologically sound arguments and evidence. That being said, I want to jump ahead right here because I think it will enhance the understanding of where we’re headed.
The above scripture has been placed in quotations by me as I share it with you because it is not made of my own words. Likewise, the passage above should be in quotations in our Bibles too because they are not the words of Paul. Yes, Paul has written these words in his letter to the Corinthians but he is repeating a statement and common thought made by the religious leaders of the Corinthian church. In other words, he is quoting back to them something they said in their letter to him. It is interesting, then, to see that in the very next verse (v 36) Paul strongly rebukes the Corinthian Church. This makes perfect sense when you understand that Paul himself was not forbidding women to speak but was quoting their “oral tradition law” and practice and then rebuking it.
Okay, now, let’s back it all up and go through these passages and others in a more systematic way to show you how we arrive at the above conclusion which makes perfect contextual and grammatical sense and in no way limits women from speaking and participating in church services.
There is so much to say and scripture is so fascinating but let’s go ahead and start out a few chapters ahead of the passage in question and look at 1 Corinthians Ch 11. In this chapter, my Bible gives it a little sub-heading of “propriety in worship”. That seems like a good title because what Paul addresses in Ch 11 is how men and women should prophesy in a public gathering and also how to conduct yourself when taking Communion/The Lord’s Supper.
Hopefully, you noticed right away that I said Paul was giving instructions on how men and women should prophesy in an orderly way. In case you are unfamiliar with prophesy, a standard definition of one who prophesies is: a spokesperson for God who hears from God and speaks his message forth to the people. So Paul is acknowledging that both men and women can be that spokesperson. A woman or a man can equally exercise the gift of prophecy in a church service so long as they follow the proper order. Also, I hope you have realized that in order for a woman (or man) to prophesy in a church they actually have to speak. So in Chapter 11 (which could be a whole additional study in and of itself) Paul is telling women they can prophesy/speak in church.
In Chapter 12 Paul talks about spiritual gifts. He tells them that there are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. (v. 4) I will remind you of my previous posts where we talked about how there is only one Holy Spirit and it is the same Holy Spirit for both males and females. In Chapter 13, Paul speaks about love and how it is the essential foundation upon which and from which any of the other gifts must function. And then, we get to Chapter 14 where Paul is instructing and bringing answers to their questions on the orderly use of prophecy and tongues.
The bulk of Chapter 14 is filled with Paul describing and distinguishing between the uses and benefits of prophecy vs. tongues in a public setting. By the time we get down to v. 25 Paul is ready to summarize his points. Let’s look at verses 26-40 which close out Ch. 14.
(One little thing to add: the word “brethren” in some translations is the Greek word “adelphoi” which is gender plural or gender inclusive which means Paul is addressing both men and women. In the translation below it is written as “brothers and sisters”.)
26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.
29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.
34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38 But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.
39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
We already know that Paul has just stated (in Ch. 11) that women can speak and prophesy in the church. So why would he now say in his summary verses that women cannot speak, that they should remain silent, and if they want to inquire about something they should ask their husbands at home? The answer is, he wouldn’t say that. However, the Jewish leaders of the church would.
As we look at verse 34, we see the phrase “as the law says”. There are a few things to take note of here. First, there is no restriction on the speech of women in the whole of the written Law given by God. So this “law” cannot be referring to the written Law given by God. Also, the saying of this verse is completely consistent with Jewish rabbinical teaching (oral law) which we have covered in a previous installment of this series. Lastly, whenever Paul refers to the Law, he usually then quotes the scripture or precedes his use of the scripture by “it is written”.
Grammatically speaking, scholars have noted that after v. 35 at the beginning of v.36 there is a Greek symbol that indicates that the previous statement was a quotation. This would mean that when we read v 34 and 35, we are not reading Paul’s instructions to the church, but rather are reading Paul quoting back to the Corinthians something they have said or possibly written in the letter he is replying to. (We don’t know for sure if it was a written statement or just a Corinthian slogan because we don’t have a copy of the Corinthian’s letter to Paul.)
Following this theological interpretation, we would then see that this passage makes far more sense than when read through any other interpretation. Paul has already clearly stated that women are allowed to prophesy- speak- in church gatherings. He has already instructed them, as well as men, on the proper protocol. In verses, 26-33 we see continual encouragement from Paul to both men and women on speaking/utilizing spiritual gifts in an orderly way in worship services.
Now we have v 34-35 to deal with. If we read them as Paul making some universal declaration that women need to be silent in churches than we have all sorts of problems reconciling the previous multiple verses throughout this letter alone, not to mention the rest of the Bible. We also have to call into question Paul’s actual knowledge of the Law (OT scripture) because nowhere in the OT scripture scripture/Law does God ever forbid women from speaking in church or anywhere else. So if Paul is making an "across the board- for all time" statement based on something that isn’t in the Law, but he’s saying it is, well, then he is lying.
Furthermore, if Paul really did mean to make some universal statement about women being silent in church…then why would he rebuke his own words in the very next verse? (v 36 is a rebuke). What would he be rebuking?
However, if we read v 34-35 as Paul quoting the Judaizers (Jews who converted to Christianity but still believed in upholding the Rabbinical teachings and man-made religious laws), then it makes much more sense as does v 36. Verse 36 reads as follows in the KJV:
“What? Came the word of God out from you? Or came it unto you only?”
This is a direct rebuke to the Judaizers and any others that believed this saying that “women should be silent, must not speak and must be in submission as the law says”.
Interestingly enough, after this little clarification, Paul continues right on with what he was saying about keeping order during times of prophesy and the exercising of other spiritual gifts. Bottom line, all are welcome to participate in services through the Holy Spirit but are to do so in an orderly and fitting manner.
While these verses have been used to limit the role of women within the church and their use of spiritual gifts and even leadership, that was never the intention of God or Paul. The decidedly patriarchal lens through which most scripture has been passed down and interpreted is in need of some revision. When we read the Bible as a whole and we see the heart of God for women and His original plan for them, there is no question that they are equally suited to serve God inside and outside of the church.
Not all men are called to lead. Not all women are called to lead. But for all those women and men who are indeed called to leadership within the church, please know that you are 100% free to do that and nothing in God’s word is stopping you! His word is filled with advice and correction and instruction that should be equally applied by both male and females. Keep your heart close to His, listen and apply the Word of God to your life and actions, and just go be who He created you to be! Stay humble, stay teachable and be patient as His truth and love goes forth, slowly but surely, causing the man made rules and lies to crumble and fade away.
I hope you've enjoyed this series, I hope it will be a convenient, useful, easy to understand ministry tool for equipping and encouraging the Body of Christ!
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church
As always, it is important to have a little historical background on the people and region that Paul is writing to. Corinth was the second largest populated city, second only to Rome. It was a major hub of trade and its population consisted of not just Romans but also Jews, Orientals, Greeks, Egyptians, and others. Corinth was also known for shameful and immoral living and thus was a very challenging place to try to have Christianity take root. Against the odds, years earlier, Paul had indeed successfully planted the church but now all sorts of twisted doctrine and perverted messages were beginning to take hold causing many disputes and disagreements. It was time for Paul to speak order into the church once again.
If you remember from previous sections of this series, many of the Jews had created their own rules that went above and beyond any rules God Himself ever gave the people. These rules were ultimately gathered into what was known as the Oral law and were eventually written down in what is now called the Talmud. So in the midst of the Corinthian church we have the “real rules” from written scripture (God given) and those who were violating them, and, we also have the “fake man made rules” from oral law (man made) and those that were violating those “rules”. The church was at odds as to how to bring correct order and needed some apostolic direction from Paul.
Now, the reason I reviewed that little point is because we will see that a lot of the questions that Paul replies to involve him clarifying the difference between their “oral law” and the laws and heart of God Himself. When we refer, or when Paul refers to God’s Law, he is referring to Old Testament scripture and Paul’s usual style if he refers to the Law is to then quote it or say “as it is written”. (Check out the previous chapters of 1 Corinthians to see that this is true.)
Okay- moving on to the verses in question, let’s take a look at 1 Corinthians14:34-35. They read as follows out of the NIV:
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”
As I have stated before, it is my goal in writing this series to write in a way that can be easily understood by anyone. I also am diligent to provide full and honest reasoning and theologically sound arguments and evidence. That being said, I want to jump ahead right here because I think it will enhance the understanding of where we’re headed.
The above scripture has been placed in quotations by me as I share it with you because it is not made of my own words. Likewise, the passage above should be in quotations in our Bibles too because they are not the words of Paul. Yes, Paul has written these words in his letter to the Corinthians but he is repeating a statement and common thought made by the religious leaders of the Corinthian church. In other words, he is quoting back to them something they said in their letter to him. It is interesting, then, to see that in the very next verse (v 36) Paul strongly rebukes the Corinthian Church. This makes perfect sense when you understand that Paul himself was not forbidding women to speak but was quoting their “oral tradition law” and practice and then rebuking it.
Okay, now, let’s back it all up and go through these passages and others in a more systematic way to show you how we arrive at the above conclusion which makes perfect contextual and grammatical sense and in no way limits women from speaking and participating in church services.
There is so much to say and scripture is so fascinating but let’s go ahead and start out a few chapters ahead of the passage in question and look at 1 Corinthians Ch 11. In this chapter, my Bible gives it a little sub-heading of “propriety in worship”. That seems like a good title because what Paul addresses in Ch 11 is how men and women should prophesy in a public gathering and also how to conduct yourself when taking Communion/The Lord’s Supper.
Hopefully, you noticed right away that I said Paul was giving instructions on how men and women should prophesy in an orderly way. In case you are unfamiliar with prophesy, a standard definition of one who prophesies is: a spokesperson for God who hears from God and speaks his message forth to the people. So Paul is acknowledging that both men and women can be that spokesperson. A woman or a man can equally exercise the gift of prophecy in a church service so long as they follow the proper order. Also, I hope you have realized that in order for a woman (or man) to prophesy in a church they actually have to speak. So in Chapter 11 (which could be a whole additional study in and of itself) Paul is telling women they can prophesy/speak in church.
In Chapter 12 Paul talks about spiritual gifts. He tells them that there are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. (v. 4) I will remind you of my previous posts where we talked about how there is only one Holy Spirit and it is the same Holy Spirit for both males and females. In Chapter 13, Paul speaks about love and how it is the essential foundation upon which and from which any of the other gifts must function. And then, we get to Chapter 14 where Paul is instructing and bringing answers to their questions on the orderly use of prophecy and tongues.
The bulk of Chapter 14 is filled with Paul describing and distinguishing between the uses and benefits of prophecy vs. tongues in a public setting. By the time we get down to v. 25 Paul is ready to summarize his points. Let’s look at verses 26-40 which close out Ch. 14.
(One little thing to add: the word “brethren” in some translations is the Greek word “adelphoi” which is gender plural or gender inclusive which means Paul is addressing both men and women. In the translation below it is written as “brothers and sisters”.)
26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.
29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.
34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38 But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.
39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
We already know that Paul has just stated (in Ch. 11) that women can speak and prophesy in the church. So why would he now say in his summary verses that women cannot speak, that they should remain silent, and if they want to inquire about something they should ask their husbands at home? The answer is, he wouldn’t say that. However, the Jewish leaders of the church would.
As we look at verse 34, we see the phrase “as the law says”. There are a few things to take note of here. First, there is no restriction on the speech of women in the whole of the written Law given by God. So this “law” cannot be referring to the written Law given by God. Also, the saying of this verse is completely consistent with Jewish rabbinical teaching (oral law) which we have covered in a previous installment of this series. Lastly, whenever Paul refers to the Law, he usually then quotes the scripture or precedes his use of the scripture by “it is written”.
Grammatically speaking, scholars have noted that after v. 35 at the beginning of v.36 there is a Greek symbol that indicates that the previous statement was a quotation. This would mean that when we read v 34 and 35, we are not reading Paul’s instructions to the church, but rather are reading Paul quoting back to the Corinthians something they have said or possibly written in the letter he is replying to. (We don’t know for sure if it was a written statement or just a Corinthian slogan because we don’t have a copy of the Corinthian’s letter to Paul.)
Following this theological interpretation, we would then see that this passage makes far more sense than when read through any other interpretation. Paul has already clearly stated that women are allowed to prophesy- speak- in church gatherings. He has already instructed them, as well as men, on the proper protocol. In verses, 26-33 we see continual encouragement from Paul to both men and women on speaking/utilizing spiritual gifts in an orderly way in worship services.
Now we have v 34-35 to deal with. If we read them as Paul making some universal declaration that women need to be silent in churches than we have all sorts of problems reconciling the previous multiple verses throughout this letter alone, not to mention the rest of the Bible. We also have to call into question Paul’s actual knowledge of the Law (OT scripture) because nowhere in the OT scripture scripture/Law does God ever forbid women from speaking in church or anywhere else. So if Paul is making an "across the board- for all time" statement based on something that isn’t in the Law, but he’s saying it is, well, then he is lying.
Furthermore, if Paul really did mean to make some universal statement about women being silent in church…then why would he rebuke his own words in the very next verse? (v 36 is a rebuke). What would he be rebuking?
However, if we read v 34-35 as Paul quoting the Judaizers (Jews who converted to Christianity but still believed in upholding the Rabbinical teachings and man-made religious laws), then it makes much more sense as does v 36. Verse 36 reads as follows in the KJV:
“What? Came the word of God out from you? Or came it unto you only?”
This is a direct rebuke to the Judaizers and any others that believed this saying that “women should be silent, must not speak and must be in submission as the law says”.
Interestingly enough, after this little clarification, Paul continues right on with what he was saying about keeping order during times of prophesy and the exercising of other spiritual gifts. Bottom line, all are welcome to participate in services through the Holy Spirit but are to do so in an orderly and fitting manner.
While these verses have been used to limit the role of women within the church and their use of spiritual gifts and even leadership, that was never the intention of God or Paul. The decidedly patriarchal lens through which most scripture has been passed down and interpreted is in need of some revision. When we read the Bible as a whole and we see the heart of God for women and His original plan for them, there is no question that they are equally suited to serve God inside and outside of the church.
Not all men are called to lead. Not all women are called to lead. But for all those women and men who are indeed called to leadership within the church, please know that you are 100% free to do that and nothing in God’s word is stopping you! His word is filled with advice and correction and instruction that should be equally applied by both male and females. Keep your heart close to His, listen and apply the Word of God to your life and actions, and just go be who He created you to be! Stay humble, stay teachable and be patient as His truth and love goes forth, slowly but surely, causing the man made rules and lies to crumble and fade away.
I hope you've enjoyed this series, I hope it will be a convenient, useful, easy to understand ministry tool for equipping and encouraging the Body of Christ!
Copyright Eileen Slattery Berglund - Scriptural Basis for Legitimacy of Women in Leadership Within the Church