Women of the Bible / Women in Ministry

The reason this article combines the topics of women of the Bible and women in ministry is because the noble women of the Bible also functioned in God’s service in one capacity or another. In short, the two subjects go hand-in-hand.

Of course the main question we want to tackle is whether or not women can serve in positions of ministry in the body of Christ, including the fivefold ministry, that is, serve as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors or teachers (Ephesians 4:11-13). Please keep in mind that ‘ministry’ means “service” and ‘minister’ means “servant” (Matthew 20:25-28).

An understandable response is: Why can’t woman serve in ministry and be ministers? After all, were Aimee Semple McPherson (pictured above) and Kathryn Kuhlman in gross sin by serving as healing evangelists, reaching millions in the 20th century? (That’s a rhetorical question).

The reason this article is important is because there are sincere believers in the body of Christ who question the legitimacy of women in ministry and base their disapproval (or, at least, agnosticism) mostly on a couple verses in the New Testament. We’ll honestly examine those verses, but we’re going to first set some vital groundwork on the topic and examine myriad notable women in the Bible, both New Testament and Old Testament. However, if you want to go straight to the two supposed “hard sayings” on women in the New Testament, just scroll down to the sections 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-15.

Now let’s start with some foundational passages on the topic…

Understanding the “Genesis Curse”

Christ came to set people free from the bondage of sin & death, which includes its expression in human relationships. For instance, Paul taught by the Spirit: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 ESV). We’ll look at this text closer in the next section; let’s first go back to the very beginning of humanity after Adam & Eve sinned to establish some fundamental points…

¹⁴So the LORD God said to the serpent:

“Because you have done this,

cursed are you above all livestock

and every beast of the field!

On your belly will you go,

and dust you will eat,

all the days of your life.

¹⁵And I will put enmity between you and the woman,

and between your seed and her seed.

He will crush your head,

and you will strike his heel.”

 

¹⁶To the woman He said:

 

“I will sharply increase your pain in childbirth;

in pain you will bring forth children.

Your desire will be for your husband,

and he will rule over you.”

 

¹⁷And to Adam He said:

 

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife

and have eaten from the tree

of which I commanded you not to eat,

cursed is the ground because of you;

through toil you will eat of it

all the days of your life.

¹⁸Both thorns and thistles it will yield for you,

and you will eat the plants of the field.

¹⁹By the sweat of your brow

you will eat your bread,

until you return to the ground—

because out of it were you taken.

For dust you are,

and to dust you shall return.”

 

²⁰And Adam named his wife Eve, because she would be the mother of all the living.

Genesis 3:14-20

When God pronounced to Eve that “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you” (verse 16) the Creator was issuing a warning to Eve, not giving a command to Adam! In other words, God was not giving Adam (and men in general) permission to be tyrants over the women in their lives. The LORD was basically saying: “Beware, Eve, man is now going to try to dominate you and your female descendants.” This tendency is in the flesh of all males. You can even see it in boys who naturally try to dominate their mothers (which they don’t do with their fathers, generally speaking, and wisely so). I know because I myself did this when I was a kid. Don’t get me wrong, the masculine spirit is good — God called it “very good” along with everything else that was created (Genesis 1:31) — but the flesh, the sinful nature, perverts all good things.

We must understand that this section of Scripture — Genesis 3:14-19 — is a divine proclamation concerning the result of humanity now being fallen. In other words it was a prophetic curse due to transgression — not a blessing or a command — which is why this section of Scripture is called “the Genesis curse.” Nothing in this proclamation is a moral law like “You shall not commit adultery” or “You shall not steal” (Exodus 20:14-15), rather it’s a divine judgment — a curse — on the serpent/satan for deception and on Adam & Eve for their sin. The only sense that any proclamation in Genesis 3:14-19 is “Law” is that it’s contained in the section of Scripture known as the Law or Pentateuch, aka the first five books of the Bible. The fact that some ministers refer to Genesis 3:16 as “Law” or a “blessing” is laughable. I can’t help but suspect they have issues with misogyny.

We’re going to focus on the LORD’s proclamation to Adam & Eve since humanity has the potential for redemption whereas satan is incorrigible (you can read details here). God was conveying the general way it will be for them & their progeny — humanity — in a fallen world, not the way it should be or has to be. For instance…

• The LORD said to Eve that he would “sharply increase your pain in childbirth,” but this doesn’t mean that a woman and those who are assisting her medically shouldn’t do everything in their power to ease her pain during childbirth.
• The LORD said “in pain you will bring forth children,” but this doesn’t mean that a woman has to have children or will have children. What about women who can’t find a husband? What about women who have no interest in having sex with men? What about women who want to forsake marriage & children in order to devote their lives to God à la 1 Corinthians 7:34? What about women who can’t have children for one reason or another? What about women who simply have no desire to bear & raise children?
• The LORD said “Your desire will be for your husband,” but this clearly doesn’t mean every woman will desire a husband.
• The LORD said “and he will rule over you,” but this doesn’t mean he ought to rule over her (more on this momentarily).
• The LORD said to Adam “cursed is the ground because of you; through toil you will eat of it all the days of your life,” but this doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t improve agriculture quality and production, nor does it mean that people since that time have to limit their diet to fruits & vegetables.
• The LORD said “through toil you will eat,” but this doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t reduce the amount of needless toil in our work in order to make a living. The biblical book of wisdom says “The blessing of the LORD brings wealth, without painful toil for it” (Proverbs 10:22).
• The LORD said “By the sweat of your brow you will eat your bread,” but this doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t find ways to reduce the amount of sweat it takes to earn a living.
• Lastly, the LORD said in the latter part of verse 19 that death is now a reality for humanity obviously because “the wages of sin is death,” but this doesn’t mean that there aren’t exceptions to suffering physical death, like Enoch (Genesis 5:21-24), Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) and those who will be raptured (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18). Nor does it mean we shouldn’t reconcile with God through the message of Christ to escape eternal death (Romans 6:23 & John 3:16).

In short, these statements are general truths about the way life will be in a fallen world due to Adam & Eve’s sin — called “original sin” by theologians — but they are not absolutes nor are they moral laws or blessings. They warn of the way it will generally be in this cursed physical reality, but not the way it should be or has to be or will always be. Are you following?

There are two elements of the Genesis Curse that apply to our topic:

1. The statement in verse 16 that the husband will “rule over” the wife reveals that tyrannical gender hierarchy is a result of the corruption of sin in a fallen world. God was warning that the male will have a fleshly tendency to dominate his female mate, which can be attributed to his generally larger mass & muscle, as well as a typically more aggressive mentality (which happened to be a good thing back in the day when barbarians threatened the country or homestead). In other words, because the male is generally bigger, stronger and more aggressive he will be inclined to carnally control the female in their relationship; that is, “rule over” her.
2. The other is God’s statement to the devil (who possessed the serpent in order to deceive Eve): “I will put enmity between you and the woman” (Genesis 3:15). This shows that there is enmity between satan and women because the Messiah, the destroyer of the devil’s work, would ultimately come through a woman (Hebrews 2:14 & 1 John 3:8). Satan hates all humankind, of course, but he especially hates women for this reason; in short, satan is the ultimate misogynist. This explains why throughout history he has moved upon males to subjugate women, which can be observed in societies ever since. Look no further than Muslim countries today and the underground slave market. Even in liberated Western countries, like the USA, women didn’t even get the right to vote until 1920!

But God does not want the male to “rule over” his mate nor males in general to “rule over” women in any type of abusively domineering sense. This is clearly observed in both the Old and New Testaments. For instance, Ephesians 5:25 shows that the leadership of the husband in the marriage is to be loving and self-sacrificial in nature, not domineering; in fact, husbands are to love their wives in the sense of Christ loving the Church and giving up his life for it. The Greek word for ‘love’ in this verse refers to practical love, not a feeling. It is defined in the famous love passage 1 Corinthians 13:4-7. If husbands make it a point to practice this kind of love with their spouses 99% of wives would gladly acquiesce if there’s a disagreement. You could say that Ephesians 5:25 counteracts the curse of Genesis 3:16. Other New Testament verses do the same thing, like Ephesians 5:28, Colossians 3:19 and 1 Peter 3:7.

Another vital point to keep in mind is that the husband having headship in the marriage does not mean inequality because 1 Corinthians 11:3 parallels the husband’s headship over the wife with God’s headship over Christ. Are the Father and Son equal? Of course they are. Jesus said “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). Similarly, husbands and wives are supposed to be one ideally (Matthew 19:4-6 & Ephesians 5:31).

Whilst Father and Son are equally the LORD, Yahweh (Genesis 1:26), there is subordination in an economical, relational sense. For instance, the Scriptures very clearly show that the Father is the head over the Son and this is explicitly stated (1 Corinthians 11:3 & 15:27-28). While the Father and Son are equal in being, the Son is subordinate to the Father in function or relationship. This is paralleled to the relationship of husbands and wives.

Furthermore, God gave both Adam & Eve the commission to subdue or govern the Earth, not just Adam (Genesis 1:28). This suggests equality and teamwork, not one being superior to the other.

It should be noted that the same Greek word for ‘submit’ used in the context of wives submitting to their husbands (Colossians 3:18) is also used in reference to believers submitting “to one another out of reverence for Christ,” which illustrates a spirit of mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21-25). This means we should strive to get along and give preference to one another. I’m pointing this out so you plainly see that submitting to others in a spirit of humility is a universal concept in the body of Christ — for males and females — and not just something wives are to exclusively do with their husbands.

In regards to the Old Testament, notice what the LORD commanded concerning newlyweds:

If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married.

Deuteronomy 24:5

God is so concerned about marriages being healthy and starting off on the right foot that newlywed husbands in Israel were not permitted to go to war for a full year or be burdened by any other duty so that they could stay home and bring happiness to their wives! Does this remotely sound like the LORD wants the husband to “rule over” the wife? Obviously not. God wants husbands to bring happiness to their wives!

Or consider Abraham, the progenitor of the Israelites and the biblical “father of faith” (Romans 4), did he “rule over” his wife Sarah (who was originally named Sarai)? It was Sarah who made the decision to give her servant, Hagar, to Abraham so that he could have children through her since Sarah couldn’t bear offspring at the time (Genesis 16). It was also Sarah’s decision to exile Hagar & Ishmael (the latter being Abraham & Hagar’s child) after she became jealous. While these decisions may have been dubious, Abraham complied with both (Genesis 21). This shows that Sarah had the freedom in their relationship to make life-changing decisions in the domestic realm and Abraham willingly abided by them. Clearly, Abraham didn’t “rule over” Sarah.

This corresponds to Paul’s instructions in 1 Timothy 5:14 where he said wives are “to manage their homes.” This phrase is one compound word in the Greek, oikodespoteó (oy-kod-es-pot-EH-oh), which means “to rule the household.” This suggests that, while the husband is the head of the marriage, the wife is the domestic head.

For irrefutable proof that the Genesis curse did not mean males were to rule over women in general, the LORD chose & anointed Deborah to lead Israel spiritually, legally and militarily for 40 years (Judges 4:4-9). God selected Deborah to fulfill this great leadership position in a generally patriarchal region of the globe. Why? Obviously because she was qualified for the job above any male. Barak, the most qualified man, wouldn’t even go to battle without her presence! We’ll look at Deborah in more detail shortly.

Christianity Destroys the Worldly Idea that People are Inferior Due to Race, Social Status or Gender

The message of Christ is the ‘gospel’ — literally the “Good News” — because those who believe are spiritually regenerated (Titus 3:5) and become “new creations” (2 Corinthians 5:17) free from bondage to sin & death, which would include its expression in human relationships — discrimination due to race, social status or gender:

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Galatians 3:26-28

Paul’s letter to the Galatian assemblies is one of the earliest epistles of the New Covenant and establishes something foundational: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (ESV). This passage does not deny the existence in this fallen world of different races, social statuses or the two genders, but rather points out that in Christ Jesus — that is, in covenant (contract) with God thru Christ — we are all one body. While all believers are at different levels of spiritual growth and have different gifting or offices, we “are all one in Christ Jesus.” This explains why the Messiah taught against the practice of titles in the Church and emphasized the equalitarian nature of leadership (Matthew 23:7-11). Certainly the Scriptures acknowledge servant-oriented leadership in the kingdom of God — that is, leadership positions or offices and the gifting necessary for such (Ephesians 4:11-13) — but personal titles are a different story. Christ emphasized that believers “are all brothers and sisters.”

There is no male or female in Christ. As such, women are free to learn in the assemblies and serve in ministry; that is, participate in God’s service. While this is true, Christians have to be sensitive to the customs of the region in which they are ministering if they want to effectively reach the people there. If they introduce ideas that are too radical to the people’s established mores it’ll give Christianity & the gospel a bad rap and hinder the chances of reaching them. This is why it’s necessary to “become all things to all people so that by all possible means [we] might save some,” as Paul put it (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

We’ll look at some of these things in greater detail as we continue, let’s now consider…

Women in the New Testament who were used by the Lord in service of God’s Kingdom

Priscilla

Priscilla and her husband, Aquila, came from Italy to Corinth after the Emperor Claudius expelled Hebrews from Rome via executive order. They were tentmakers who met Paul in Corinth (Acts 18:2) and eventually traveled with him to Ephesus, which is where Paul’s protégé, Timothy, later served as a Pastor (Acts 18:18-19 & 2 Timothy 4:19). A small church — a Christian assembly — regularly met in Priscilla & Aquila’s house (1 Corinthians 16:19).

Notice what Paul says about this couple in his letter to Roman believers:

Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus. ⁴ They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.

⁵Greet also the church that meets at their house.

Romans 16:3-5

This shows that Priscilla & Aquila served the Gentile churches. Note how Paul mentions Priscilla before Aquila and acknowledges both as “my co-workers in Christ Jesus.” While Paul was obviously in charge as he was the most prominent apostle of the New Testament, he referred to these two fellow servants in an equalitarian sense even though they were technically under him in the Church. This corresponds to what was noted above — believers “are all one in Christ Jesus,” whether Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female (Galatians 3:28) and servant-leadership in the Church is equalitarian in nature (Matthew 23:7-11).

Notice what took place in Ephesus after Priscilla & Aquila heard a mighty man of God speak at the local synagogue:

Meanwhile, a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. ²⁵ He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. ²⁶ He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

Acts 18:24-26

Once again, Priscilla is mentioned before Aquila, and this time it was chronicled by Luke via the Holy Spirit. Upon hearing Apollos speak at the synagogue, they discerned that he was yet ignorant of the full message of Christ despite being a “learned man with a thorough knowledge of the [Old Testament] Scriptures.” So they invited him to their home to “explain to him the way of God more adequately” or “more accurately,” as some translations put it (Acts 18:26).

Think about it, Priscilla — along with her husband — taught this scriptural scholar & mighty speaker New Covenant truths. They did this at their home, which is where most assemblies met back then, in the homes of believers (Romans 16:3-5 & 1 Corinthians 16:19). In essence, the three of them were “having church.” Did not Christ say “where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them” (Matthew 18:20). We have to get away from this erroneous idea that believers can only “have church” when they meet at an official Church facility.

Please notice that nothing is said in these passages about how Priscilla, being a woman, should be silent in the church or that she shouldn’t teach men, especially someone of Apollos’ stature. Nor is anything said about Apollos having a problem receiving from Priscilla. Keep in mind that Apollos was later mentioned in the same breath as Paul and Peter (1 Corinthians 1:12 & 3:22) and Paul placed Apollos on the same spiritual level as himself (1 Corinthians 4:6).

Women who ministered through the Prophetic Word

Philip the evangelist “had four unmarried daughters who prophesied” (Acts 21:9). Meanwhile the apostle Paul clearly expected women with the prophetic gift to prophesy to others and not keep silent, not to mention pray in public (1 Corinthians 11:4-5); the context implies that men were present. Both passages illustrate the fulfillment of the prophet Joel’s word from the LORD: “I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy” (Joel 2:28 & Acts 2:16-18).

Are these verses referring to the body gift of the prophetic word (Romans 12:6-8) or to the fivefold ministry gift (Ephesians 4:11-13)? If you’re unaware, those with the body gift lack the anointing of the fivefold ministry gift. Naturally believers with the body gift, like teaching or prophecy, may eventually be called to serve as fivefold ministers. I’m a good example of this: Before I entered the fivefold ministry I functioned in the Church as a teacher with the body gift. But not all those with a body gift will necessarily go on to serve in the fivefold ministry.

In any case, neither verse distinguishes whether these women should use their gift solely in terms of the body gift or also in fivefold ministry, presumably because both apply depending on the individual and her calling. But the main point rings clear: Women are expected to have ministry gifts and serve accordingly. Read that again; proclaim it from the rooftops.

The female prophet, Anna, is noted when Joseph & Mary brought the child Jesus to the Temple for purification rites. She “spoke about the child to all [men and women] who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem” (Luke 2:36-38). Obviously she was a prophet in the Old Testament sense (you can read about the difference between the two here); nevertheless, she’s mentioned in the New Testament as a prophet and nothing is said about how she should be silent at the Temple and men shouldn’t listen to her because she’s a female. Actually, the passage goes out of its way to point out how devout Anna was and deserving of respect as a godly prophet, not to mention “all” listened to her and not just other women.

Speaking of Mary, she & Elizabeth also served in the prophetic, which we’ll look at momentarily.

Additional Women involved in Ministry in the New Testament

Junia

Junia is mentioned along with Andronicus (who may or may not be her husband) as “fellow Jews” who had been in prison with Paul, which shows that they were persecuted for serving the Lord; Paul noted that they were “outstanding among the apostles” and accepted the message of Christ before he did (Romans 16:7). The verse could be interpreted to mean that the two were apostles, although it’s also interpreted to mean that the apostles held them in high regard due to their devotion to the Lord & ministry.

Phoebe

Phoebe was a deacon (Greek: diakonos) at the church in Cenchrea, which means she was involved in helps ministry, assisting the fivefold ministers (Romans 16:1). Deacons today include ushers, greeters, secretaries, custodians and sound operators.

Euodia and Syntyche

These two women “contended at [Paul’s] side in the cause of the gospel,” which shows that they also functioned in helps ministry as deacons (Philippians 4:2-3).

Lydia

Lydia was a “worshipper of God” from Thyatira that Paul met outside of Philippi. She accepted the message of Christ and invited Paul & his companions to stay at her home with her family (Acts 16:12-15). After Paul & Silas suffered persecution in Philippi they returned to Lydia’s house “where they met with the brothers and sisters and encouraged them” (Acts 16:40). Since she actively helped Paul’s world-changing ministry she was in essence a deacon.

Lois and Eunice

These women were the grandmother & mother of Timothy respectively; Paul noted their “living faith” that was now living in the young pastor of Ephesus (2 Timothy 1:5). While someone might respond “Whoop-de-do,” think about: There is no ministry work more important than raising a child to be an anointed, faithful man or woman of God, especially a powerful fivefold minister, like Timothy, who would reach multitudes (Proverbs 22:6).

The “Chosen Lady” of 2 John

This refers to the noble woman that John addressed in his second epistle (2 John 1:1 & 1:5). She was at least a respected believer known by the apostle who opened her home to intenerate ministers (verse 10). It’s also possible that an assembly met at her house and the believers thereof are the “children” that John noted. It’s even possible that she was the leader of this fellowship; after all, why would the great apostle write some insignificant female homeowner concerning key issues involving the local Church? If that’s all the “chosen lady” was, why would this letter end up a part of the God-breathed Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16)? For details, go here.

Mary, the Mother of Jesus

Mary was “highly favored” of the LORD (Luke 1:28) and her relative Elizabeth, a descendent of Aaron, called her “the mother of my Lord” (Luke 1:43). Moreover Mary’s inspired song says that future generations would call her blessed (Luke 1:48). Elizabeth’s divine insight and Mary’s biblical song places them both in the prophetic office.

Mary was also listed with the great leaders of the early Church after the ascension of Christ when the Holy Spirit was about to fall on the Church:

Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk from the city. ¹³When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. ¹⁴They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

Acts 1:12-14

You can read more about Mary here.

Mary, the sister of Martha & Lazarus

This Mary wisely sat at the Lord’s feet feeding on his ministry when Jesus visited their house (Luke 10:38-42). Christ publicly commended Mary for choosing “what is better” as opposed to Martha who was running around in a distraught whirlwind of preparations. This shows that relationship with the Lord takes precedence over working for God. Why? Because our work for the Lord should always be a natural outgrowth of our relationship with God. If it’s not, we’ll fall into the pitfall of legalism, which is counterfeit spirituality. For details see this article.

The Women at Christ’s Tomb after his Resurrection

The first persons to discover that Christ was resurrected were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James-the-less and Salome (Mark 16:1), but also Joanna & others in the periphery (Luke 24:10). An angel at the tomb told these women to give instructions to Christ’s disciples, who would soon be apostles. As they hurried to fulfill their assignment the resurrected Lord suddenly met them and gave them similar instructions (Matthew 28:1-10 & Mark 16:7). These women were the first evangelists! Evidently the angel at the tomb and Christ Himself never got the memo that women in the Kingdom of God are to remain absolutely silent and never instruct a male. Why? Because it’s a false doctrine.

Unnamed Women noted in the Book of Acts

Luke spoke of the “prominent women” of Thessalonica and Berea who believed the message of Christ that Paul shared (Acts 17:4 & 17:12). Then there’s “the God-fearing women of high standing and the leading men” of Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:50). While the latter women weren’t Christians (yet), Luke speaks of them in noble terms and cites them before the leading men of the city. They were open to the gospel of Christ until the legalist Jews stirred up persecution against the ministry of Paul and Barnabas.

In none of these cases are these women spoken of as second-class citizens in the kingdom of God. Nowhere do these verses suggest that women should remain silent at assemblies or that men shouldn’t receive from them. Why? Because there is no male or female in Christ (Galatians 3:26-28).

Women who Led or Served God in the Old Testament

The Middle East & nearby regions were generally patriarchal in nature, but there are numerous examples of female leaders in the Old Testament, great and small, as well as those who simply served God in one capacity or another. Let’s start with…

Deborah

Deborah is one the most notable woman of the Old Testament. For twenty years circa 1200 BC, Israel was oppressed by Jabin, king of Canaan. Thus the Lord raised up Deborah:

Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. ⁵ She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites went up to her to have their disputes decided. ⁶ She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead them up to Mount Tabor. ⁷ I will lead Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.’ ”

⁸ Barak said to her, “If you go with me, I will go; but if you don’t go with me, I won’t go.”

⁹ “Certainly I will go with you,” said Deborah. “But because of the course you are taking, the honor will not be yours, for the Lord will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman.”

Judges 4:4-9

Deborah was married and no doubt submitted to her husband as the head of the family (Ephesians 5:21-25), but as far as the nation of Israel was concerned — male and female — she was (1) a respected prophet, (2) a judge who settled legal disputes and (3) a military leader. She was such a mighty woman of God that Barak, a subordinate military leader, refused to face the enemy with 10,000 Israelite troops without her presence, even though the LORD promised to give the Canaanites into Barak’s hands (verse 7).

Think about it, God had no problem with a woman leading the Israelites spiritually, legally or militarily for 40 years during this challenging time in Hebraic history. Female leaders may not have been the norm since the entire region of the globe was patriarchal in nature, but two chapters of the Holy Scriptures — God’s Word — are devoted to this amazing woman, illustrating that the Israelites submitted to Deborah spiritually, legally and militarily for four decades!

If this was the way it was when Israel was under the Mosaic Law, a thoroughly inferior covenant, how do you think it is for God’s people under the superior New Covenant of grace through Christ (Hebrews 8:6, 8:13 & 2 Corinthians 3:6)?

One popular minister, who disdains the idea of female leaders — especially spiritual leaders — essentially dismissed the account of Deborah by saying that (paraphrasing) “Deborah’s rise to leadership was the exception in the book of Judges because of Barak’s failure to show the oomph to lead courageously.” Assuming this is so, why didn’t the LORD just choose a devout man other than Barak to take this supreme position if male leadership is so important and female leadership is unacceptable? I’ll tell you why: Because Deborah was the most qualified person for the position and God had zero issue with it; the fact that this was a generally patriarchal culture was irrelevant.

Another critic argued that, since “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” during that time period (Judges 17:6), the Israelites set up Deborah as a leader without the LORD’s blessing. But 1. both the Old Testament and the New Testament plainly say that God rose up the judges (Judges 2:16 & Acts 13:20) and 2. the LORD used Deborah as a prophet to speak to the people; in other words, God spoke through Deborah (Judges 4).

Jael

Jael (yaw-AYL) was the wife of Heber and is noted in the same chronicling of Deborah and the defeat of the Canaanite forces. Sisera, the commander of the Canaanites, escaped the slaughter of his troops and found refuge in Jael’s tent because the Canaanites were on friendly terms with Heber’s clan. But Jael was on the side of Israel & Deborah and so brutally drove a tent peg through Sisera’s temple into the ground while he slept (Judges 4: 17-21). (She had experience driving tent pegs into the ground and was obviously quite good at it).

Jael is praised in Scripture for her bold actions and called “most blessed of women” (Judges 5:24-27). The very time period was even named after her, i.e. “the days of Jael” (Judges 5:6).

Needless to say, this is a serious R-rated story and Jael is clearly a mighty warrior-ess of God. I can’t help but think of the unnamed woman at Thebez that threw a millstone from the tower, cracking the skull of the fraudulent “king” Abimelech (Judges 9:52-53).

Huldah

This was a respected prophet whom King Josiah contacted via the priests of Jerusalem when the book of the Law was found in the Temple after 55 years of Manasseh’s wicked reign. While God pronounced impending judgment upon idolatrous Judah for blatantly forsaking the LORD, righteous Josiah would not see it, but rather live and die in peace (2 Kings 22:14-20).

Noadiah

Noadiah was a prophet in Israel after the exiles returned. She and other prophets were evidently in league with Nehemiah’s nemesis Sanballat and thus tried to discourage Nehemiah & his team from rebuilding the wall in Jerusalem. Nehemiah prayed that the LORD would help them overcome opposition from such religious leaders (Nehemiah 6:14). It’s assumed that God changed the minds of these misguided prophets, particularly after they witnessed the miraculous rebuilding of the walls in 52 days, which resulted in the Great Revival (Nehemiah 8-10). Repentance, by the way, literally means to change one’s mind.

Miriam

This was the sister of Moses and Aaron, who assumed the role of prophet during the exodus from Egypt and led in praise & worship (Exodus 15:20-21). While her reputation is soiled by an episode of insubordination and her leprous exile for seven days (Numbers 12 & Deuteronomy 24:9), she was humbled and repented. Is there anyone reading this who hasn’t made a huge mistake and repented after being humbled by the LORD? Later prophets identified Miriam as a leader sent by God, spoken in the same breath as Moses and Aaron (Micah 6:4).

The Queen of Sheba

The queen of Sheba is nameless in the Bible but known as Makeda (ma-KAY-dah) in Ethiopian tradition. She came to Jerusalem with a great caravan of gifts for King Solomon wherein she was overwhelmed by Solomon’s wisdom and the grandeur of his kingdom (1 Kings 10:1-13). Another Ethiopian queen is noted a thousand years later in Acts 8:27. In neither case is anything mentioned about how a woman should not be a political leader.

Think about it, Solomon was the wisest person on the face of the Earth wherein people from distant lands regularly came to hear his great knowledge, understanding and wisdom (1 Kings 4:29-34). And, yet, nowhere does he say anything about it being intrinsically wrong for a woman to lead other people, including men, whether politically, spiritually, legally or militarily. He doesn’t inform the queen of Sheba that she should step down and remain silent in the presence of men. Why not? For one thing, he’d be contradicting God’s will when it came to Deborah who led Israel spiritually, legally and militarily a hundred years earlier for forty years.

A critic argued that it’s wrong for me to bring up the Queen of Sheba in this article because she was a pagan, but 1. the title of this section includes women who led in the Old Testament and not just women who served God and 2. the point about the wisest man on Earth at the time not rebuking the Queen for the supposedly gross transgression of leading a nation is a key point.

Abigail

The wise discernment of Abigail saved the lives of all the adult males on her huge ranch after her thankless husband, Nabal, showed gross contempt toward the noble David & his warriors. Abigail took the initiative and made the wise decision without Nabal’s approval to assuage David’s righteous anger in order to save the men on her ranch & more (1 Samuel 25). After Nabal’s sudden death David sent word to Abigail, asking for her hand in marriage. His Momma didn’t raise no fool.

Queen Mothers in Israel

‘Queen mother’ refers to the mother of a reigning monarch and were given the title Gebirah (gheb-ee-RAW), aka “Great Lady,” which was an official position in Israel & Judah (1 Kings 15:11-13). Great care was taken to preserve the name of the Queen Mother (e.g. 1 Kings 14:21), although they could be deposed for rebellion against the LORD, as righteous Asa did with his grandmother Maacah (1 Kings 15:13). Nathan the prophet enlisted Bathsheba rather than king David or Solomon in his plan to have Solomon confirmed as king (1 Kings 1:11-40). Wives of kings never ruled Israel or Judah, although the daughters of great allies enjoyed special privileges (1 Kings 7:8) or influence (1 Kings 16:32-33, 18:19 & 21:7-14). However, wicked Queen Mother Athaliah usurped power and became queen of Judah for about seven years after the death of her son, Ahaziah, by murdering her grandsons, the legitimate heirs; although Joash was able to escape via the aid of Jehosheba (2 Kings 11:1-3).

Unnamed Wise Women during David’s Monarchy

A wise woman was specifically sent for by Israel’s military commander, Joab, in order to successfully bear a message to the king (2 Samuel 14:1-21). Later, another wise woman spoke directly to Joab, whose forces were curiously assaulting her righteous city, and she proceeded to advise her fellow citizens on how to end the assault, which they readily heeded (2 Samuel 20:14-22).

Both cases illustrate that these wise women were valued counselors and thus leaders. After all, if people listen to your counsel, you’re a leader.

Wisdom is Personified as a Female, Plus the Books of Ruth and Esther

On top of all these examples of notable women in the Bible, I think it’s significant to add that wisdom is figuratively personified as a woman in the Old Testament (Proverbs 1:20-33 & Proverbs 8:1-9:12) and two whole books of the Hebraic Scriptures are named after mighty women of God, Ruth and Esther.

You can look for other notable women in the Old Testament & New Testament in your studies, I just wanted to establish several occasions in the Bible where women served God, led others, or showed shrewdness in one capacity or another.

Now let’s get back to the Church Age…

Can Women Serve as Fivefold Ministers?

We’ve established that female believers can serve in the Kingdom of God and are expected to. But can they serve in what is known as the fivefold ministry, which consists of five different offices:

So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, ¹² to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up ¹³ until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Ephesians 4:11-13

To understand each of these five callings in the body of Christ see this article.

The question we want to address is: Can women serve in any of these five positions? We know that Philip the evangelist’s four daughters operated in the prophetic (Acts 21:9) and that Priscilla taught Apollos, along with her husband (Acts 18:26), did these women serve with the “body gifts” of teaching and prophecy (Romans 12:6-8) or were they fivefold ministers? I’m assuming the former, but the Bible doesn’t distinguish. Furthermore, notice that nowhere in Ephesians 4:11-13 (above) does it specify that fivefold ministers must be males. Why? Obviously because “there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28).

Can Women Serve as Pastors?

An objection to women serving as pastors specifically is based on Paul’s instructions to Timothy in Ephesus and Titus in Crete; Paul said that those qualified for the position of pastor must be “faithful to his wife” or “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2  & Titus 1:6). Both statements obviously suggest that the pastor is male. But this is easily explained by the fact that these were patriarchal areas, generally speaking, and so Paul simply phrased his statements accordingly.

I served under one female pastor for seven years and it sure seemed to me that God was using her in service of the kingdom. This is different than saying that she was a perfect minister; such a person has never existed beyond Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4:15).

For proof that Paul was not excluding the possibility of female pastors in a universal sense throughout the Church Age, he addressed the position of deacons in the very same context with similar instructions: “A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well” (1 Timothy 3:12). The Greek word for deacon is diakonos (dee-AK-on-os), which refers to the position of someone in helps ministry, such as an usher, secretary, sound operator or custodian. We saw earlier that Phoebe was a deacon at the church in Cenchrea (Romans 16:1) and Euodia & Syntyche were deacons as well (Philippians 4:2-3). As such, Paul’s words cannot be interpreted to mean that all deacons must be male during the Church Age. It’s an unbiblical position. Since this was the case with deacons, why would it not also be so with pastors?

That said, if you or anyone else is convinced that women should not serve as pastors the answer is simple: Don’t go to an assembly with a female pastor; only attend fellowships with male pastors. Problem solved.

As for me & my wife, if the Spirit leads us to serve at an assembly with a female pastor, we’re going to follow. People who have qualms about it need not attend.

The Feminine Nature of our Teacher, the Holy Spirit

At this point I think it’s important to point out something of which most Christians are not familiar. In the New Covenant, who is the believer’s spiritual teacher, that is, their non-human teacher? Answer: The Holy Spirit is our teacher, as verified by several verses (John 14:26, Luke 12:12, 1 John 2:20, 2:27 & Nehemiah 9:20). What’s interesting is that the Scriptures clearly reveal that the Holy Spirit is feminine in nature. Simply consider the evidence…

The creation account of human beings says:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Genesis 1:27

The word “man” in the Hebrew is adam, which is how Adam got his name. However, we see in this text that “man” in the generic sense refers to humankind in general, both male and female. And notice that “man” — male and female — was created in the image of God. This shows that the feminine nature originated with God.

Furthermore, God has a “feminine” side in that Scripture gives evidence of his softer traits (feminine), as well as his sterner side (masculine). Some good examples include Psalm 103:8, 1 John 4:8 and Matthew 11:28-30.

Also consider this verse:

As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master,
as the eyes of a female slave look to the hand of her mistress,
so our eyes look to the LORD our God,
till he shows us his mercy.

Psalm 123:2

As you can see, the LORD is compared with both a master (male) and a mistress (female). And the Creator has no problem including such a passage in the God-breathed Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Think about that.

Yet when it comes to Father, Son and Holy Spirit, which one especially suggests the feminine nature? (Please understand that this is not a question of sexuality, but of nature). Obviously not the Father or Son because, after all, they’re the Father and Son — both clearly masculine.

I would offer that the Holy Spirit generally reflects the feminine nature. For instance the symbol for the Holy Spirit is a dove, which suggests beauty, gentleness and harmlessness (Luke 3:22). Also, the Holy Spirit is referred to as a “Helper” of believers in John 14:16, 26 (also translated as “Comforter” and “Counselor”) and one of Eve’s main purposes was to be Adam’s “helper” (Genesis 2:18, 20). This same Hebrew word, ezer (AY-zer), is used of God helping believers sixteen times in the Old Testament (e.g. Psalm 115:9-11 & 146:5). In addition, the Holy Spirit is shown to be sensitive — easily grieved — in Ephesians 4:30 and Hebrews 10:29.

Yet the most glaring evidence of the Holy Spirit’s feminine nature can be observed in John 3:6 where the Messiah pointed out that “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” Christ was comparing human birth with spiritual regeneration. Just as a woman gives birth to a child (“flesh gives birth to flesh”) so the Holy Spirit gives rebirth to a person’s spirit when he or she turns to God thru Christ. Giving birth clearly bespeaks of the feminine nature. By contrast, in 1 Peter 1:23 believers are said to be “born again” of the imperishable seed of the living Word of God, who is Jesus Christ. This is also conveyed in 1 John 3:9 where “Seed” in the Greek is sperma, the Greek word for sperm. You see, believers are born-again of the sperm of Christ, but given spiritual rebirth by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5). Giving birth is obviously a feminine quality, not masculine.

Furthermore, this may spur chuckles, but when the Messiah said, “Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew 12:32), I can’t help but think of the way men get irate when someone says something insulting about their Momma.

In regards to being sure not to grieve the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30 & Hebrews 10:29), I can’t help but think of the saying: “If Momma ain’t happy, no one’s happy.”

It is true that the Holy Spirit is referred to by the pronoun “he” in Scripture (e.g. John 16:13) and Mary was inseminated by the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:18-20), but that seed was the seed of the Word of God, which is Jesus Christ; and the thrust of Scripture points to the Holy Spirit’s feminine nature, as detailed above. Besides, God transcends quaint masculine and feminine associations and there is neither male nor female in Christ (Galatians 3:28).  Also, Jesus is the wisdom of God, as seen in 1 Corinthians 1:30, but wisdom is personified as a woman in Proverbs 8-9 and referred to with a feminine pronoun (e.g. Matthew 11:19).

The bottom line is that the believer’s spiritual teacher is the Holy Spirit (John 14:26 & 1 John 2:20, 2:27) and the Holy Spirit is feminine in nature. Chew on that.

‘But isn’t the woman created to be man’s helper?’

More specifically, Eve was created to be Adam’s helper because God saw that it wasn’t good for Adam to be alone, which happened to be the first thing the LORD said was not good in creation (Genesis 2:18). This shows that men need help from women! Furthermore, this doesn’t mean that women are inferior since — as noted above — God is also described as our helper in the Old Testament sixteen times using the same Hebrew word, ezer (AY-zer), such as Psalm 124:8. Obviously the LORD is not inferior to human beings; nor is the wife inferior to her husband. This proves, incidentally, that being someone’s helper in the sense of ezer doesn’t mean being a lowly servant girl. After all, is the LORD our servant girl?

So this statement was in reference to wives helping husbands, but what of the multitudes of women today and throughout history who never marry, as Paul encouraged the female believers of troubled Corinth in 1 Corinthians 7:34? What about women who are widowed or divorced and have no interest in marrying again? Does the fact that they have no husband to assist mean that they have no purpose in life? Obviously not. They would use their help-skills to serve the Lord in the Kingdom of God, like Anna did (Luke 2:36-38).

‘But isn’t Man the Head of Woman?’

This question is based on this verse:

But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

1 Corinthians 11:3

The koine Greek word for ‘woman’ is guné (goo-NAY), which is also the same word used for wife/wives. In other words, this verse is referring to husbands being the head of the wife, which is stated more specifically in this passage where the Greek for wives/wife is also guné:

²¹Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

²²Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. ²³For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. ²⁴Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

²⁵Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

Ephesians 5:21-25

I’m including the bracketing verses because it helps to see the fuller context. Paul starts out by saying that believers are to “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ,” which illustrates a spirit of mutual submission. We’re all instructed to make an effort to “get along” and give preference to others in a Christ-like spirit of servanthood. As noted earlier, the Greek word for ‘submit’ is the same word used for wives submitting to their husbands (Colossians 3:18). This spirit of mutual submission is stressed in other epistles as well; for instance: “serve one another humbly in love” (Galatians 5:13), “in humility value others above yourselves” (Philippians 2:3) and Peter put it like this: “All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, ‘God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble’” (1 Peter 5:5). I’m pointing this out so you clearly see that submitting to others in a spirit of humility is a universal concept in the body of Christ and not just something wives are to do with their husbands. Chew on that.

As pointed out at the beginning of this article, in the covenant of marriage the husband is the head in the relationship, but this does not mean that the two are not equal since 1 Corinthians 11:3 (quoted above) parallels the husband’s headship over the wife with God’s headship over Christ. Are not the Father and Son equal? Of course they are. Jesus said “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). Similarly, husbands and wives are ideally supposed to be one (Matthew 19:4-6 & Ephesians 5:31).

Speaking of Ephesians 5, verse 25 instructs husbands to “love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her,” which shows that husbands are to love their wives in a self-sacrificial manner. The Greek word for ‘love’ in this verse is the verb form of agapé, which is defined in the famous love passage 1 Corinthians 13:1-7. If the husband walks in love like this, the wife will gladly submit to his headship. But, again, this does not mean they are not equal. Obviously important issues are discussed at length with much prayer, but someone has to have the final word if the two disagree. After all, when there are two visions there will be di-vision.

The LORD does not want husbands to lead in an authoritarian sense. This needs stressed because some people automatically equate one person submitting to another with carnal domination. Keep in mind that the devil naturally tries to pervert whatever God creates, commands or blesses. The husband’s headship over the wife is paralleled to Father God’s headship over Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3), which means it is leadership based on LOVE because “God is love” (1 John 4:7-8,16). This helps make sense of this proverb:

Love and faithfulness keep a king safe; through love his throne is made secure.

Proverbs 20:28

A “king” refers to an authority figure. In our day and age it would apply to anyone who has authority in any given environment, male or female: a father or mother, a teacher or professor, an employer or supervisor, a president or governor, a pastor or apostle, a police officer or guard, etc. This proverb reveals the godly way of keeping one’s position of authority — one’s “throne” — safe and secure: Through love and faithfulness. So, when the Bible talks about leadership and the corresponding submission it’s talking about leading in love and faithfulness, not being an abusive tyrant. Are you following?

‘But isn’t Man to “Rule Over” the Woman?’

This question refers to the Genesis curse, which the LORD proclaimed after the fall of Adam & Eve. This was answered in detail earlier, but to briefly reiterate: The Genesis curse was God’s judgment on the serpent/satan, Adam & Eve and creation itself, which has negatively affected life on Earth ever since. The Creator’s proclamation that the husband would “rule over” the wife in Genesis 3:16 was not a command to Adam, but rather a warning to Eve (and women in general)! It revealed the male’s fleshly proclivity to dominate his mate due to normally superior mass & strength, augmented by satan’s hatred of women, as noted in verse 15. This was the result of sin, not a command or blessing from God!

Make no mistake the masculine spirit is a positive thing and instrumental to a healthy society. The LORD called it “very good” along with everything else that was created (Genesis 1:31). Unfortunately the flesh — the sinful nature — perverts and ruins all good things.

The previous section reveals how God wants males to function as the head in their marriages, which is the furthest thing from being a domineering tyrant. You could say that Ephesians 5:25 and similar verses* counteract the curse of Genesis 3:16.

* Ephesians 5:28, Colossians 3:19 and 1 Peter 3:7.

As for the erroneous idea that males should “rule over” females in general, if this were the case then the LORD wouldn’t have chosen Deborah to lead Israel spiritually, legally and militarily for 40 years in a largely patriarchal region of the globe (Judges 4:4-9).

The Two “Hard Sayings” regarding Women in the New Testament

This brings us to two statements by Paul in the New Testament that seem to contradict everything we’ve been seeing in the Scriptures up to this point about women in God’s service. However, the Bible is “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and does not contradict itself when properly understood through the use of common sense hermeneutical guidelines, like “Scripture interprets Scripture” and “Context is King.”

So let’s examine both passages and consider reasonable interpretations that gel with the context of the passage and what the rest of Scripture says about women in the LORD’s service.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Establishing Order in the Corinthian Assemblies so that the Believers would be Edified

The topic in this section of Scripture is maintaining order when the troubled church in Corinth assembled. This is important to know because “Context is King” and thus understanding the context will naturally help us to properly interpret the passage in question. Here’s how the section opens:

What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.

1 Corinthians 14:26

First, notice that Paul is addressing both males and females in the assembly, which can also be verified by Paul’s greeting at the beginning of this letter:

To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:

1 Corinthians 1:2

The Greek word for “brothers and sisters” in verse 26 is adelphos (ad-el-FOS), which is a masculine noun, but is gender neutral in actual usage, similar to the English ‘guys.’ I’ve done sermons where I’ve addressed the congregants as “guys,” but I was obviously referring to both males and females. That’s the case here. For scriptural proof, look no further than Romans 16:1-17 where Paul is clearly addressing males and females in the Church and then refers to them collectively as adelphos in verse 17. This explains why some translations, such as the NIV and NASB, translate adelphos as “brothers and sisters” here and not just “brothers.” It’s simply more accurate since Paul was addressing both men and women.

Now notice that Paul says, “When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up” (verse 26). The Greek word for “each of you” is hekastos (HEK-as-tos), which comprises both genders, not just males. Each of the believers would have something to give, male and female, but Paul was concerned about maintaining a sense of order. Paul’s goal was that the church be built up when assembled. “The church” refers to the people, not the building. So the goal was for believers to be built-up.

Three Sets of People at the Corinthian Church were instructed to Keep Quiet

Paul then proceeds to give instructions on public tongues & interpretation, as well as prophecies. If you’ve never been to a Christian assembly that believes in charismatic gifts you might be unfamiliar with them, but 1st Century fellowships regularly flowed in these gifts as evident in Paul’s letter. It’s a shame that the false doctrine of cessationism and the corresponding unbelief have all but eliminated these wonderful gifts from our assemblies.

A Side Note: The gift of public tongues is not the same as private glossolalia, which is synonymous with praying in the spirit. The former is a gift of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:4-11) wherein God speaks to people thru the gift of tongues manifesting in a believer as the Spirit wills whereas praying in the spirit is the believer using the gift of glossolalia to pray to God by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 14:14-15). One is God speaking to believers while the other is the believer praying to God bypassing the limitations of his/her mind. You can read details here.

Paul defends order for the mutual good of all the believers present. He wants those with spiritual gifts and those who disrupt the service to respect others present. Here are the three sets of people he instructs to keep quiet:

1. Those openly speaking in tongues who don’t have an interpretation or interpreter (verse 28). These people were basically pretending like they have the gift of the Spirit of public tongues, but they didn’t, which explains why there was no interpretation. Hence Paul instructs them to keep quiet and speak in tongues to God privately without disturbing the congregation.
2. Those ministering in prophecy when the Spirit then moves upon someone else to prophesy (verse 30). Such believers were obviously hogging the stage, so to speak. These kinds of people are basically arrogant loudmouths — the opposite of humility — and God opposes arrogance (see this article for details).
3. Wives who were blurting out during the service and thus disrupting the ministry (verse 34).

The Greek word for keeping quiet in all three verses is sigaó (see-GAH-oh), which means to keep silent or keep a secret. In short, all three sets of people were to keep unedifying things to themselves during the service. Yet none of these three prohibitions against speaking was absolute:

1. Those speaking in tongues should only keep quiet if they didn’t have the gift of the Spirit to edify the congregation, but this didn’t mean they wouldn’t use their gift of glossolalia to pray to God privately by the Spirit, as Paul himself did (1 Corinthians 14:13-19).
2. Those prophesying should only keep silent when the Spirit gives a prophetic word to another believer, but this didn’t mean they should never prophesy in the assembly.
3. Just the same, wives who were disrupting the service by blurting out questions and other things should keep quiet at this time, but this didn’t mean they should never speak at the assembly.

The apostle points out: “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace — as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people” (verse 33). So, again, Paul was concerned about establishing a sense of order in the assemblies at Corinth and eliminating selfishness so that believers would leave the meeting built up and not frustratingly unedified. Obviously the Corinthian fellowships had an issue with disorder when they met, which is plainly indicated in earlier verses of the epistle (1 Corinthians 1:10-17 & 3:1-5).

The Passage in Question

This is when Paul says:

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. ³⁵If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

³⁶Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? ³⁷If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. ³⁸But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.

1 Corinthians 14:34-38

Again, Paul didn’t mean that women should remain silent in assemblies in an absolute sense. After all, he stated earlier that women with the prophetic gift are expected to prophesy to others and not keep silent, not to mention pray in public (1 Corinthians 11:4-5). Furthermore, as noted above, he said that each of them — male and female — would have a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation when they assembled, which naturally involves speaking during the assembly (verse 26).

“Wives [who Disrupt the Services] should remain Silent during the Church Service”

Secondly, the phrase “Women should remain silent in the churches” would more accurately be translated as “wives should remain silent when the church assembles” for these two reasons:

1. The koine Greek word for “women” is guné (goo-NAY), which is also the same word used for wife/wives, as observed in verses like Matthew 1:20,24.
2. Paul follows up this statement with “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home.” Since not every single woman had a husband, verse 34 must be referring to wives.

Keep in mind that the topic was keeping a sense of order when the believers gathered for a service, which is why Paul concludes with “be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way” (verses 39-40). Apparently wives were blurting out questions and perhaps other things during the service, which wasn’t helped by the possibility that women and men were seated in different areas. This inclination may have been due to their newfound sense of freedom in Christ or the negative influence of Dionysian worship and Gnosticism in the area (which we’ll look at shortly). Whatever the case, their selfish outbursts naturally created an atmosphere of disorder and Paul wanted to put a stop to it.

A good modern example would be this woman at one assembly where I frequently taught years ago. She would occasionally blurt out questions during the sermon, which disrupted the ministry of the word. One day my wife happened to be sitting behind her at a service when she uttered a question; Carol tapped her shoulder and kindly whispered “Jessie, why don’t you save your questions till after the service, Dirk’s trying to minister the word and it’s being recorded.” This restored order.

Being Sensitive to the Customs of the Culture in order to Effectively Minister there

About ten years after Paul wrote this letter to the Corinthian believers he wrote to Titus who was pastoring on the island of Crete:

³Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. ⁴Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, ⁵to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

Titus 2:3-5

Seasoned, reverent Christian women on Crete were instructed and expected to “teach what is good.” While this likely refers to the body gift of teaching (Romans 12:6-8) and not the fivefold ministry gift (Ephesians 4:11-13), it’s not technically distinguished. Paul adds that these women should be subject to their husbands at home “so that no one will malign the word of God.” This shows that Paul was sensitive to the positive image of Christianity in a rigidly patriarchal culture obviously so that the spread of the word of God would not be hindered.

To explain, while Paul plainly declared by the Spirit in his earliest epistle that “there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28), he was also conscious of the male-dominated cultures of which Titus and other pastors ministered and he didn’t want the word of God to be “maligned” — written off — because it alienated citizens since it didn’t align with the ethos of their societies. The Greek word ethos (EE-thaws) originally meant “accustomed place” and refers to customs of a particular culture, equivalent to the Latin word mores.

The Middle Eastern custom of men being the rulers of their households can be observed in the king of Persia’s edict after Queen Vashti disobeyed him (Esther 1:20-22). This was not Old Testament law, but rather a Persian edict. It illustrates the general patriarchal air of the region.

A good parallel in the modern world would be a ministry trying to pioneer assemblies in a strict Muslim nation once the government finally permitted an openly Christian fellowship. For such a mission to succeed they’d have to work within the cultural framework of that region; they’d have to be considerate of that area’s established mores. As such, they obviously wouldn’t send a woman to pastor an assembly nor female evangelists to conduct services, like Amie Semple McPherson or Kathryn Kulman.

Think about it in terms of the USA, a generally liberal “first world” country, which is where I live: Women didn’t even get the right to vote until 1920. Since then ladies have made much progress in walking free of the curse of Genesis 3:16 but, before that, we were very much a patriarchal society and women in ministry were few and far between. Even today female ministers are by far the minority and they still catch flak for openly serving in God’s kingdom, especially if they function as pastors.

Since the USA and Western nations in general — including Western-influenced countries — are no longer rigidly patriarchal there’s no reason women cannot serve in the fivefold ministry when called. Of course, ministers have to be led of the Spirit to serve effectively in whatever pocket of the country they’re assigned.

Paul’s sensitivity to cultural mores so as not to “hinder the gospel” can be observed earlier in his epistle to the Corinthians when he discussed the wearing of hats during prayer and men’s hair length (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). Neither of these have anything to do with Christian morality, but rather respect for the customs of the culture in question so as not to impede the spread of the message of Christ. Just the same, he was sensitive to the patriarchal nature of the areas where his subordinates ministered. It’s the principle of “becoming all things to all people so that by all possible means [we] might save some,” which Paul stressed earlier in his letter (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

In America today there’s cultural diversity and therefore respect or tolerance for different styles & customs of a culture or subculture. Despite this, a friend of mine who’s a fulltime evangelist informed me that “older viewers” might be turned off by the “head piece” I wore in my video Four Rules of Bible Interpretation. I didn’t take him in the wrong spirit because he was just concerned about reaching people and not unnecessarily turning some off. Paul had a similar concern in the mid-1st Century with the churches he oversaw in regards to the customs of the area in question. Nevertheless, I didn’t change the video because it reflects America’s modern subcultural diversity. If anyone is offended by what I wear on my head they don’t have to watch it.

Bacchus/Dionysus Worship in Corinth

The situation in 1st Century Corinth may be better grasped when you understand that the female-dominated worship of Bacchus was prevalent. Bacchus is better known as Dionysus, the Greco-Roman deity of the grape harvest & winemaking, as well as fertility, ritual madness and religious ecstasy. Ancient writers described Dionysian celebrants as engaging in excessive behavior, like drunkenness, revelry, sexual promiscuity and degrees of undress. It was all about the instinctual, the spontaneous and the emotional at the expense of moderation. Is it any wonder that Jim Morrison of The Doors was heavily into Dionysus? Imagine the activity at one of that group’s more wild concerts in the late 60s and that’s Dionysian worship in essence.

Female devotees were called maenads (MAY-nids), literally “mad women” or “raving ones.” When they worked themselves into a frenzy during their pagan gatherings they would cry out or offer a high pitched chant accompanied by clanging cymbals. They were occasionally known to tear animals limb from limb, consuming them bloody raw as part of their perverted worship. There are even legends of them tearing men limb from limb, e.g. Pentheus and Orpheus. Is it any wonder that Alexander the Great reportedly incorporated these fierce maenads into his army to assist in conquering lands?

Just as new believers today tend to retain elements of their subcultures (e.g. punk rockers, rappers and Goths), so ex-worshipers of Dionysus at the assemblies in Corinth no doubt retained a residue of their former lifestyles, particularly the more recent female converts. This is hinted at in several of Paul’s statements in his letter:

• Believers with weak consciences being uncomfortable with the idea of other believers eating meat sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 8:1-13).
• Paul’s condemnation of partaking of sacrificial meals in pagan temples (1 Corinthians 10: 14-22).
• Believers getting drunk during Holy Communion (1 Corinthians 11:21). Talk about disorder!
• Paul’s critical reference to the noise of a resounding gong or clanging cymbal (1 Corinthians 13:1)

The point is that women in Corinth were negatively swayed by the Dionysian culture of their area and this understandably affected order in the relatively new Christian services. Paul was just trying to get the pandemonium under control.

The Proper Understanding of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Based on what we now know from the above facts, let’s reread the text in question juxtaposed with a paraphrased rendition:

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. ³⁵If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Wives [who tend to blurt out things] should remain silent when the church assembles. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission [to their husbands], as the law says. ³⁵If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a [selfish, disrupting] wife to blurt out things during the service.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (paraphrased)

This is the proper reading of the passage since it doesn’t contradict the rest of Scripture.

‘What about the Statement They “Must be in Submission, as the Law Says”?’

Paul’s issue was wives blurting out questions and other things during the service at the Corinth assemblies, which interrupted the ministry of the word. This is why he followed up with “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home.” So, as far as submission goes, Paul was specifically talking about wives being submissive to their husbands. In a previous section we saw that Paul actually taught that all believers are to be submitted to one another with a humble, servant’s heart, which he stated before he instructed wives to submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:21-25). So the attitude of submission is a universal thing in the body of Christ and not just something for wives to do with their husbands. Furthermore, Paul paralleled the husband’s headship over the wife to Christ’s headship over the Church. Does the Lord lead believers in a carnally controlling way? Of course not. Yeshua leads by laying down his life for his beloved. Husbands are instructed to lead in the same manner, not “rule over” their wives in a fleshly tyrannical way. When Paul elsewhere instructed wives to submit to their husbands “as is fitting in the Lord” he immediately followed it up with “Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them” (Colossians 3:18-19). So the idea of men “ruling over” their wives in a fleshly way is completely out of the picture.

As for Paul’s statement that wives must be in submission “as the Law says,” this was not a reference to the curse of Genesis 3:16 since that was a curse, a punishment for disobedience, not a moral command or blessing. Since there is no specific statement in the Old Testament Scriptures about wives submitting to their husbands, he must have been referring to the gist of the Law, as observed in Numbers 30 and Genesis 2:18.

Keep in mind, however, that there are several passages in the Old Testament that reveal how valuable a noble wife is, such as:

A wife of noble character is her husband’s crown, but a disgraceful wife is like decay in his bones.

Proverbs 12:4

The wise woman builds her house, but with her own hands the foolish one tears hers down.

Proverbs 14:1

He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the LORD.

Proverbs 18:22

 ¹⁰ A wife of noble character who can find?
She is worth far more than rubies.
¹¹ Her husband has full confidence in her
and lacks nothing of value.
¹² She brings him good, not harm,
all the days of her life.
¹³ She selects wool and flax
and works with eager hands.
¹⁴ She is like the merchant ships,
bringing her food from afar.
¹⁵ She gets up while it is still night;
she provides food for her family
and portions for her female servants.

¹⁶She considers a field and buys it;

    out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.

Proverbs 31:10-15

I encourage you to read the remaining verses of Proverbs 31 for further insights on how the Old Testament hails noble women.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Let’s now look at the other seeming “hard saying” regarding women in the New Testament:

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. ¹²I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. ¹³For Adam was formed first, then Eve. ¹⁴And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. ¹⁵But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Here Paul is writing his protégé Timothy who was pastoring in Ephesus, located in what is today western Turkey. When he says that “women should learn in quietness and full submission” he was obviously referring to wives submitting to their husbands since he goes on to reference the first husband and wife of humanity, Adam and Eve. Remember, as earlier noted, the koine Greek word for “women,” guné (goo-NAY), can refer to either women or wives depending on the context. For instance, in Matthew 19:9 it clearly refers to a wife.

This is further reinforced by the fact that Paul taught elsewhere in the New Testament that wives were to submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:21-25 & Colossians 3:18-19), as did Peter (1 Peter 3:1), because the husband has headship in the marriage, which is likened to Father God’s headship in relation to the Son (1 Corinthians 11:3 & 15:27-28). Again, this does not indicate inequality as the Scriptures clearly state that God is one and thus Father & Son are one (Deuteronomy 6:4, John 10:30 & John 1:1-4). Ideally, husbands & wives are to be one as well with the wife submitting to the husband just as the Son submits to the Father.

So when Paul says “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet” he was referring to wives submitting to their husbands as the head in the marriage. Obviously there was an issue with wives disrespecting their husbands in the Ephesian assemblies or disrupting the services in some way, similar to the situation ten years earlier in Corinth. The Greek word for “assume authority” is authenteó (aw-then-TEH-oh), which is used this sole time in Scripture. In the Greek literature of that era the term had a radical connotation as in exercising authority in a domineering manner, even resorting to murder. Paul was led of the Spirit to use this more extreme term for exercising authority above a more common one, which points to the nature of the problem in Ephesus.

In regards to cultural context, pertinent background info reveals the zeitgeist of that area, which had an impact on the believers at Ephesus…

The Cult of Artemis at Ephesus and the Philosophy/Religion of Gnosticism

The worship of the goddess Artemis (ART-uh-mis) was big in Ephesus where its Temple of Artemis was one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Paul spent three and a half years establishing the church in Ephesus and, at one point, caused a riot because the message of Christ was turning so many people away from the idolatry of Artemis and craftsmen were losing business making idols (Acts 19: 23-41).

Artemis worship was a female-dominated cult that believed Artemis was born before her male twin Apollo and thus women were superior to men and could dominate them. So Paul was countering this belief with his instructions in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and this explains his point that “Adam was formed first, then Eve.”

Paul went on to stress that “Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.” In other words, Eve was the first to sin, then Adam, which would taint the human race within their loins. Again, Paul was counteracting false beliefs promoted by the Artemis cult. But there’s something obvious that needs added to his commentary for balance: Eve was deceived into sinning whereas Adam sinned without being deceived, likely because feminine beauty was his weakness and so he just went along with Eve’s transgression.

The apostle was simultaneously counteracting the false religion/philosophy of Gnosticism (NOSS-tuh-sism) prevalent in the region, which taught that the woman was the originator of man and that the serpent in the Eden story was good — merely trying to get Eve to eat of the Tree of Gnosis, aka the Tree of Knowledge, in an effort to enlighten Adam.

So Paul was “killing two birds with one stone” with his instructions in 1 Timothy 2:11-14.

What does “Women will be Saved through Childbearing” Mean?

This brings us to Paul’s curious statement in verse 15:

But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1 Timothy 2:15

More literally, women will be saved through the childbearing, a reference to the incarnation of Christ — the birth of Jesus into this world. Recall what the LORD prophesied over satan during the Genesis curse:

And I will put enmity
between you [satan] and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers [Christ];
he [Christ] will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”

Genesis 3:15

The mighty Messiah crushed satan’s head through his birth, death and resurrection. As it is written: “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work” (1 John 3:8).

This is the obvious translation of the verse since the idea that women are saved through merely bearing children doesn’t even make sense. The Scriptures plainly teach that we are saved by God’s graciousness through faith in Christ, not by works, although genuine faith always results in works (Ephesians 2:8-9 & James 2:14-26).

Paul’s additional statement that women will be saved through the childbearing of Christ “if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety” merely points to the necessity of persevering in faith, which he stressed elsewhere to all believers, not just women (Colossians 1:22-23). After all, if it takes faith to be saved it naturally follows that someone cannot be saved if they come to a point where they no longer believe due to neglecting the feeding of their faith. See this article for details.

How Do We Know that Paul wasn’t saying All Women should Submit to All Men in General?

Some people have gone to extremes with Paul’s statement: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet” (1 Timothy 2:11-12), suggesting that women should submit to men in general. But such a radical interpretation can be dismissed for a dozen glaring reasons:

• As already covered, Paul was talking about wives submitting to husbands as the head in the marriage in the same manner that the Son submits to the Father as head.
• Suggesting that all women should submit to all men in general would contradict the LORD’s choosing of Deborah to lead Israel for 40 years spiritually, legally and militarily (Judges 4:4-9).
• It would contradict God’s usage of several notable women in the Old Testament who taught males, like the prophet Huldah (2 Kings 22:14-20).
• It would contradict the instructions of the angel at Christ’s tomb and the Messiah Himself that were given to several women who went to the empty tomb. They were instructed to educate men — Jesus’ disciples & imminent apostles — and thus these women became the first evangelists (Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, Matthew 28:1-10 & Mark 16:7).
• It would contradict Priscilla’s teaching of the mighty scholar Apollos “more accurately” at her home along with her husband (Acts 18:24-26). By the way, a portion of the church in Ephesus — the town in which Timothy ministered — met in Priscilla & Aquila’s abode there (1 Corinthians 16:19).
• It would contradict Paul’s commendation of Timothy’s grandmother & mother — Lois and Eunice — for being responsible for Timothy’s “living faith” (2 Timothy 1:5 & Proverbs 22:6).
• Moreover, Timothy traveled & ministered with Paul as his protégé in the past (1 Corinthians 4:17). If Paul had a universal rule against women teaching men Timothy would’ve already known about it.
• In 1 Corinthians 14:26 Paul addresses believers with the Greek word adelphos (ad-el-FOS), which refers to males and females in practice, similar to how we use the English ‘guys.’ This is verified by his usage of the word in Romans 16:17 where he was clearly referring to men and women; moreover Paul goes on to say “When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation.” The Greek word for “each of you” is hekastos (HEK-as-tos), which is gender neutral and can refer to males and/or females. In other words, when believers come together women can have a word of instruction — a teaching — and are expected to voice it, not just men.
• Paul lists the body gifts that are available to all believers in 1 Corinthians 12:4-11, which includes the gift of teaching. In Ephesians 4:11-13 he lists the fivefold ministry gifts, which also includes the gift of teaching. Nowhere in either context does Paul stipulate that only males can have these gifts and use them. Why not? Obviously because they’re available to men and women and both are expected to walk in them.
• Paul admonished the believers in Colosse to “teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit” (Colossians 3:16). The opening of that epistle shows that Paul was writing the “saints” in Colosse and referred to them with the aforementioned Greek word hekastos (Colossians 1:2) which, again, refers to males and females, as proven by Romans 16:17. Once more, he doesn’t stipulate that only males should be teaching and admonishing others.
• In his second letter to Timothy, Paul instructs his protégé to “entrust to reliable people” what he has taught him “who will also be qualified to teach others” (2 Timothy 2:2). The word ‘people’ is anthrópos (ANTH-ro-pos), which refers to human beings in general, not just males. It’s where we get the English word anthropology.
• Christ rebukes the believers at Thyatira for tolerating the teachings of “Jezebel” in Revelation 2:20-23. Nowhere does the Lord suggest that it’s wrong for a woman to teach; the issue was what this particular woman taught, which misled Christians into sexual immorality and idolatry. It’s actually implied that it’s perfectly appropriate for a woman to teach and that believers would listen, including males.

The Proper Understanding of 1 Timothy 2:11-15

So Paul was talking about wives submitting to their husbands in 1 Timothy 2:11-15, not all women submitting to every man on Earth, which would be absurd, then or now. The passage should be read thusly:

A wife should learn in quietness and full submission. ¹² I do not permit a wife to teach or to [radically] assume authority over her husband; she must be quiet [and respect her husband in the assembly]. ¹³ For Adam was formed first, then Eve. ¹⁴ And Adam was not the one deceived; it was his wife who was deceived and became a sinner. ¹⁵But she will be saved through the childbearing [i.e. Christ’s incarnation, death and resurrection] — if she continues in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1 Timothy 2:11-15 (paraphrased)

Paul was led of the Spirit to stress this because there was a spirit of misandry in Ephesus due to the influence of Artemis worship and Gnosticism. This was manifesting in marriages in the Ephesian church and it was a glaring enough issue that word traveled to Paul about it, whether through Timothy or others.

If you didn’t know, misandry (mis-ANN-dree) is the opposite of misogyny. The latter is the devaluing, disrespect or abuse of women while the former is contempt for men. There’s a growing spirit of misandry in the USA today and Western nations in general, which can be observed in the popular phrase “toxic masculinity” and the emergence of ‘soy boys.’ I’m not saying there isn’t such a thing as negative masculinity. Obviously there is, but let’s not mistakenly turn to misandry to purge it. Let’s also not cultivate a spirit of toxic femininity, which is just as damaging as toxic masculinity.

Speaking of toxic femininity and the corresponding misandry, this was obviously a serious enough problem in Ephesus due to Artemis worship and Gnosticism for Paul to address it so overtly.

Properly Understanding the Husband’s Headship in the Marriage

Just as there cannot be a healthy marriage if a spirit of misogyny is prevalent, the same is true if there’s a spirit of misandry. The Holy Spirit, working through Paul, wanted to ensure that there were healthy marriages in the assemblies in Ephesus.

We’ve already gone over the fact that a husband being the head in the family does not mean there’s inequality between the husband and wife since the Father is head of the Son and yet they are equal (1 Corinthians 11:3, Genesis 1:26, John 10:30 & 1 Corinthians 3:23). In other words, headship don’t not mean better. God gave both Adam & Eve the commission to subdue or govern the Earth, not just Adam (Genesis 1:28). Nor is headship an excuse for abuse since husbands are plainly exhorted to love their wives in the self-sacrificial sense of Christ loving the Church; and they are not be harsh with them (Ephesians 5:25 & Colossians 3:19).

Another thing that needs to be understood is that the husband is the head of the marriage & family in the sense of the chain of authority, but…

1. The wife is the domestic head as observed later in Paul’s letter to Timothy where he instructed younger widows “to manage their homes” (1 Timothy 5:14). This phrase is one compound word in the Greek, oikodespoteó (oy-kod-es-pot-EH-oh) meaning “to rule the household.” This explains why our great father of Faith, Abraham, complied with Sarah’s important domestic decisions (Genesis 21). (This also explains an interpretation of a statement in 1 Corinthians 11:10 where Paul said “It is for this reason that a woman [wife] ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels,” meaning authority over her marital head, the husband. In short, the wife has authority in the household, even over her husband. This reading is supported by the phasing of the verse in several translations, e.g. NIV, ISV, Douay-Rheims and Aramaic Bible. Of course the more popular interpretation is that Paul was talking about a symbol of authority on her head; in other words, a head covering, aka hat. The problem with this reading is that the Greek word for “authority” just means authority or power and not “a symbol of authority” or “a sign of authority.”).
2. The husband is not the spiritual head because Christ is the spiritual head since he’s the head of the worldwide Church, the body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22, 4:15, 5:23 & Colossians 1:18); thus the Lord is the spiritual head of every female believer, including wives. If this were not the case it would mean that an unbelieving husband would be the spiritual head of a believing wife, which is obviously not the case (1 Corinthians 7:13-16). That said, a husband can be the subordinate spiritual head of the marriage & family — subordinate to Christ, of course — if he proves himself faithful and devoted to the Lord.

I say “if” because some Christian husbands don’t prove themselves worthy of subordinate spiritual headship in the marriage. For instance, I know a couple who used to attend an assembly I taught at in the 2000s where the husband would often lead in worship, playing piano and singing. He was a gifted worship leader, but in the years to come it became clear that he struggled with his relationship with the Lord and would fall out of fellowship for periods of time. I remained distant friends with him regardless and we’d discuss biblical topics now and then on Facebook. Then, suddenly, he started going on curious rants about how the devil wrote the Scriptures and so they’re not a reliable source of truth, blah, blah, blah. I was hoping this was just a phase, but he has continued with this erroneous attitude for months now and has been very vocal about these new beliefs. Carol & I couldn’t help wonder how his godly wife was handling the situation. Obviously her husband’s actions disqualified him of being a subordinate spiritual head in the marriage.

So Paul’s goal — led of the Spirit — was for believers to have healthy marriages in Ephesus. He wanted wives to respect their husbands as the head of the marriage & family rather than treat them with contempt with an arrogant attitude bolstered by Artemis worship and Gnosticism. This was likewise the case in the Corinthian situation ten years prior, except that the negative influence there was Dionysian worship (and likely Gnosticism as well). Of course the apostle elsewhere stressed how husbands were to love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her. Paul’s aim was to have healthy marriages & families in the church. It’s a noble goal — a good thing, not a bad thing. When wives refuse to give their husbands the respect due them it’ll naturally suck the life out of the husband and the marriage will eventually fall apart. I’ve unfortunately seen this happen with friends!

Honor the One Who Wears Your Ring

So, please, whether you’re the husband or wife, honor the one who wears your ring. Honor & love him/her even when you see someone of the opposite sex that might attract you or shows a modicum of interest. Honor & love your spouse by not even giving your thought life over to dwelling on another person (Job 31:1, 31:9-10 & Matthew 5:28). Are you following? This doesn’t mean you won’t find certain people of the opposite sex attractive on occasion, it just means you honor your spouse & marriage by not daydreaming about them. For anyone who says that a truly godly person wouldn’t experience such a temptation in the first place, wrong. It happened to Job and he was the most righteous person on the face of the Earth at the time (Job 1:8) and thus was compelled to make a “covenant with his eyes” so as not to look at a woman in the wrong spirit, both outer eye and inner eye (Job 31:1).

By the way, when I suggest that spouses should honor the one who wears their ring, I don’t mean that we should condone sin. Intercede for your spouse when you see sin issues, confront as led of the Spirit and forgive when s/he humbly repents (Luke 17:3-4). Furthermore, as clichéd as it may sound: The family that prays together stays together. Carol & I pray together on a daily basis. I encourage couples to do the same. It keeps you tight and in sync with God.

Close

I hope you were blessed by this study and that the scriptural truths have increased your understanding of women from a biblical perspective and women in God’s service, as well as the dynamics of husband & wife in marriage.

This article is now available in book form with loads of additional material!

You can purchase the print book here for only $5.99

Or get the Kindle eBook here for only 99¢

Related Topics:

Women — Were they Considered Just Property in Bible Times?

What IS Marriage? (and Related Topics)

Bible—Is it Full of Contradictions? Does it Promote Slavery, Tyranny and Discrimination?

The Fivefold Ministry Gifts — Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Pastor and Teacher

Q&A on Solomon’s Song of Songs