Download Women in Leadership FCA - Fellowship of Christian Assemblies

Women in Ministry research positions prepared by Michael McCartney for the
Fellowship of Christian Assemblies April meeting 2013:
The Fellowship has had many women play significant ministry roles in the history of the FCA.
The gifts of the Holy Spirit have been evident on both men and women in the FCA. Women
have been empowered by the Holy Spirit and have been used in the following leadership
positions within FCA churches over it’s history: planted churches, pastored churches (solo), copastored churches with their husbands, been evangelists, Bible teachers, preachers, Christian
Education educators and women have also been gifted missionaries fulfilling the role as
Christian leaders abroad. Many of these missionaries did pastoral ministry on the foreign
mission field.
We Pentecostals from around the world believe that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit began
in the early twentieth century as a true fulfillment of the following prophecy:
“Your sons and daughters will prophesy . . . Even on my servants, both men and women, I will
pour out my Spirit in those days” (Joel 2:28, 29; cf. Acts 2:16–18 - NIV).
This prophecy as confirmed by Peter in Acts and means that women as well as men are to
prophesy – in other words to proclaim the Word of God – our FCA history and the history of
many other sister groups has proven this to be true. God uses women in all positions of
ministry including senior leadership roles. We will see this to be true historically from the
Bible and from our church history.
I want to look at a few other fellow sister groups which are historically linked to our FCA
Fellowship. Their research, their historical precedent and Biblical discoveries will help us in
our exploration and position of women in ministry. I believe in this spiritual journey we will
discover that God is no respecter of persons and He will use men or women to lead His church.
Here is the official position paper of the Assembly of God on women in ministry – this is from
their official research paper – “The Role of Women in Ministry as Described in Holy Scripture”
This paper was adopted by the General Presbytery of AG in their General Session of August 911, 2010 it can be found at http://ag.org/wim/roleofwim/index.cfm:
Biblical Examples of Women in Ministry
Old Testament history includes accounts of strong female leadership in many roles. The
following are striking examples: Miriam was a prophet to Israel during the Exodus,
alongside her brothers Moses and Aaron (Exodus 15:20). Deborah, both a prophet and a
judge, directed Barak to lead the army of Israel into successful combat against Israel’s
oppressors (Judges 4 to 5). Huldah, also a prophet, authenticated the scroll of the Law
found in the temple and helped spark religious reform in the days of Josiah (2 Kings 22:14–
20; 2 Chronicles 34:22–28).
1
The New Testament also shows that women filled important ministry roles in the Early
Church. Tabitha (Dorcas) initiated an effective benevolence ministry (Acts 9:36). Philip’s
four unmarried daughters were recognized prophets (Acts 21:8,9). Paul singled out two
women, Euodia and Syntyche, as “women who have contended at my side in the cause of
the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers” (Philippians 4:2,3).
Priscilla was another of Paul’s exemplary “fellow workers in Christ Jesus” (Romans 16:3,4).
In Romans 16, Paul greets numerous ministry colleagues, a large number of them women.
In these greetings, the word Paul uses to speak of the work (kopiaō), or labor, of Mary,
Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis (Romans 16:6,12) is one he uses extensively for the labor
of ministry (1 Corinthians 16:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:12; 1 Timothy 5:17).
Phoebe, a leader in the church at Cenchrea, was highly commended to the church at Rome
by Paul (Romans 16:1, 2). Unfortunately, translation biases have often obscured Phoebe’s
position of leadership, calling her a “servant” (NIV, NASB, ESV). Yet Phoebe was diakonos of
the church at Cenchrea. Paul regularly used this term for a minister or leader of a
congregation and applied it specifically to Jesus Christ, Tychicus, Epaphras, Timothy, and to
his own ministry. Depending on the context, diakonos is usually translated “deacon” or
“minister.” Though some translators have chosen the word deaconess (e.g., RSV, because
Phoebe was female), the Greek diakonos is a masculine noun. Therefore, it seems likely that
diakonos was the designation for an official leadership position in the Early Church and the
proper translation for Phoebe’s role is “deacon” (TNIV, NLT, NRSV) or “minister.”
Moreover, a number of translations reflect similar biases by referring to Phoebe as having
been a “great help” (NIV) or “helper” (NASB) of many, including Paul himself (Romans
16:2). The Greek term here is prostatis, better translated by the NRSV as “benefactor” with
its overtones of equality and leadership.
Junia was identified by Paul as an apostle (Romans 16:7). Beginning in the thirteenth
century, a number of scholars and translators masculinized her name to Junias, apparently
unwilling to admit that there was a female apostle. However, the name Junia is found more
than 250 times in Rome alone, while the masculine form Junias is unknown in any GrecoRoman source. Paul clearly was a strong advocate of women in ministry.
These instances of women filling leadership roles in the Bible should be taken as a divinely
approved pattern, not as exceptions to divine decrees. Even a limited number of women
with scripturally commended leadership roles affirm that God does indeed call women to
spiritual leadership.
A Biblical Survey of the Role of Women in Ministry
Of primary importance in defining the scriptural role of women in ministry is the biblical
meaning of “ministry”. Of Christ our great model, it was said, “For even the Son of Man did
not come to be served [diakoneō], but to serve [diakoneō], and to give his life as a ransom
for many” (Mark 10:45; cf. Matthew 20:28). The New Testament leadership modeled by
2
Jesus portrays the spiritual leader as a servant, whether male or female. The question of
human authority is not of primary significance, though it naturally arises as organization
and structure develop.
Genesis 2:18–25-Some expositors have taught that all women should be subordinate to
adult men because Eve was created after Adam to be his “helper” (NIV; “help meet”, KJV).
Yet the word ēzer (“helper”) is never used in the Hebrew Bible with a subordinate meaning.
Seventeen out of the twenty times it is used, it refers to God as the helper. Eve was created
to be a help (kenegdo) “suitable” or “corresponding to” Adam, not a subordinate.
Some argue that God created men and women with different characteristics and desires,
and that these differences explain why leadership roles should be withheld from women.
Others attribute these perceived differences to culture and social expectations imposed on
children from birth to adulthood. Physical differences and distinctive biological functions
are obvious; but it is only by implication that gender differences can be made to suggest
leadership limitations.
Paul’s Emphasis on Charismatic Ministry
Ministry in the New Testament is charismatic in nature. It is made possible and energized
as the Holy Spirit sovereignty distributes spiritual gifts (charismata) to each member of the
body of Christ (Romans 12:6–8; 1 Corinthians 12:7–11,27,28; Ephesians 4:7–12; 1 Peter
4:10–11). While some gifts are a spontaneous work of the Spirit and others are recognized
ministry gifts to the Body, all are given for service without regard to gender differentiation.
For example, the gift of prophecy is explicitly for both men and women: “Your sons and
your daughters will prophesy” (Acts 2:17). The New Testament confirms that women
received and exercised this gift of the Spirit (Acts 21:9; 1 Corinthians 11:5).
If Peter found certain statements by Paul hard to understand (2 Peter 3:16), it is no
surprise that we, removed by nearly two thousand additional years of history, would share
his struggle in interpreting some Pauline passages. While the original audiences were
familiar with the problems that Paul addressed, we are left to reconstruct them and apply
his prescriptions as best we can in light of the larger context of his letters and biblical
revelation. And we, like Peter (2 Peter 3:15), must respect and love our brothers and sisters
who hold alternative interpretations on issues that are not critical to our salvation or
standing before God. We only request that those interpretations be expressed and
practiced in love and consideration for all of God's children, both men and women.
First Corinthians 11:3–12-The statement that “the man is the head of the woman” has for
centuries been used to justify the practice of male superiority and to exclude women from
spiritual leadership. Two alternative translations for kephalē (“head”), debated widely by
contemporary evangelical scholars, are (1) “authority over” and (2) “source” or “origin.”
Both meanings are found in literature of Paul’s time.
3
Taking the passage as a whole, the second meaning fits as well as or better than the first
meaning, leading to the summary statement of verse 12: “As woman came from man, so
also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.” Even the relationship
between the eternal Son and the Father—“the head of Christ is God” (11:3)—fits better as
“source” than “authority over” (cf. John 8:42). Without attempting definitively to resolve
this debate, we do not find sufficient evidence in kephalē to deny leadership roles to
women (in light of biblical examples of women in positions of spiritual authority, and in
light of the whole counsel of Scripture).
First Corinthians 14:34–36 - There are only two passages in the entire New Testament that
might seem to contain a prohibition against the ministry of women (1 Corinthians 14:34
and 1 Timothy 2:12). Since these must be placed alongside Paul’s other statements and
practices, they can hardly be absolute, unequivocal prohibitions of the ministry of women.
Instead, they seem to be dealing with specific, local problems that needed correction.
Therefore, Paul’s consistent affirmation of ministering women among his churches must be
seen as his true perspective, rather than the apparent prohibitions of these two passages,
themselves subject to conflicting interpretation.
There are various interpretations of what Paul was limiting when he said, “women should
remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak” (1 Corinthians 14:34). Paul
uses a word to limit the speech of women (sigatō) that previously has been used to limit
the speech of those speaking in tongues if there is no interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:28)
and prophets if a prophecy is given to another person (v. 30). It is only under such specific
circumstances that the speech of tongues speakers, prophets, and women are to be silenced
in the church. Under what circumstances then, is the speech of women to be limited?
Options include (1) chatter in public services, (2) ecstatic disruptions, (3) certain
authoritative ministries (such as judging prophecies), and (4) asking questions during the
service. It is apparent that Paul permitted women both to pray and prophesy in public
worship at Corinth (1 Corinthians 11:5). Moreover, Paul advised that those who prophesy
(evidently including women) should be among the ones to judge prophecies (1 Corinthians
14:29). Therefore, as with Paul’s constraints on both men and women tongues speakers
and prophets, it may be that Paul’s additional constraints on women have to do with other
forms of disruptive speech.
While the precise nature of Paul’s prohibition in this text is a matter of ongoing study, we
do conclude that it does not prohibit female leadership, but like the rest of the chapter, it
admonishes that “everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way” (1 Corinthians
14:40).
First Timothy 2:11–15-The meaning and application of Paul's statement, “I do not permit a
woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:12),
have puzzled interpreters and resulted in a variety of positions on the role of women in
ministry and spiritual leadership.
4
From the above survey of passages on exemplary women in ministry, it is clear that Paul
recognized the ministry of women. There were obvious problems in Ephesus, some relating
to women. Some women were evidently given to immodest apparel and adornment (1
Timothy 2:9). The younger widows were “into the habit of being idle . . . And not only do
they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to” (1
Timothy 5:13). In his second letter to Timothy, Paul warned against depraved persons
(possibly including women) who manipulated “weak-willed,” or “gullible,” women (2
Timothy 3:6).
A reading of the entire passage of 1Timothy 2:9–15 strongly suggests that Paul was giving
Timothy advice about dealing with some heretical teachings and practices specifically
involving women in the church at Ephesus. The heresy may have been so serious that he
had to say about the Ephesians’ women, “I am not allowing women to teach or have
authority over a man.” Other passages show that such exclusion was not normative in
Paul’s ministry.
First Timothy 3:1–13- This entire passage has been held by some to confirm that all leaders
and authorities in the Early Church were supposed to be males. The passage deals
primarily with male leadership, most likely because of majority practice and expectations.
But there is also significant support for female leadership.
Typical of modern English versions, the New International Version translates verse 11, “In
the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect”. The NIV translators
arbitrarily decided that the verse refers to the wives of deacons (even though there is no
reference in the preceding qualifications of elders to their wives).
However, the word translated “wives” is the plural of the Greek word gynē which can be
translated as either “woman” or “wife” depending on the context. Recognizing this, the NIV
translators did include the word “deaconesses” as an alternate reading in their footnotes.
But the NASB and the NRSV render the plural form of gynē as “women.” Thus, literally, the
verse is addressing the qualifications of women in spiritual leadership who, in this context,
might easily be called “deacons.”
Although the first-century cultural milieu produced a primarily male church leadership,
this passage along with other biblical evidence of female spiritual leadership (e.g., Acts
21:9; Romans 16:1–15 ; Philippians 4:2,3) demonstrates that female leadership was not
prohibited, either for Paul’s day or for today. Passages that imply most leaders were male
may not be taken to say that all leaders were male, since the biblical record speaks
approvingly of numerous female leaders.
Galatians 3:28- Those who oppose allowing women to hold positions of spiritual leadership
place contextual limitations on Galatians 3:28, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor
free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
5
Some interpreters restrict the meaning of this triad to salvation by faith or oneness in
Christ. That truth is certainly articulated throughout Scripture. Yet the verse carries a ring
of universal application for all our relationships, not just an assurance that anyone can
come to Christ. “Neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female”—these are basic
relationship principles to which faithful followers of Christ must give highest priority.
The God of the Bible “does not show favoritism” (Romans 2:11; cf. also 2 Samuel 14:14; 2
Chronicles 19:7; Acts 10:34; Ephesians 6:9). He calls whom He will and gives gifts and
ministries as He chooses; humans must not put limitations on divine prerogatives. The
strained relationship between Adam and Eve, including the statement that “he will rule
over you” (Genesis 3:16), comes as a result of the curse, making it clear that this was not a
part of God’s original and durable design for humankind. In Christ we are truly set free
from sin and its curse, which separate us from God and each other and cause us to elevate
or demean according to race, social standing, or gender.
Therefore We Conclude (The Assembly of God)
After examining the various translations and interpretations of biblical passages relating to
the role of women in the first-century church, and desiring to apply biblical principles to
contemporary church practice, we conclude that we cannot find convincing evidence that
the ministry of women is restricted according to some sacred or immutable principle.
We are aware that the ministry and leadership of women are not accepted by some
individuals, both within and outside the Christian community. We condemn all prejudice
and self-promotion, by men or women. The existence of bigotry against women in our
world, and all too often in the church, cannot be denied. But there is no place for such an
attitude in the body of Christ. We acknowledge that attitudes of secular society, based on
long-standing practice and tradition, have influenced the application of biblical principles
to local circumstances. We desire wisely to respect yet help redeem cultures that are at
variance with Kingdom principles. Like Paul, we affirm that the Great Commission takes
priority over every other consideration. We must reach men and women for Christ, no
matter what their cultural or ethnic customs may be. The message of redemption has been
carried to remote parts of the world through the ministry of dedicated, Spirit-filled men
and women. A believer’s gifts and anointing should still today make a way for his or her
ministry. The Pentecostal ministry is not a profession to which men or women merely
aspire; it must always be a divine calling, confirmed by the Spirit with a special gifting.
The Assemblies of God has been blessed and must continue to be blessed by the ministry of
God’s gifted and commissioned daughters. The Bible repeatedly affirms that God pours out
His Spirit upon both men and women and thereby gifts both sexes for ministry in His
Church. Therefore, we must continue to affirm the gifts of women in ministry and spiritual
leadership.
Surely, the enormous challenge of the Great Commission to “go and make disciples of all
6
nations” (Matthew 28:19) requires the full deployment of all God’s Spirit-gifted ministers,
both men and women.
So we see that the Assemblies of God believes women should not be hindered in being spiritual
leaders within the Church of Jesus Christ. They believe that women should follow the calling of
God and their gifting and not be hindered in any way. In their research of the Bible and
historical precedent they conclude that Women can be spiritual leaders in the church in all
realms.
I have also researched the Foursquare position on women in ministry and want to highlight
some of their findings as well. You can get more information on their official position from
http://www.foursquare.org/news/article/women_in_leadership.
Women in Leadership Ministry
The Foursquare Church
Introduction
This document is intended to serve several purposes. It is, first of all, an explanation of why
our family of churches believes women should serve in ministry and why they should be
encouraged to rise to the highest levels of leadership. We make no attempt to write a
lengthy theological defense of our position; there are already many books written on this
subject. This booklet is certainly theological, but written with a simple style and with a
positive tone, explaining why we believe it is both Biblical and practical to encourage every
woman to fulfill the calling God has put in her heart—whatever that calling may be. The
contents herein are intended to be relevant to a broad audience: the board of directors and
cabinet of The Foursquare Church, Foursquare churches, ministers, members. Our goal is to
provide a quality document that strengthens a concept that is unmistakably important to
the life of our denomination.
Further, we hope this document will allow us to explain ourselves gracefully to the larger
Body of Christ; and we also hope it will allow us to release some Foursquare pastors who,
because of concern over certain Bible passages, have quietly opposed women leaders. In
some areas of the church, a person’s stance on this issue is seen as an indicator of whether
or not that person holds a high view of the authority of the Bible: anyone who releases
women to lead is thought by some to be disregarding Scripture. To answer this, we will
address these controversial passages with a defense that tries to reveal the meaning in a
straightforward way. We realize there is room for sincere disagreement on this topic, but
we want it to be evident that our position is not a compromise or an accommodation to
current trends. Rather, it is heart-felt obedience to what we believe the Bible commands.
Doctrine Committee Members
Jim J. Adams
Jack W. Hayford
John A. Mazariegos
Jim C. Scott
7
Part One: Position Statements
Introduction
The publication of a booklet on women in ministry leadership is the process of a few
months; however, the framing of the conceptual basis for such a document is the result of
years. Throughout its history, The Foursquare Church has addressed the subject with brief
statements, including the following:
1988 Board of Director’s Declaration
On April 12, 1988, the board of directors unanimously passed the following declaration:
The present and historical position of the Foursquare Church affirms the Biblical truth
that women are called of God to roles of leadership and public ministry. We hereby
reaffirm and encourage the ministry of women throughout the International Church of
the Foursquare Gospel.
1998 Women in Ordained Ministry Leadership
The 1998 excursus for the Foursquare Church entitled “Women in Ordained Ministry
Leadership” was foundational to this document. We thank the dedicated writers of that
excursus for the work they did regarding the role of women in ordained ministry
leadership.
2005, Our Statement and Our Spirit
The Great Commission, along with the need of the dying world in which we live, calls for all
the people of God, His sons and daughters, to engage the harvest using whatever gifts He
has entrusted to them. Since women are redeemed, anointed, gifted, called, and loved by
God in exactly the same way as men, we categorically affirm that they should be fully
released to exercise their gifts for every facet of ministry in His church.
Since its founding, the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel has affirmed the
place of women in ordained ministry and leadership. The position of the Foursquare
movement regarding ministry leadership has always been the following:
Anyone called by God and verified through character, spiritual experience and preparation
for service or leadership, is qualified for Foursquare Church ministry in any role or office,
regardless of gender, age, or ethnicity.
This understanding has afforded women positions in all capacities in the local church, on
the mission field, and at all levels of government in the Foursquare corporate structure.
The Foursquare Church has never presented this issue as an essential of the faith, but, at
the same time, it is a distinctive of our movement’s tradition—the atmosphere we have
8
chosen, after searching the Scriptures, for relating to one another. Foursquare’s
“Declaration of Faith” clearly notes a determination to exercise “in all things charity,” and
we are committed to avoiding any polarization that exists in the Church at large. The
following discussion, though brief, is not intended to engage in debate with any who hold
differing perspectives. We simply wish to indicate that a studied view of God’s Word
undergirds the position taken by the Foursquare Church to release women into ministry
leadership, rather than restrict them from that role.
Part Two: A Biblical Basis for Women in Ministry
Introduction
The Foursquare Church is now, and has been since its founding, a movement submitted to
the authority of Scripture. Our first article of faith unmistakably places the Bible as the
foundation of all we believe, signifying clearly that we consider the Word of God to be the
final authority in all matters of faith and practice. The issue of women in ministry
leadership is not an exception to this value. We are proud of our history, and we deeply
respect our founder, Aimee Semple McPherson; we are grateful that she invested her gifts
and talents in establishing a denomination that would outlast her—something possible
only because the foundation upon which The Foursquare Church was built was not Sister
McPherson, but the inerrant Word of God. Our honoring of her example of godly ministry
and our desire to perpetuate that example are based on a strong conviction that Sister
McPherson’s ministry was clearly consistent with Biblical truth. We believe that the Word
of God requires us to include women as equal partners in ministry with men. Our position
is a matter of obedience, not compromise.
Here is Foursquare’s Commentary on Relevant Bible Passages regarding women in
ministry:
Question 1: Was the Old Covenant more generous than the New?
To say that the culture of the ancient Near East was male-dominated would be an
understatement. Although numerous women played very significant roles in Old Testament
history, the truth is that only a few had positions that included providing spiritual
leadership to men. Because of the cultural context out of which those examples come,
passages that boldly acknowledge women leaders become all the more meaningful,
especially when divine favor is shown toward their leadership. It is significant that the
Biblical writers felt no shame in reporting that such women led them, nor did they hide the
fact that those women leaders were empowered in their ministries by God’s Spirit. No
suggestion is made that these women were out of order or unauthentic in that which they
ministered. In fact, the opposite is the case.
Miriam was called “the prophetess” (Exod. 15:20) and was one of the three main leaders
“sent before” Israel by God to lead the people out of Egypt (Mic. 6:4).
Deborah, the wife of Lappidoth, sat as judge of Israel, keeping the land “undisturbed for
forty years” (Judg. 4:4-5; 31). Her assistant, Barak, deferred to her primary leadership
9
because he recognized her gifting and calling (Judg. 4:8). In the song written to
commemorate the victory gained over their enemies, Deborah wrote of how the common
people were afraid to travel in their own land “until I, Deborah arose, until I arose, a mother
in Israel” (Judg. 5:7).
When Hilkiah, the high priest, found the lost Book of the Law in 621 B.C., King Josiah chose
to inquire of the Lord from the prophetess Huldah, wife of Shallum, who then advised both
the high priest and the king in regard to their futures (2 Kings 22:14-20).
Esther, who had become queen of the Persian Empire, saved the lives of her people through
her bravery, and she also established the 13th and 14th of Nisan as a celebration of that
deliverance. The Feast of Purim is observed to this day.
Isaiah referred to his wife as “the prophetess,” showing full acceptance of her gift and
calling (Isa. 8:3).
These passages lead us to explore some essential concepts. The Old Covenant is defined far
more by rules and law than the New, yet it celebrates women leaders. It does not seem
possible, then, to interpret New Testament passages in a way that restricts women’s
leadership. There seems to be no explanation to satisfactorily support the assertion that the
New Covenant requires women to be silent and offer no leadership in Christian gatherings
when any man is present. It is, however, logical to expect the New Covenant to emancipate
women and provide them entry to greater levels of ministry rather than to subordinate
them further.
Question 2: Did Paul disagree with Peter concerning Joel’s prophecy?
Joel 2:28-31
According to Joel 2:28-31, one of the wonders accompanying the arrival of the “Day of the
Lord” would be the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on God’s people. Although the event
would include judgment upon the unrighteous, the righteous were to anticipate it joyfully,
for it would bring great blessings. And there could be no greater blessing than the
unlimited gift of God’s Spirit. This same theme is expressed by other prophets as well.
Isaiah and Habakkuk pictured the earth immersed in God’s presence “as the waters cover
the sea” (Isa. 11:9; Hab. 2:14). This comparison of the Spirit to liquid may be one reason
that both John the Baptist and Jesus later described this outpouring of God’s Spirit as a
“baptism with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Acts 1:4, 5; 11:16). Something like an ocean of
God’s presence would immerse believers, men and women alike, and transform them into
Spirit-empowered ministers. Joel very specifically prophesied that the Spirit would be
“poured out” on males and females, young and old, and he went on to say that, when the
Spirit arrived in that dimension, He would enable people to operate in supernatural levels
of ministry, including prophecy, prophetic dreams, and visions. This fits quite well with the
theme that runs through much of the Bible–that it is God’s desire for His people to become
“a kingdom of priests” to fulfill offices that are authoritative by their very nature (Exod.
10
19:6; 1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10). Joel said that God’s prophetic gifts would be given to both
men and women, and prophetic gifts are normally meant to be spoken so others can hear
and obey. The passage in Joel goes on to describe some of the cataclysmic turmoil that will
immediately precede the return of Christ (Joel 2:30,31). Joel issued a warning to people
who would be living in those tumultuous days, urging them to repent and “call on the name
of the Lord,” assuring them that, if they do so, they “shall be saved” (v. 32). The implication
is that people will call on the name of the Lord and be saved as a result of a spiritempowered generation, including both genders, proclaiming God’s promise of salvation.
According to Joel, both men and women will be anointed in the same way, with the same
Spirit and the same enablement, giving both men and women the authority and the power
to speak to that generation. Without pursuing the eschatology of this text any further, the
point that is of particular application to our discussion is this: something remarkable will
happen to God’s people before the return of Christ (v. 31). God’s people will be transformed
by an endowment of the Spirit, and God will use them to extend His invitation to be saved
to whoever will hear it. Afterward, the world will face the terrifying judgment of God (Joel
3:12-16). With this summary of these verses of Joel in mind, let us turn to Peter’s
application of the same verses on the Day of Pentecost.
Acts 2:14-21
On the Day of Pentecost, about ten days after Jesus’ ascension into heaven, 120 believers
gathered in Jerusalem for prayer in an upper room (Acts 1:13-15; 2:1). The group included
women, one of whom was Jesus’ mother, Mary (Acts 1:14). Upon all of these the Holy Spirit
fell suddenly and powerfully, coming in a way that first produced a loud sound and then
appearing visibly as flames of fire over each person’s head. The symbolism of “tongues of
fire” over their heads would have been meaningful to Jews who were well-versed in the
Torah. That manifestation was a sign that the Spirit had chosen to abide in them, just as the
pillar of cloud and fire had proclaimed His presence over the tabernacle in the wilderness
(Exod. 40:34-38). The flames declared that those disciples had become living “tabernacles”
in whom the Spirit dwelled. What happened next was even more remarkable. The believers
began to extol the “mighty deeds of God” in foreign languages they had never learned. As
they did so, a crowd of pilgrims from many different nations gathered to observe the
phenomenon. Some, misunderstanding the spiritual event they were watching, mocked the
disciples as being drunk. At that, Peter stood up to address the crowd of thousands.
Without the slightest hesitation, he told them what they were seeing was not drunkenness,
but the arrival of the moment promised by the prophet Joel. Peter then quoted the same
verses we examined in the previous section. There is no mistaking the point he made: he
was announcing that the “last days” season promised by Joel had arrived (v. 16). Its arrival
was the reason men and women were prophesying in such miraculous fashion. Peter then
went on to quote Joel 2:28-32 to prove his point and to warn the crowd that they were
being given an opportunity to repent before facing the day of God’s judgment. As a result,
approximately 3,000 souls responded to Peter’s call to repentance (Acts 2:41).
Application: If Peter was inspired by the Spirit to announce, “…This is what was spoken of
through the prophet Joel…” (v.16), then it is clear that, at that moment, God was beginning
11
a new season of His work on earth. As the chronicle of the Early Church unfolds throughout
the Book of Acts, it is apparent that the apostles (including Paul) did not consider Pentecost
a once-for-all event; they saw it as the beginning of a new spiritual potential for all
believers (See Acts 2:39; 4:31; 8:14-17; 10:44-48; 11:15-18; 19:1-7.). The Holy Spirit’s
equipment for supernatural ministry was being given without discrimination to all God’s
people: male and female, young and old alike. Moreover, that availability and inclusiveness
would continue until “the great and glorious Day of the Lord…” (v.20). The dilemma these
passages pose for our discussion is this: If, as some assert, Paul absolutely forbade women
to speak in a gathering of believers, he would have been rejecting Peter’s announcement
and stating that he believed the fulfillment of that portion of Joel had not yet arrived. This
point needs to be made firmly because, if that were the case, we would be forced to decide
whether we believe Peter or Paul is correct. If Paul forbade women to prophesy in a
service, then he stood in direct opposition to Peter. And if Peter’s announcement was
correct, then Paul must not have been inspired when he commanded women to remain
silent in a church service. Of course The Foursquare Church does not believe that there is a
contradiction in the Holy Spirit’s words through these two great apostles. Paul did not
reject Peter’s application of Joel, but fully agreed that the era of the Spirit which had begun
meant that men and women, young and old, would be equally empowered for spiritual
ministry. Paul’s admonishments to women “to keep silent in the churches” (1 Cor. 14:34)
and not to “teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (1 Tim. 2:12) were
not a refusal to acknowledge a woman’s spiritual potential; they were pastoral solutions to
specific problems being faced by those to whom he wrote. In fact, the verse from 1 Timothy
cannot be extracted from the surrounding verses and explicated outside of the greater
context in which it occurs. Much of the content of the second and third chapters of 1
Timothy has to do with husband and wife relationships, and, because of that specific
application, should not be generalized to address all male/female relationships. Paul
wanted both men and women to avoid being conformed to the gender roles that had been
shaped within a world system that was completely Godless. When we look more closely at
those frequently cited passages later on, we will see that they were not universal
commands forbidding women to exercise their spiritual gifts in public.
Question 3: Did Paul allow women to minister in 1 Corinthians chapter 11 and then
forbid them to minister in chapter 14?
1 Corinthians 11:2-12
It seems that confusion rather than rebellion was the reason women had stopped covering
their heads in the churches of Corinth. Paul’s opening affirmation, “…I praise you because
you…hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you” (v.2), indicates that the
churches had been trying to obey him in this matter. But it seems that they had failed in
that attempt. Paul did not specifically say what caused the misunderstanding, but the
women may have over-zealously applied the principle
12
that “in Christ” believers are set free from observing religious rituals (Gal. 3:24-4:7). While
the “Law” had passed away, there were still social norms that should be respected and
observed. By removing their traditional head covering, the women in Corinth made an
unintentional but inappropriate social statement.
Verse 3: With the heart of a pastor, Paul asked those women to restrict some of their
freedom, a theme he repeatedly applied in this letter to all believers (1 Cor. 9:19-23; 10:2311:1). Then he listed several reasons for asking them to do this. The first reason, is the
principle of “leadership.” The word “head” as it is used here is best explained by Paul
himself in verses 7-12. Although the word can express several basic meanings, Paul seemed
to use the word to refer to that which is the source of another’s existence; this concept
includes the implication that one who comes forth from the “head” is intended to bring
honor (glory) to the “head.” He illustrated this by using the examples of three persons who
are the “head” of someone else: Christ, Adam, and God the Father. First, Paul identified
Christ as the agent of creation for Adam in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:7; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2;
John 1:10; 1 Cor. 8:6). The statement “Christ is the head of man” indicates that Adam came
forth from the pre-incarnate Son and was, therefore, intended to bring honor to Him. The
next reference is to the creation of the first woman, which occurred when God, through His
pre-incarnate Son, took a rib out of the man and fashioned Eve. In that way, the man was
the source of the woman. She was made as a partner to help him and to complete what was
lacking in him (Gen. 2:20-25). Finally, this passage of Scripture points out that even Christ
has a “head,” God the Father. The Father begot the Son and is His eternal source, and the
Son honors the Father by faithfully carrying out His part of God’s plan. This last example,
drawn from the Trinity, shows the proper attitude within which these relationships are to
function. The relationship between the Father and Son is marked by love and mutual
respect. The Son freely chooses to honor the Father, and the Father delights in honoring the
Son (1 Cor. 15:28). It is Christ’s attitude that Paul asked the women to emulate in their
relationships with their husbands by continuing to cover their heads with a shawl during
worship services. The reason the shawl mattered will become clearer as we consider the
next three verses.
Verses 4 and 5: The custom of Jewish men covering their heads with prayer shawls had
apparently not yet begun in Paul’s day. A man’s uncovered head symbolized his
acknowledgment of God as his source (v.7). A covered head would have been a disgraceful
statement. This portion of the text indicates that some of the women had decided that, if
men did not have to cover their heads during worship, then neither did they. Of course,
theologically, they were right. But, in the culture of that day, removing their head covers
was an inappropriate social statement. As a symbol of modesty, Jewish women of that time
normally braided their hair and covered it with a shawl when in public or in worship
(Edersheim 142). They covered their beauty to avoid attracting undue attention and as a
public acknowledgment that they were married women. A woman untied her hair and let it
hang freely only in the presence of her husband. In that setting her uncovered hair was a
beautiful expression of marriage. But when the women of Corinth sat in church with their
heads uncovered,
13
they pressed cultural sensitivities too far. They were engaging in behavior that labeled
them as immodest and single. So Paul tried to explain that, though they were free from
religious ritual, they still needed to consider the effect of their behavior on others. It is
significant to our discussion to point out that this verse specifically alludes to women
praying or prophesying in the formal gatherings of the church; the matter-of-fact tone gives
no hint of disapproval. Paul’s sole concern was the social statement made by their
uncovered heads. This acknowledgment of women praying and prophesying in public
services needs to be kept in mind as we consider the next passage.
1 Corinthians 14:33-35
Verse 33: In chapters 11-14, Paul communicated important truths regarding Christian
worship gatherings. One such truth is that the Spirit sovereignty distributes His gifts to
each believer. Another is that love should control how and when those gifts are expressed.
Verse 33 includes another foundational principle: God’s own personality is orderly and
peaceful. Therefore, if God is really in charge of a meeting, the meeting will express His
personality and will not degenerate into noisy confusion. Paul told the Corinthians that
their loud tumultuous services were very different from the gatherings of believers in other
cities. It seems unlikely that anyone at that time had been in more churches than Paul had,
and he informed the Corinthians that they were the only ones behaving that way. If the
disorderly services they conducted were truly under the Spirit’s control, then it would have
been logical to expect a similar disorder to exist in other churches that welcomed the
Spirit’s presence and work in their gatherings. Instead, the services in other cities were
peaceful and well-ordered. The dignity of those churches stood as a testimony against the
wildness in Corinth. The lack of order was not the unique working of the Spirit in Corinth;
rather, it resulted because the church was immature and out of step with God and His
people.
Verse 34: Paul wanted peace and order restored to the Corinthian services. Having just
dealt with tongues and prophecy he addressed another aspect of their gatherings that was
producing noisy disorder. It seems that women were engaging in some sort of disruptive
questioning. We can speculate about the type of questions they posed and whether or not
men and women were seated separately, but those matters really do not change the
significance of this passage to our topic. If these verses were intended as a pastoral
correction to noisy women, telling them to ask their questions at home, then Paul’s
admonition, “The women are to keep silent in the churches…” was not meant to be a
censorship of women who were trying to minister properly in the services. Paul was not
imposing a new law that prohibited women from making a sound in a service. The “law”
referred to in verse 34 is not identified, but it is logical to infer that it is the same principle
he pointed to in 11:3-16, which was the idea of women showing respect to men. If so, then
the questions being asked may well have included antagonistic challenges toward some of
the men. Significant to our discussion is that this passage was not meant to stop women
from making constructive contributions such as praying or prophesying; it was written to
restrain a pattern of disruptive dialogue that had emerged in the first-century church. At
times
14
these verses have been taken out of context, and people ignore the fact that that Paul had
already acknowledged the possibility of women praying and prophesying. These verses are
then used as evidence to prove that women are forbidden to participate in the spoken gifts
during a meeting.
Question 4: To what extent do gender roles disappear for those who are joined to
Christ?
Galatians 3:21-4:7
Paul was dismayed that certain churches he had planted in Galatia were being drawn away
from the central tenet of the gospel, which is that the gift of Christ’s righteousness is
received on the basis repentance and faith alone. He taught that believers must abandon all
hope of earning their way to heaven by either performing good deeds or religious rituals.
The context of this letter indicates that self-appointed teachers had gone to Galatia after
Paul left, telling the churches that Paul had misled them. In particular those “teachers”
claimed that Christians still needed to observe certain practices of Judaism, circumcision
being foremost. They said that faith in Christ must be supplemented with obedience to
certain commandments from Old Testament Law. Paul wrote to the Galatians to correct
that deception. In the middle of his theological explanation about the relationship of the
Law to salvation, he made a startling remark about women. He stated that women and men
were one in Christ and, as such, heirs of the same promise (v.28).
Verse 25: When a person is saved through faith in Christ, the role of the Law as a teacher in
regard to salvation is finished. The teacher then hands us over to our Heavenly Father.
Verse 26: Faith in Christ brings us into an entirely new relationship with God. He becomes
our Father, not in a metaphorical sense, but in a literal sense. By being joined spiritually to
His only begotten Son, we become adopted sons; this position of “sonship” applies to both
men and women. “In Christ” women stand before God (along with men) as “sons” (vv. 26;
4:6, 7). This term is not intended to disparage the position of a daughter but to emphasize
the point that women are not ascribed a lesser status than men. Women are “sons” in this
case because they are joined to the Son. They stand on exactly the same level as men, they
inherit exactly the same promises, and they can have exactly the same types of ministry.
Verse 27: Water baptism illustrates how completely we have been placed into Christ. Just
as we are plunged into water, we are immersed into Christ. There is a mystery here, but the
concept of being “in Christ” is affirmed so often in the New Testament that the spiritual
reality it points to is surely meant to be taken literally (See John 17; Rom. 6; Eph. 1.). Paul
could accurately say, “…You… have clothed yourselves with Christ.”
Verse 28: So that there would be no mistaking to whom Paul referred when he used the
plural pronoun “you,” he listed specific categories of people. This indicates that
15
inclusion in Christ supersedes all other human categories. Being a Jew or a Gentile makes
no difference in a person’s standing before God. Coming from a high or low position in
society makes no difference. Following those remarkable statements, Paul made a further
declaration that applies directly to our discussion concerning women in ministry
leadership: “…There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Gender
distinctions do not limit a person’s spiritual capacity. Joined to Christ, all inherit everything
He has inherited (See Rom. 8:32; 1 Cor. 3:21-23.). All are clothed with His righteousness,
and all are equipped with His authority.
Question 5: Are women subordinated to men because of Adam and Eve?
1 Timothy 2:9-15
Paul wrote this letter to give Timothy guidelines for pastoring the Ephesian church.
Although Paul was not the first Christian to evangelize that major regional city, his was the
foundational ministry that produced the explosive growth that made it a leading church in
Asia Minor (Acts 18:18-21; 19:1-41). Departing from his pattern of evangelizing other
cities, Paul remained in Ephesus and pastored the congregation for three years (Acts 20:1738). He knew that after he departed those who opposed him would grow more outspoken
(Acts 20:29, 30), so he appointed Timothy to pastor in his place until mature elders could
be raised up. And controversy did arise just as Paul predicted. Self-appointed teachers tried
to impose aspects of Old Testament Law onto the gospel. A picture of those false teachers
emerges in Paul’s letters to Timothy. They were theologically ignorant (1 Tim. 1:6,7), they
aggressively opposed essential elements of Paul’s gospel (1 Tim. 1:3,4; 4:1; 6:20,21), and
they exploited their role as teachers for financial gain (1 Tim. 6:5-10). The false teachers
found that some of the women in the church were a very responsive audience (1 Tim. 4:7; 2
Tim. 3:6-9). In such an environment, church services must have had tense moments of
conflict that required Timothy to correct and teach with great boldness. To help him do
that, Paul reminded him of the prophecies that had been spoken over him (1 Tim. 1:18;
4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6,7). In the strongest of terms, Paul exhorted Timothy to preach the truth (2
Tim. 1:7; 4:1-5) and not be self-conscious about his relatively young age (1 Tim. 4:12).
When it was necessary for him to rebuke an older man or woman, he was to deliver the
rebuke, but he was to be sure that he did so in a respectful tone of voice (1 Tim. 5:1,
2).
1 Timothy 2:1-10
In this passage, Paul issued a series of instructions to help Timothy counter some of the
problems he faced. First, Paul addressed the church’s corporate prayer life, which was
lagging, probably because of the internal strife (2:1-8). Anger had diminished their unity.
Next Paul addressed the immodest clothing and ornate hairstyles of some of the women
whose behavior, whether naïve or deliberate, brought strife to the church (2:9,10). Some
dressed in revealing clothing, and others wore expensive gowns and jewelry; those
behaviors produced envy in other women. As their apostle, Paul commanded the women of
the church to dress modestly and to avoid public
16
displays of wealth (Rienecker and Rogers 620). He told them that the notice a Christian
woman receives should not be the result of lust or envy that draws the eye, but rather the
light of Christ’s love shining through her as she carries out her God-given ministry. That
Christ-like beauty is the “clothing” that belongs to every woman who professes reverence
toward God.
1 Timothy 2:11-14
These verses have been the subject of much debate in Christian circles. Some have used
them to prevent women from teaching in public gatherings. Others have reacted angrily
against what the verses appear to say, accusing Paul of uninspired bigotry toward women.
However, considering their historical context, these verses were probably written to
silence certain women who had become aggressive proponents of legalism and to warn
them of the danger they faced in rejecting Paul’s gospel. It has already been clearly
established that Paul did not forbid women to speak authoritatively in church. He
acknowledged in his first letter to the church in Corinth that he expected women to pray
and prophesy (1 Cor. 11:5,13). It would be extremely odd for him to say one thing to the
church in Corinth and another to the church in Ephesus. And, of course, Paul did not
contradict himself with such inconsistencies. We must let the context of this passage reveal
the meaning. As was mentioned earlier, false teachers were trying to control what was
being taught in the church. They, along with some of their disciples, were defying Timothy
(See 1 Tim. 1:3-7; 18-20; 2:8; 4:1-5, 7; 5:1,2; 6:3-5, 20, 21.). Judging from the force of Paul’s
statements, some of Timothy’s greatest opposition was from women. In the liberated
atmosphere of the Early Church, they apparently challenged the young pastor’s authority
and rejected the doctrine Paul had taught him. The culture of that day denied education to
women, especially theological education, and this kept women vulnerable to deception
(Spencer 84-86, 91, 94). Timothy was to be bold and insist that the women learn from him.
Week by week as he taught the Word (1 Tim. 4:13, 16; 2 Tim. 4:2), they would gain the
theological training they lacked. If they would “quietly receive instruction,” in time there
would be women teaching in Ephesus (Spencer 95).
Verse 11: This verse has traditionally been translated, “Let a woman learn in silence…”
(KJV), a translation that leaves the impression that a woman is not permitted to teach in a
church service when men are present. But the word some translate as “silence” does not
the absence of sound. Several other Greek words do mean the absence of sound or the
muzzling of the voice, but Paul chose to use none of them in this passage. The term he used,
hesuchia, has to do more with a person’s attitude than speech. It refers to people calming
down and no longer arguing. The word in one form or another is used in the following
passages: Luke 14:4; 23:56; Acts 11:18; 21:14; 22:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:11; 2 Thessalonians
3:12; 1 Timothy 2:11, 12; and 1 Peter 3:4. These verses indicate that Paul actually told the
Ephesian women to stop being contentious. He asked them not to join the public arguments
that were going on, but to remain quiet. The final phrase in this verse, “…in all subjection”
17
pictures someone maintaining the attitude of a “student” rather than becoming a “teacher.”
This all makes sense if we recall that Paul’s purpose was to mediate a difficult situation, not
define women’s ministry potential for all other situations.
Verse 12: Paul said, “…I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise [a self-taken] authority
over a man, but to be in silence [hesuchia].” In the flow of the sentence, the words “teach”
and “exercise authority” seem to define one action rather than two. In other words, Paul
was not talking about teaching and authority, but teaching in a manner that uses a
particular kind of authority. The kind of authority to which he referred is explained by the
uncommon Greek word he chose, authentein. The common word for “authority” is exousia,
and Paul used this word twelve times elsewhere in his letters. The word authentein is
based on the personal pronoun for “self” and is used to describe those who exercise an
authority that no one has given to them. Paul’s goal was to keep those women from using a
self-taken authority when addressing Timothy or Paul himself (1 Tim. 3:1,2; 5:17). The
women were to be humble and learn from them. Naturally, Paul would not have wanted a
man to teach with autocratic authority either, but that is not the situation he addressed in
this passage.
Verses 13, 14: In verses 11 and 12, Paul told the Ephesian women to learn from Timothy
peacefully. Of course, the implied message for Timothy was “Do not back down when
strong personalities confront you.” In this passage, Paul wanted to show those who are
being contentious that they had been deceived. The warning he issued was based on the
example of Adam and Eve because there was a striking similarity between the situation in
Ephesus and the Garden of Eden. Adam was created first and had lived in Eden prior to Eve.
During that time, he personally heard God speak to him forbidding him to eat from the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16, 17). He had a firsthand revelation from God
Himself. However, Genesis does not record a similar incident involving Eve. It is certainly
possible that the topic of the forbidden fruit came up in conversation as the two humans
walked together with the Lord “in the cool of the day” (Gen. 3:8), but it is also possible that
Eve received her knowledge of this command from Adam rather than directly from God.
This seems to be most consistent with the Biblical text. It is this second understanding that
turns these two verses in Timothy into a powerful warning to the Ephesian women without
disparaging them as the gender more vulnerable to deception (“but the woman being
deceived,” v.14). In fact, a universally applicable principle emerges in these verses, and it fit
the crisis in Ephesus perfectly. If Eve received the command from Adam, then an additional
level of trust would have been required of her, beyond what was required of Adam. When
tempted, she had to decide if she would obey the command, but she also had to determine
whether or not Adam’s information was accurate. The serpent’s temptation may have
caused her to doubt that Adam had understood what he heard (Gen. 3:4-6). In a similar
way, the Ephesian women had to choose whether or not to trust Paul’s report of the gospel,
which he claimed to have received directly from Christ. He said the gospel he preached was
not something he had invented or something he had been taught by another teacher. He
had received it by revelation (Gal. 1:11,12). Just as God first spoke to Adam, who then
spoke to Eve, so God had
18
also first spoken to Paul. Because Eve rejected Adam’s report, she fell into deception and,
ultimately, death. If the Ephesian women rejected Paul’s report of the gospel, they would
make the same mistake Eve had made. She doubted Adam; they doubted Paul. Paul had
appointed Timothy as his representative and had taught him the gospel. By listening to the
voices of the false teachers, the Ephesian women were being deceived by the serpent just
as Eve had been. They needed to stop trying to correct Timothy and trust that he was
accurately presenting the gospel that leads to salvation. They needed to “receive
instruction with all submissiveness” so that they could gain a solid theological foundation.
Then they could rise to the levels of ministry leadership to which God had called them. We
should be careful to note that Adam and Paul were not simply representatives of men in
general. They were humans selected by God to receive special revelation. Paul was not just
another teacher; he was a true apostle. The analogy would not apply otherwise.
The Conclusion after the research for Foursquare in regards to women in ministry is:
It may seem odd that a discussion about women in ministry leadership would devote so
much attention to the question of whether or not women are allowed to speak in a church
service. Yet an examination of these passages is necessary because most of them have been
used to prevent women from taking leadership roles. If women cannot even speak in a
service, any discussion about their authority to lead is ended. We in The Foursquare
Church, a Biblically based movement, are addressing these passages once again to
demonstrate that they are applied improperly when they are offered as proof that women
should not lead. We are fully convinced that gender does not determine the ministry
capacity people can receive from God.
Once again we see a fellow sister group which believes from their Biblical research that
women should be allowed in all phases of spiritual leadership within the Body of Christ.
Here is another fellow Charismatic Pentecostal group stating that women should be allowed
to lead at all positions within the church of Jesus Christ – even senior leadership positions.
The official Vineyard stance on women in ministry - compiled by Winn Griffin, D Min. and you
can find other resources supporting women in ministry at
http://www.vineyardusa.org/site/task-forces/women/article/story-god-and-womenministry.
God is the master storyteller. He has delivered a time honored story first in an oral
presentation, then later in a written presentation. He is responsible for all the ingredients
of what goes on in a story.
What are those ingredients, you may ask? Good question! A story could simply be defined
as a presentation of a question with the expectation of an answer. A story has a
protagonist/hero, one who has an intention and overcomes conflict to secure a resolution.
This perfectly describes the Story of Scripture.
19
Tom Wright1 has suggested that the Bible can be best understood as a story which has
several acts; for him it is a five-act-play. This story moves from Creation to New Creation
through the maze of independence, i.e., conflict toward the goal of humankind restored
completely to their interdependent status.
In the first act, recorded in the first chapter of Genesis, God creates the universe. The back
story of this Act is that of the Covenant, whose story is recorded in Act 3, stating the first
stipulation of that covenant, i.e., you can’t have any other God but me. In Act 2 we have the
story of Creation told again with a focus toward humankind being created to be
interdependent with God, but as the scenes move forward, humankind decides that
independence from God would be better than independence with God. So, they break the
only stipulation in the Garden and eat of the tree that was forbidden.
Within Act 1 and 2, we have the setup of the story. God created humans to be
interconnected with him, and the conflict, humans decided to be disconnected from God.
The remaining Acts are told so that the reader can see how the main hero of the Story, who
is God, intends to overcome the conflict and bring about a resolution to it.
Here are some things to keep in mind. First, from the beginning there was the Kingdom and
the Church. God created a world over which he could have reign. The first human couple
formed the first version of the Church. There are several upgrades to this version of the
Church throughout the story. Second, the two humans who were created were created
equally, one being second in sequence to be a helper equal to the first one. There was no
hierarchy of male over female. Third, the couple together broke the only stipulation in the
Garden. Fourth, the curses that were given out for disobedience were only given to the
serpent, not the two humans.
One of the interpretations coming out of this story that has long influenced the concept of
mutuality of female and male is the interaction where God tells the woman that the man
will rule over her. There is a similar saying in close context to this saying that sheds light on
how to understand what the storyteller meant. We are told a bit earlier that the sun would
rule over the moon. So, to comprehend what this means, we must ask the question, what
did that rule look like? It is fair to say that the sun does not, even to this day rule over the
moon in the way in which we have become accustom, to understanding authority and
submission in our culture.
As we progress into Act three which tells the story of God’s rule in terms of the Mosaic
covenant and Israel as the next version of the Church, there are times where we see the
sub-stories which demonstrate that the place of a woman, even in a culture which is male
oriented, shines out as a light of the equality of female and male in the storyline. Women
from Sarah to Esther demonstrate that there is another story at play inside the overall
storyline.
In Act 4, we see Jesus bringing about an updated version of the Kingdom which has come to
20
be referred to as the inauguration of the Kingdom and the move toward a new version of
the Church in his choice of the twelve as the leadership of Israel rejected Jesus early in the
storyline of the Gospel of Mark. We could call that progression or trajectory. The apex of
the Story in Scripture is also the climax of the Story. The conflict which began in the Garden
is now solved with the event of Jesus who moved into the neighborhood showing the
Church how to live a Kingdom life as truly new humans, now, but not yet. What occurred in
the Garden is now undone in Jesus.
Act 5 continues to show us how the Church of the first century struggled with learning how
to be the true humanity for the sake of the world. The culture in which they lived provided
one story of how to live while Jesus had provided another story. Paul, the earliest writer of
“help” letters written to churches, wrote about this new humanity idea in the first book of
the New Testament era to be written, the book of Galatians, to demonstrate to the folks in
Galatia who were Judaizing themselves. He told them that the distinctions that the old
humanity had held sway over them, had been broken in Jesus and there was neither Jew
nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. In the ministry of Jesus to bring about the
beginning of a new creation, these distinctions had been broken and cast aside.
Remember, these books written in this period of time were ad hoc and dealt with specific
problems that the churches were facing when learning to live out their new humanity in
their old culture. Some of these books have passages that had to do with the place of
women and their function in the church, which when they heard them allowed them to find
the freedom described from Paul’s pen. While it looks like some of those books may contain
passages that forbid the work of women in the ministry of the church, they do not mean
what it looks like they mean with a surface reading with an old English version governing
the reading. The context produces quite a different picture of what is meant.
So What?
What does all this have to do with women in ministry and leadership? The great storyteller
has provided us with a story to live into as inaugurated Kingdom people. In a succinct way,
God created the world in which male and female were equal. By their choice, the male and
female decided to become independent from God’s design. In this independent world
humans move to another story, one in which a male was superior to a female. God selected
a people through whom he would send his son, who in a great climactic event would
overcome the conflict brought on by independence and its results and bring resolution to
the problem introduced by male and female. In this climactic act, Jesus brought a new
creation, not unlike the first one before independence became the rule. In that new
creation, male and female are once more equal. In this new creation, there is neither male
or female, i.e., there is equality between the sexes. The concept of headship which had been
produced by humankind in its independent state has been completely reversed.
So why has the Vineyard moved toward the participation of women in leadership, including
senior leadership within Vineyard churches? Because we believe that we are following the
21
trajectory of the New Testament. We believe that we are looking at this idea through
inaugurated Kingdom lenses and working out the values of the Kingdom presented in the
New Testament.
We are a centered set people. And that focus allows us to move forward to embrace the
ministry that God has called each of us to do for the sake of others and provides equal
access for both females and males to actively interface in ministry. Living into his Story
calls us to move from other stories to live in this new creation. The lens of the inaugurated
Kingdom demands no less.
© 2009. Winn Griffin. DMin. The Story of God and Women in Ministry
So once again in my research of another Pentecostal Charismatic group we see that they too
have come to the conclusion that women should be in ministry even in senior pastoral roles. I
have met some of their senior pastor leaders who are women and they are doing a great work
for the Kingdom of Heaven.
In my research on the big question: “Should women be allowed to be pastors, senior pastors,
preachers, elders, Christian leaders within the Body of Christ?” I keep seeing the answer to this
question as “Yes!”
I bring you one last well known Biblical Seminary which also has a stance on women in
ministry and it comes from Fuller Theological Seminary. Let’s see what they have to say about
our big question.
Women in Ministry thoughts from Fuller Theological Seminary:
Women have contributed much to the ministry of the Church throughout its history.
However, their role in this area has never been free from controversy. Today, most church
bodies are discussing the place of women in their ministries. Crucial to these discussions
for many of us are the matters of faithful biblical interpretation. Perhaps a few words
should be said about the concept of ministry itself on the basis of the New Testament.
Today, we tend to confuse our specific church traditions about ordination with the biblical
concept of ministry. The New Testament says relatively little about ordination. It clearly
portrays, however, the fact that the early Church had a varied and faithful ministry arising
from the fact that all of God’s people were “gifted” by the Holy Spirit for the purpose of
building up one another (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 12:4-31, 14:1–19; Romans 12:3–8;
Ephesians 4:7–16; 1 Peter 4:8–11). Any person could exercise ministry (which means,
remember, service) who was called and gifted by God and affirmed by the body of Christ,
the Church. Some were set apart in leadership positions and some were assigned specific
tasks to accomplish, but the differences among ministries were not distinction of kind.
Eventually, certain types of affirmation were combined with certain functions of ministry
to produce our current understanding of ordination. Modern debates over the ordination
of women often miss the crucial and basic issues of the holistic concept of the ministry of
22
the Church reflected in the New Testament. Of course, no person should be ordained or
given any responsibilities of ministry within the Church because of gender or for the sake
of a “point.” On the other hand, we have affirmed in the Church that no person, called and
gifted by God, should be denied any role of ministry or leadership in the church because of
one’s gender.
Acknowledgement of following content: All “Women in Ministry” articles on these pages
are adapted, with permission, from those authored by David M. Scholer for The Covenant
Companion: December 1, 1983; December 15, 1983; January 1984; and February 1984
issues. See Women in Ministry: The Basis in Creation from http://www.fuller.edu/AboutFuller/Women-in-Ministry/The-Basis-in-Creation.aspx
The foundation:
The basic foundation of the partnership of women and men in God’s creation and in the
Church and its ministry is given in the opening chapter of Genesis. Here are found two
fundamental perspectives, which should inform our thinking about persons and mutual
relationships.
First, man (‘adam), a generic term meaning the “human person,” is created in God’s very
own image (Genesis 1:26–27; 5:1–2). This creation in God’s image includes the
identification of persons as male and female. This mutuality of women and men carries no
suggestion of male headship or female submission.
Second, this mutuality is confirmed in that both the man and the woman are together,
without distinction, charged with responsibility for all of God’s creation (Genesis 1:26, 28).
This equal partnership between man and woman is also present in the retelling of the
creation story in Genesis 2. Here the man is found in need of a companion, but none of the
creatures God has created qualify (Genesis 2:18–20). Thus, God differentiates man (‘adam)
into man (‘ish) and woman (’ishshah), persons of separate male and female gender identity.
The point of such a provision of companionship is to relate the male and female persons as
equals, indicated by the common designations (‘ish/’ishshah; the same word root) and the
common identity of bone and flesh (Genesis 2:23). This is climaxed with the concept of
mutuality expressed in the “one flesh” language (Genesis 2:24).
Some have interpreted Genesis 2:23, in which the man (‘ish) calls the “bones of my bones
and flesh of my flesh” woman (‘ishshah), as an act of naming which demonstrates the
headship or authority of man over woman. However, that type of naming does not occur
until after the Fall when “Adam named his wife Eve . . . ”(Genesis 3:20).
Genesis 2 also indicates that the woman partner with the man will be an appropriate
“helper” (Genesis 2:18). The word “helper” (‘ezer), when used of a person in the Old
Testament, always refers to God (in 29 places) apart from the one reference to David. The
word “helper,” then, is not to be understood as an expression of submission and service to
23
man; rather, the woman as helper serves God with man.
The woman and man sin together
(Genesis 3:1–7). Although it does not show in English translations, the serpent addresses
the woman with the plural “you.” Genesis 3:6 states that the woman “. . . gave some [of the
fruit] to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.” The fact that the man was with her
(a phrase sometimes omitted from English translations!) indicates that both partners are
together involved in disobedience to God. This is also seen by the fact that it is after both
ate that it is said: “Then the eyes of both of them were opened . . . (Genesis 3:7).
The statements of judgment for disobedience (Genesis 3:14–19) are deceptive ones of
future realities, which involved a supremacy/subjection relationship between man and
woman. These statements are not creation mandates; rather the relationship of mutuality,
partnership, and equality portrayed in Genesis 1:1–3:7 is now sadly marred by sin.
In the time of Jesus’s ministry, women were usually regarded as subordinate and inferior in
virtually every area of life. They were to remain at home, to be good wives and mothers,
and to take no part in public discourse or education. Josephus, a Jewish historian, said: “The
woman, says the Law, is in all things inferior to the man. Let her accordingly be submissive .
. .” It was also said: “Better is the wickedness of a man than a woman who does good”
(Sirach).
The basis of women in Jesus ministry.
Jesus, however, by his teaching and actions, affirmed the worth and value of women as
persons to be included along with men within God’s love and service. Jesus challenged
“sexual put-down” of women. In Jesus’s setting, the prerogative of divorce belonged almost
exclusively with men, and virtually any reason could be used to justify divorce. Jesus
tolerated no such “male chauvinism.” He recalled the “one flesh” concept (Genesis 2:24) of
mutual partnership and God’s intention for marriage (Matthew 19:3–9). Although women
were held responsible, in Jesus’s time, for all sexual sin, Jesus rejected this “sexism” with his
dramatic indictment of men: “. . . anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:27).
Jesus reached out to women who were rejected. In spite of the laws regarding uncleanness
Jesus allowed a woman with a twelve-year menstrual problem to touch him and
commended her faith (Mark 5:25–34). Jesus permitted a sinful woman to anoint and kiss
his feet (Luke 7:36–50). Jesus challenged religious leaders by saying: “I tell you the truth,
the tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you” (Matthew
21:31). He also offered salvation directly to women who were known as adulteresses (John
4:4–42 and John 8:1–11).
In Jesus’s day responsible teachers were not to teach women. Nevertheless, Jesus taught
women and included them in his group of committed disciples. He taught Mary of Bethany
and commended her learning to her sister who was carrying out the traditional tasks (Luke
10:38–42). It was to the Samaritan woman that Jesus made his most explicit affirmation
24
that he was the Messiah, and he shared with her his basic mission (John 4:4–42). According
to Luke 8:1–3 many women were in Jesus’s band of traveling disciples. These same women
were present at the crucifixion and burial and on resurrection morning (Luke 23:49, 55–
56; 24:1).
Jesus affirmed the value of committed discipleship and obedience to God, even over the
natural and valued role of mother: “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s
word and put it into practice” (Luke 8:21), and “Blessed [rather than his own mother] are
those who hear the word of God and obey it” (Luke 11:28).
The women Jesus included became the proclaimers of Jesus as Savior and risen Lord. The
Samaritan woman was responsible for evangelizing her town (John 4:39–42). All of the
Gospels show that it was Jesus’s women disciples who were the first persons to declare the
message of Jesus’s resurrection, central to the gospel in the early church.
Among Jesus’s disciples we know of seventeen men by name: the Twelve, Joseph Justus,
and Matthias (Acts 1:23), Lazarus, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea. What is not so
often noted is that we also know women by name from among his circle of devoted
disciples: Mary the mother, Mary Magdalene, the “other” Mary, Mary of Bethany, Joanna,
Susanna, and Salome.
Jesus’s inclusion of and ministry to and through women within his own life and teaching
were a powerful witness to the early Church of the partnership of women and men within
its membership and ministry.
Women in ministry in the early church of Acts
The Book of Acts shows clearly that women were part of the first church in Jerusalem and
were included as the church grew and spread. The group of 120 disciples (Acts 1:15) who
waited in Jerusalem for the coming of the Holy Spirit included women such as those
previously mentioned in Luke as disciples who followed Jesus and Mary the mother of Jesus
(Acts 1:14). That women continued as part of the growing church in Jerusalem is attested
by Luke’s comments that “more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were
added to the number” (Acts 5:14), and that Saul, in his persecution of the Jerusalem church,
“dragged off men and women and put them in prison” (Acts 8:3; see also 22:4). Women are
frequently mentioned in Acts as the account of the spread of the church is given, including
the widows in Joppa, Timothy’s mother Lystra, the women in Philippi, the prominent
women who joined the church in Thessalonica, the prominent women in Berea who
believe, Sarius in Athens, Priscilla in Corinth, the wives in Tyre, and Philip the evangelist’s
four daughters who had the gift of prophecy in Caesarea.
Apart from documenting the widespread presence of women in the early church, the
account in Acts presents us with three additional items of importance. First is the fact that
when the Holy Spirit came in power and in fulfillment of God’s Word (Joel 2:28–32) both
25
men and women were present (Acts 1–2). Peter interpreted the events of Pentecost to
mean that the “last days” of God’s time had come and that God’s Spirit was poured out on
both women and men enabling them to prophesy. This foundational role was significant in
the early church (see Acts 21:8–9; 1 Corinthians 11:5). Throughout the history of the
modern Church, the events of Acts 2 have been one of the major arguments in favor of
women in ministry.
Second, the involvement of women in the establishment of the Philippian church is note
worthy (Acts 16:11–40). Paul begins the church in Philippi, the leading city of its district,
with a group of women gathered for prayer outside the city gate (Acts 16:13–15). The
“place of prayer” here is probably to be understood as a synagogue. Clearly one of the
leaders of this remarkable women’s synagogue was Lydia. She and her home became the
center of the new Philippian church (Acts 16:14–15; 16:40). This data is very significant
background for the two women of Philippi who worked with Paul in the gospel ministry
(Philippians 4:2–3).
Third, Acts gives some indication of the importance of Priscilla (Acts 18:2,18,26). She, along
with her husband Aquila, instructed Apollos who became a noted teacher in the church
(Acts 18:26). There has always been debate over the significance of the fact that Priscilla
taught Apollos at home rather than in the church, but it must be recognized that she did
teach Apollos (see 1 Timothy 2:12). Galatians 3:28, like Acts 2, has been cited for hundreds
of years as a basis for women in ministry. Detractors of women in ministry often argue that
Galatians 3:28 refers only to the spiritual reality of equal access to God through faith in
Christ Jesus. The text does refer to this, but it clearly encompasses other realities as well.
There are three traditional pairings, and they reflect the three basic social divides of
hostility within the first century A.D. in the Roman Empire. Paul’s declaration would have
had no less actual social impact than an American preacher’s statement in the 1950’s that
“in Christ Jesus there is neither Black nor White” would have had.
Further, the conflict of Paul and Peter recorded in Galatians 2:11–14 demonstrated that the
declaration of “neither Jew nor Greek” had social implications in the life of the Church.
Paul’s letter to Philemon has similar implications for “neither slave nor free” in asking
Philemon to accept Onesimus as a dear brother in the Lord just like Paul (Philemon 15–17)!
Paul’s declaration about male and female had implications, too, for the life of the Church.
The point is not the obliteration of God’s created differences between male and female, but
is that sexual differentiation does not determine the participation in Christ’s Church for
persons created in the image of God.
Paul also notes the mutuality of men and women in Christ in two striking passages in 1
Corinthians. In 1 Corinthians 7:3–5 Paul makes it clear that sexual relations between a
husband and wife are matters of mutuality and equality in respect and in rights. Such a
position grew out of the love and inclusiveness of Christ and was directly counter to the
prevailing Jewish and pagan opinion in the Roman Empire that the husband had all the
sexual rights over his wife. In 1 Corinthians 11:11–12 Paul includes a strong and explicit
26
assertion of the mutuality of men and women lest his discussion about head coverings be
misunderstood as against women’s participation.
The discussion of head coverings for women in 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 clearly implies and
assumes that women, as well as men, engage in prayer and prophecy (1 Corinthians 11:5).
The participation in prophecy is the “highest” gift in the Church because it is the means of
edification, encourage-ment, and comfort in the Church (1 Corinthians 14:3). Such
edification is the purpose of the Church’s life together and constitutes, under the Holy
Spirit, the exercise of authority and teaching in the Church. Thus, Paul concludes the first
part of his discussion on head covering (1 Corinthians 11:2–10) by stating that women
ought to have authority on their heads. 1 Corinthians 11:10 is rarely translated in English
(most often one finds “a sign of authority” or “veil”), but Paul asserts that women have
authority, using his normal word which always means the active exercise of authority (and
never the passive reception of it).
Paul’s letters also mention twelve women by name who were coworkers with him in the
gospel ministry. This is the most often neglected evidence from the New Testament
relevant to the participation of women in ministry.
Three women are known as leaders of house churches (the only type of church there was in
the first century!): Chloe (1 Corinthians 1:11), Nympha (Colossians 4:15) and Apphia
(Philemon 2). To this group we can add Lydia, a Pauline house church leader known from
Acts 16.
Paul stated that four women—Mary, Tryphen, Tryphosa, and Persis (Romans 16:6, 12)—
had worked very hard in the Lord. The Greek word translated “work very hard” was used
very regularly by Paul to refer to the special work of the gospel ministry, including his own
apostolic ministry (1 Corinthians 4:12; 15:10; Galatians 4:11; Philippians 2:16; Colossians
1:29; 1 Timothy 4:10; see also Acts 20:35) as well as the work of others in the ministry,
leaders, and persons of authority in each case (1 Corinthians 16:15–16; 1 Thes-salonians
5:12; 1 Timothy 5:17). Thus, for Paul, the term, “work very hard” was not a casual term
referring to menial tasks.
In Romans 16:3–4 Paul greeted Priscilla and Aquila. This husband and wife team is
mentioned six times elsewhere in the New Testament. It is significant that Priscilla is
usually mentioned first, since the cultural pattern would be to name the husband first. This
may indicate that Priscilla was the more important or visible leader and may suggest that
she had a higher social status and/or more wealth than Aquila. Paul indicated that he and
all the Gentile churches were indebted to both of them. Paul designated Priscilla and her
husband Aquila “fellow workers in Christ Jesus,” a term used regularly for other leaders in
the gospel ministry: Urbanus (Romans 16:9), Timothy (Romans 16:21), Titus (2
Corinthians 8:23), Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25), Clement (Philippians 4:3), Philemon
(Philemon 1), Demas and Luke (Philemon 24), Apollos and himself (1 Corinthians 3:9), and
several others (Colossians 4:11).
27
In Philippians 4:2–3 Paul mentioned two women, Euodia and Syntyche, who he also classes
“along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers” and noted that these two women
fellow workers “contended at my side in the cause of the gospel,” an expression similar to
the “worked very hard in the Lord” phrase applied to the four women noted in Romans 16.
In view of Acts 16:11–40 it is not surprising that two such women leaders emerged in the
Philippian church.
Phoebe, usually assumed to have been the one to deliver Paul’s letter to Rome, is warmly
commended by Paul to the Roman church (Romans 16:1–2). Phoebe is designated as “a
servant of the church in Cenchrea.” Although some have thought the word “servant” here
means “deacon” (or “deaconess”), that is most unlikely since the other New Testament
texts which refer to the office of deacon mention the office of bishop in immediate
conjunction with it (Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8, 12). Paul regularly used this term
“servant” to refer to persons clearly understood to be ministers of the gospel: Christ
(Romans 15:8), Apollos (1 Corinthians 3:5), Epaphras (Colossians 1:7), Timothy (1 Timothy
4:6), Tychicus (Ephesians 6:21, Colossians 4:7), himself (1 Corinthians 3:5; Ephesians 3:7;
Colossians 1:23, 25), and generally 2 Corinthians 3:6; 6:4; 11:15, 23. Thus, Phoebe should
be understood as well as the minister (leader/preacher/teacher) of the church in Cenchrea.
Paul identified Andronicus and Junias as “outstanding among the apostles” (Romans 16:7),
an expression which includes them within the apostolic circle. Junias is a male name in
English translations, but there is no evidence that such a male name existed in the first
century A.D. Junia, a female name, was common, however. The Greek grammar of the
sentence in Romans 16:7 means that the male and female forms of this name would be
spelled identically. Thus, one has to decide—on the basis of other evidence—whether this
person is a woman (Junia) or a man (Junias). Since Junia is the name attested in the first
century and since the great Church father and commentator on Paul in the fourth century,
John Chrysostom (no friend of women in ministry) understood the reference to be a
woman Junia, we ought to read it that way as well. In fact, it was not until the thirteenth
century that she was changed to Junias!
These thirteen women surveyed here (Lydia, Chloe, Nympha, Apphia, Mary, Persis,
Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Priscilla, Euodia, Syntyche, Phoebe, and Junia) provide clear
evidence from Paul that women did participate in the gospel ministry, as did men. Paul’s
common terminology made no distinctions in roles or functions between men and women
in ministry.
1 Corinthians 14:34–35 is one of the two texts from the New Testament often used as a
major argument against preaching, teaching, and leadership ministries for women in the
Church. If one believes that the Bible supports women in ministry, then an adequate,
biblical explanation must be offered for this apparent prohibition.
It should be recalled that Paul has already indicated in this letter—1 Corinthians—that
women did participate in prayer and prophecy with the authority in the Church (1
28
Corinthians 11:5, 10;14:3–5). This fact alone shows that 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 cannot be
a general, absolute, and timeless prohibition on women speaking in Church…The view
which seems best to me is to understand the speaking prohibited here to women to refer
only to disruptive questions which wives (usually uneducated in the culture of Paul’s time)
were asking their husbands. This corresponds precisely with the resolution Paul offers (1
Corinthians 14:35): “if they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own
husbands at home…” Such disruptive questioning was also considered a disgrace in Paul’s
day in which it was widely believed that it was morally indiscreet for any wife to say
anything on any subject in public. This view of disruptive questioning also fits well the
specific context (1 Corinthians 14:26–40) in which Paul is concerned about
appropriateness and order, which permit genuine edification (note that 1 Corinthians
14:26 expects everyone to participate). Thus, there are actually three injunctions to silence
(1 Corinthians 14:2, 30, 34), although many Bible translations use “silent” only in 1
Corinthians 14:34.
1 Timothy 2:8­–15 is the paragraph in the New Testament which provides the injunctions
(2:11–12) most often cited as conclusive by those who oppose preaching, teaching, and
leadership ministries for women in the Church. It is inappropriate, however, to isolate
verses 11–12 from the immediate context of 1 Timothy 2:8–15. If any of the paragraph is
perceived as culturally bound (as 2:8–10 often is) or as especially difficult in terms of
Pauline theology (as 2:15 often is), it must be realized that these same issues must be
confronted in understanding 2:11–14.
It should also be observed that 1 Timothy 2:11–12 is a general prohibition on teaching and
authority exercised by women. It is not directed to only a certain level of persons (such as
“ordained” in distinction from “non-ordained” or “pastors” as distinct from “missionaries”).
Further, it is not limited to only certain styles of teaching (“preaching” as distinct from
“sharing,” seminary teaching, or writing theological books). In other words, if 1 Timothy
2:11–12 were a trans-cultural, absolute prohibition on women teaching and exercising
authority in the church, then it prohibits all such activity.
The word in verses 11 and 12 often translated as “in quietness” (11) and “silent” (12) is
identical in Greek. The same term is used by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 3:12, which the NIV
translates as “settle down.” The point is that this term, which is often assumed to mean
only “verbal silence,” is better understood as an indication of proper order or acceptance of
normal practice. The term translated “to have authority” (authentein) occurs only here in
the New Testament and was rarely used in the Greek language. It is not the usual word for
positive, active authority. Rather, it is a negative term, which refers to the usurpation and
abuse of authority. Thus, the prohibition (2:11–12) is against some abusive activity, but not
against the appropriate exercise of teaching and in the church. The clue to the abuse
implied is found within the heretical activity outlined in 1–2 Timothy. The heretics
evidently had a deviant approach to sexuality (1 Timothy 4:3; 5:11–15) and a particular
focus on deluding women, who were generally uneducated (2 Timothy 3:6–7).
29
The injunctions are supported with selective Genesis arguments (2:13–14), using Genesis 2
rather than Genesis 1 (2:13) and the fact of Eve’s deception (2:14, see the use of this in 2
Corinthians 11:3 for male heretics). The function of the Genesis argument is parallel to its
use in 1 Corinthians 11:7–9 where it is employed to argue that women must have their
heads covered in prayer and prophecy. In both cases scriptural argument is employed to
buttress a localized, limited instruction. The concluding word of hope for women (2:15) is
an affirmation of the role of bearing and nurturing children, a role considered as the only
appropriate one by many in the culture who believed women incapable of other roles as
well. This conclusion (2:15) is parallel in thrust to 1 Timothy 5:3–16 and Titus 2:3–5, both
of which are concerned with specific cultural expectations.
Two broad and basic issues of responsible biblical interpretation should concern us in this,
indeed, in any issue—balance and consistency. In terms of balance, it is the total witness of
Scripture which must inform our thought and action. In terms of consistency, it is crucial to
approach our understanding of all biblical texts in the same way in order to offset as much
as possible our blind spots and biases.
Opposition to women in ministry has often been mounted virtually on the basis of one
Pauline text—1 Timothy 2:11–12. Whatever that difficult text and context means, it must
be put in balance with all other biblical texts which bear on the same issue. This shows, in
my judgment, that the 1 Timothy text does, in fact, speak to a limited situation.
Further, in regard to balance, one must struggle with starting points. For example, on the
matter of “eternal security” of believers, does one read Hebrews 6:4–6 “through” Romans
8:28–39, or should the Romans text be read “through” the one from Hebrews? It has often
been assumed without question that 1 Timothy 2:11–12 is the “control” (i.e. authoritative)
text through which all other New Testament data on women in ministry must be
challenged. It is more plausible, in my judgment, to approach 1Timothy 2:8–15 through the
accumulated witness of all the other Pauline passages on women in the church.
Consistency in interpretation is notoriously difficult. Yet, to push it here may help
considerably in the attempt “to hear” the Scriptures. Why is it that so many persons insist
that 1 Timothy 2:11–12 is a trans-cultural, absolutely normative text, but at the same time
do not approach other texts in 1 Timothy with the same passion? Pressed in the same way,
1 Timothy 3:2 would rule out all single men from ministry, and 1 Timothy 5:3–16 would
require churches to establish “orders of widows” for those sixty and older and would
require that all widows fifty-nine and under remarry for the reasons of their sensual
desires and idleness.
Most of us do not literally exchange the kiss of peace or holy kiss even though the New
Testament commands it five times (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians
13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 Peter 5:14). Most of us do not consider foot washing a
necessity even though Jesus explicitly commanded it (John13: 14–15). Obviously, our
inherited tradition and/or our sense of the cultural contexts of certain texts strongly
30
inform our interpretations.
Finally, consistency and balance mean that we cannot impose on texts understandings that
are not there. We cannot devalue the authority Jesus gave to his followers or the authority
of prophecy in the Corinthian church just because they do not have the same structural
pattern as that of 1Timothy. We cannot divide the injunction of 1Timothy 2:11–12 into two
levels of authority imposed from our context so that women can be included in some
activities but excluded from the “highest” levels.
In conclusion, it is my deepest conviction that the full evidence of Scripture and an
understanding of balance and consistency in interpretation mean that we must rethink
some of our traditions and reaffirm with clarity and conviction the biblical basis for the full
participation of women in the ministries of the church. The underlying biblical theology of
a “new creation in Christ” in which there is “neither male and female” is a powerful
affirmation of the commitment to equality in the Gospel, the Church and all of its ministries.
Jesus’s inclusion of women among his disciples and witnesses, the coming of the Holy Spirit
on both sons and daughters, and Paul’s inclusion of women in his circles of coworkers in
the ministry all affirm the full and equal participation of both women and men in all the
ministries of the Gospel.
The above from http://www.fuller.edu/About-Fuller/Women-in-Ministry/Consistencyand-Balance.aspx
So once again another group of believers affirms that women should be allowed to be all that
God has called them to be. If pastors then pastors- if elders then elders – if preachers than
preachers and yes we need to follow the teaching of Scripture and be no respecter of person’s
like God is and let the women be the leader’s God has called them to be.
31