"26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." -- Galatians 3:26-29
All my life, I grew up believing that women could not be pastors/ministers, elders, or deacons. I was told it was in the Bible. I believed that for most of my life, and it is constantly being reinforced all across the denominational spectrum. Is is Biblical though? Many people would give an emphatic yes! They would further say that that a women is sinning if she chooses to lead or preach in any way. Some go so far to say the woman is endangering her very soul. Imagine that, she is serving God, but may still wind up being eternally separated from our Father! This issue has split churches and driven people away, but is it Biblical?
When I was deployed to the Arabian Sea, at the very beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom, I had the pleasure of meeting a female chaplain. She was ordained in the very denomination I grew up in, and had even applied to the very church I attended right up through college! We quickly became friends, and when I needed advice on something she was the most helpful of the three chaplains on board. This woman was not trying to make a statement, she was not forging ahead for woman's rights, she was just a very humble woman trying to serve the Lord where He had called her. That is when I decided to see what the Bible says. I studied the issue and did not see anyplace that expressly forbid or restrict women on how they could serve God. There are some difficult passages, and with the help of my good friend and sister in Chirst, I have researched not only God's Word, but also the original Greek for these passages and placed them in context. The result is this study. I ask that you read this with an open mind, read all the passages for yourself, and, most importantly, pray to the Lord for guidance."1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap." -- 1 Timothy 3:1-7Notice in the very first verse, it says "if anyone sets his heart on being an overseer". (The King James Version renders this, "If a man desire the office of a bishop", however the greek word is ei tis which literally means "whoever, whatever". Thus "anyone" is a more proper translation.) Now right after that it says "he desires a noble task". However the greek pronoun, autos is a generic pronoun, literally meaning he, she or it. Why is it then translated "he"? In most languages, the masculine form is used to note the generic. For example, when talking about a group of people in Spanish, French or Italian, you use the masculine plural. The masculine form is used in a generic way. Thus "he" does not necessarily mean a male, but rather a person. We know this because the Greek "whoever" was used in the subject of that sentance and not "a man".
So what about verse 2, is says, "the husband of but one wife" (which also appears in verse 12, and again in Titus 1:6). Too often people focus on the word husband and ignore the "but one wife. In the original Greek text this statement is aner mia gune which literally means, "a man of only one woman." It refers to an attitude of heart. It is an inner likeness of one who is deeply committed to just one person. We are committed to one God. The Church is often portrayed as the bride, with Christ as the groom. Christ is committed to His one Church and His one Church must be committed to Him. Genuine pastors of God's flock understand the importance of commitment. They perceive the significance, both to themselves and their followers, of a singleness of commitment to the covenants established with their God and their spouses. Their lives are to be a reflection of God's ideal; of the Creator's original design for marriage: One man committed to one woman for life. If a person cannot be committed to one spouse, than they do not possess the commitment required to serve as a leader of God's people.
While the Bible does not specifically say women can be deaconesses, It does mention one. In his letter to the Romans, Paul commends Phoebe, a deaconess in Cenchrea: That in itself may not mean much to some, however if we look through historical records, we can see examples of women serving as deaconesses. In 111 A.D., a man named Pliny sent a letter to then Emperor Trajan seeking advice on how to deal with Christians. In part of his investigation, he tortured two deaconesses:
"1I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church in Cenchrea. 2I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me." -- Romans 16:1-2
The word for "deaconess" used in this passage is, in Greek, diakanos which literally means, "servant, deacon, minister", and is the same word used in 1 Timothy 3:8 to denote the office of deacon. The Bible is full of examples of women serving God in various roles, however this verse is the only on that actually mentions a deaconess. Paul does call her a deaconess though, using the same word to describe the office.
"All the more I believed it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were called deaconesses, by means of torture. Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition." -- Pliny's letter to Emperor Trajan
Also, in the forth century, a lady by the name of Olympia was ordained a deaconess after being widowed. She took the death of her husband as sign that she should not be devoted to an earthly marriage, but a divine one, and devoted her life to Christ (see Deaconess Olympia of Constantinople).
Throughout history and even in the Bible, women have served as deaconesses. So, if God wants to call a woman to office, who is man to say otherwise?
"11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." -- 1 Timothy 2:11-12On the surface, it looks like God is saying that women are not allow to teach, period. However, when you look at the passage in its context and compare it to what the rest of the Bible says, you get a much better view of what is going on. Notice how Paul phrases it, "I do not permit a woman to teach..." It is true that every word of the Bible is literally God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16), but Paul is very specific when binding people to a command of the Lord. Look at the way he phrases things in his letter to the Corinthians:
"10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." -- 1 Corinthians 7:10-11Notice he is specific, "not I, but the Lord". The Lord commands that a wife must not separate from her husband, and a husband must not divorce his wife. He does the same thing when it is he, himself, who is making the command:
"12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him." -- 1 Corinthians 7:12-13Notice how he admits that he is saying the next thing, and not the Lord. Notice also the phrasing he uses. In the first case, he commands. The Greek word used is paragello, which means "to command, order, charge". In the next Paul says to the rest. The Greek word lego is used here, which means "to say, to speak". Paul differentiates when the Lord is giving a command, and when he is giving the instruction.
In his letter to Timothy, Paul is doing just that. He is giving instructions to Timothy, in how to lead worship. But if he is giving Timothy instructions, shouldn't we follow them today, as well? No, we are all free in Christ, we are not bound by a "new law" (see Galations 3:28 above, see also The Teaching of Christ), yet some people try to bind things that are not commanded by God. These same people let other things go though. Take the verse just before the passage in Timothy:
"8I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. 9I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God." -- 1 Timothy 2:8-10Must men raise their hands while praying today? Are women bound not to braid their hair or where jewelry? No, men do not, and women are not. As a matter of fact most of the same people who believe women should not teach, also believe raising your hands is a sin! Both are in the Bible, and Paul tells us both, yet you get two different stories for the same passage. Who has the right to decide what is binding on us today and what isn't? Who has the right to place Christians in bondage in one thing, yet free in another. Frankly, nobody does. Some people try, but only Christ has that authority, and we are all free in Christ. Thus, we should not let any man try to bind us from Christ's freedom (Galatian 5:1), and that is exactly what man is trying to do by prohiting women from teaching, when God has never commanded such.
This section was written by my friend, and sister, Vicki Cox. She has been been studying this topic on her own for quite some time, and with her permission, I have included some of her work in this study.
In my search for truth, I discovered that there is Greek, and then there is Greek, and then there is Greek. I speak not one word of it. Of great interest to me was my discovery of the koine Greek. Koine is the language most commonly used in Paul’s day. This language would be understood by the largest number of people to whom Paul was speaking. I compare our slang American English to slang Brit or proper Queen’s English. Because many pieces of the written koine have been discovered in recent times, we have available to us translating aids that we did not possess during the times of our earlier translations. These new aids paint a very different picture of the koine word, “kephale”, translated into English as “head”.
The passages of Scripture most often used to declare male authority, or “headship”, is 1 Cor. 11:3: “Now 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,” and Eph. 5:22-24: “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”
Before I test the translation of “head”, I notice the use of the word “of”, instead of the word “over”, in 1 Cor. 11:3: head OF man, Christ; head OF woman, man; head OF Christ, God. Not “over”? Why was the word “over” not used, if indeed, “over” is the intention?
Next, I notice the order: man-Christ, woman-man, Christ-God.
If one is speaking of hierarchy/headship, would one not speak in the correct order of chain-of-command, whether from top to bottom, or bottom to top? If “head” was intended as hierarchy/authority, I believe they would have been listed this way:
From the bottom, up: woman-man, man-Christ, Christ-God
My curiosity is peeked, and I begin digging again. When I step back and look at the letter to the Corinthian as a whole, I see that Paul’s main purpose is unity: 1Cor. 1:10 “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.”
He shows what division (disunity) looks like: lawsuits against fellow Christians (ch. 6), exercising freedom w/o regard to others (food - ch. 8), and demanding rights (ch.9).
He explains how the church lives and functions using the body as his visual aid (ch.12). Then he shows how they disregard and disrespect the body: the issue of headcoverings (11:4-16), gluttony at gatherings of table fellowship (11:17-34), and having the better spiritual gifts 12:1-11).
Paul then reinstates, defines and describes unity again in 12:12-27, just in case they didn't get it the first time. He defines spiritual gifts in 12:28-31, saving the best gift for last (ch. 13). He tells them that when Christ comes again, none of these gifts will be needed, except love. Love is eternal. Love is the answer to unity. Love is exhibited in patience, kindness, yielding, submitting, forgetting, protecting, trusting, hoping, persevering. This is how we find unity - in love for each other.
1 Cor. 1:10 “...that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.” 1 Cor. 8:1 “..., but love builds up.” 1 Cor. 13:13 “... But the greatest of these is love.” 1 Cor. 16:14 “Do everything in love.”
I conclude that 1 Cor. 11:3, in connection with the surrounding passage, is not about authority at all, but our incredible and powerful link to each other. Head and body are dependent on each other. Love each other. Respect each other. Consider each other. Yield to each other.
But what about “head”? That brings me back to koine and a search of those NT passages speaking of the “head” as a role. I find each passage defines “head”:
Eph. 1:22 -23 “And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”
• Christ is the head. He fills everything. He provides growth.
Eph. 4:15-16 “Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
• Christ is again the “head”. “From him the whole body...grows and builds....” He provides growth and development.
Eph. 5:23 “For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.”
• Christ is still the “head”. He is the Savior, i.e., self-sacrificing and life-giving. If “head” were intended to mean “authority”, “Lord” would have been used instead of “Savior”. This, then, is the kind of “head” the husband is to be to his wife: self-sacrificing and life-giving, so that his wife can be all that she is meant to be, as Christ is with the church.
Col. 1:18-19 “And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,”
• Christ is the source of all things given new life and reconciled to God. He is the provider of life.
Col. 2:19 “He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.”
• Christ is the supporter, the life-giver and the source of growth to the church as His body. Losing connection will bring spiritual death.
I then conclude that the “head” is used as a function, not as a position of authority, and that “head” is a servant-provider, providing life, growth, and development.
Using that definition, I then go to Eph. 5:23 and 1 Cor. 11:3 and find:
Eph. 5:23 For the husband is the servant-provider of the wife as Christ is the servant-provider of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.
1Cor. 11:3 Now I want you to realize that the life-giver of every man is Christ, and the life-giver of the woman is man, and the life-giver of Christ is God.
And the pieces fit.
So, why the confusion? Koine. The spoken Greek of the day. Mistranslated. Berkeley and Alvera Mickelson, professors at Bethel Theological Seminary, have written an excellent piece explaining this confusion of mistranslating “kephale” in their article, “The Head of the Epistles”. A user-friendly piece, “I Believe in Male Headship”, by Gilbert Bilezikian is also quite good, but does not provide the support of his position in as much detail.
Bottom line: If God is to be glorified, we must have unity. We find unity in loving each other. What does that look like in my life to my God, my church, and my family? Without love as my primary motive in every single thing I do, I have nothing to offer. I am nothing but noise. I am nothing.
This section was also written by Vicki. She has put in much study and prayer and has come up with some good answers to some difficult questions.
When looking at “difficult passages”, i.e., those that don’t really make a whole lot of sense, we have to do more than just pluck it out, set it down, and say, “means what it says, says what it means”. Paul was an intentional writer. He wrote with purpose. What was his purpose in 1 Corinthians?
When I read 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 literally, it makes me, as a woman, feel like I am less than a man to God. Because I know that isn’t true, I am compelled to study more, look further, dig deeper. In my diggings, I have learned much.
I have learned that I must read all of 1 Corinthians. The overall picture is that of ministry in the church. In 11:2-16, Paul affirms and confirms that men AND women were praying and prophesying in church gatherings.
Someone once made the comment that Scripture is written without emotion. I have learned that Paul writes to the Corinthians with MUCH emotion, but some translators chose to leave it out. Why? I can only guess. There is s a little mark in the ancient Greek that if I knew how to make one on my keyboard, I would. But, since I can’t, I’ll describe it. It’s like a lower case DeNealian n, with two little dots over the top. It’s a word used as an emotional rebuttal, such as ‘What?!’, ‘Nonsense!’, and ‘No way!’ Paul uses this word 49 times in 1 Corinthians. The word is left untranslated in most versions because it is more emotional than intellectual. Why would translators choose to leave out the emotion Paul so frequently used here? Again, I can only guess. Allow me to insert this word in vs. 35-36: “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Nonsense! Did the word of God originate with you? What? Are you the only people it has reached?” See how it changes the verse? Verse 35 is mostly likely Paul quoting the Corinthians, possibly from a previous letter they had written to him, or one of their favorite sayings.
I have learned that the ancient Greek did not have punctuation marks. How did they end one sentence and begin another? How did they ask a question? How did they make strong points? What difference does this make? Look at this:
Dear John:
I want a man who knows what love is all about. You are generous, kind, thoughtful. People who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me for other men. I yearn for you. I have no feelings whatsoever when we're apart. I can be forever happy--will you let me be yours?
Gloria
Dear John:
I want a man who knows what love is. All about you are generous, kind, thoughtful people, who are not like you. Admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me. For other men, I yearn. For you, I have no feelings whatsoever. When we're apart, I can be forever happy. Will you let me be?
Yours,
Gloria
Punctuation makes a BIG difference! So when we get to vs. 33-34, “1Cor. 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches,” we have problems. Was Paul stating a universal principle? To say this was the proper place for the period negates what Paul just said in chapter 11. Therefore, the verses would most likely read: “1Cor. 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the congregations of the saints. 34 Women should remain silent in the churches.”
I have learned about structure. Structure is used repeatedly in both the Old and New. They have names. The ones I’ll show you are particularization and chiasm. They work like this:
First, make a statement, then, give examples. In this case, the general statement is 1 Cor. 14;26, 33, 40, i.e., worship should be orderly. The examples were speaking in tongues, prophesying, and women in the church, vs. 27-32 and 34-39.
The next part of structure is a pattern - A, B, C, D, D, C, B, A. A great way to remember this is with the human body: A Hands, B Elbow, C Shoulder, D Head, D Head, C Shoulder, B Elbow, A Hand.
How this pattern applies to these verses:
The principle is introduced: vs. 26 “1Cor. 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.”
A - vs. 27-28 “If anyone speaks in a tongue, two --or at the most three --should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.”
B - vs. 29-32 “1Cor. 14:29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets.”
Principle reinstated: vs. 33 “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints,”
C - vs. 34-35a “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home;”
These statements are correcting the problem of chaos in their worship. Then,
C - vs. 35b-38 “ for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.”
B - vs. 39a “1Cor. 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy,”
C - vs. 39b “and do not forbid speaking in tongues.”
These statements defend the principle.
Principle reaffirmed: vs. 40 “But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.”
The “Law” referred to in vs. 34? “as the Law says.” It was not the Law of Moses, for no such law is found. It was most likely referring to the law of their land, their day, and their culture, for the wife to speak to the husband at home and in private.
Paul was dealing with a splitting church - those who believed they could do anything they wanted in any way they wanted (a misunderstanding of “freedom in Christ”), and those who were still practicing law/legalism. Both were hurting the church. And haven’t we all seen that happen? David Hamilton puts it this way: “Paul corrects chaos. Paul prohibits prohibitions.” Paul believed everyone should be allowed to participate (vs. 26), but only in an orderly way.
I have learned that I am to use my God-given gifts,
but only in consideration of others.
CONCLUSION:
There has been a tremendous amount of controversy over the roles of Women in Christ's Church. At a glance, it would appear that women are severely restricted in their capacity to serve God. However, taking this view you would have to overlook passages that state women's equality with man, our freedom in Christ, even the example Paul gives of a women filling the office of deacon. There is more to it than that, though. When you really dig deep into God's Word, you can see the intent of Paul, the meaning of what he is saying. I am not talking about "reading between the lines", I am talking about reading what is written. I am not trying to "twist a new meaning out of scripture", but to look and see what is meant by what is written. When you do an in depth study of scripture, you get so much more out of it then just skimming the surface. Vicki has done a wonderful job of looking deep into God's Word and has noticed some deep, but universal truths. God does not want to restrict the way anyone serves Him, but he also is not a God of disorder, but of order. He wants all of us to serve Him with our all, but wants us to do so in an orderly, dignified way that brings glory to Him. That is true for both men and women. In Christ their is neither male, nor female, only co-heirs. With Christ, it is possible to give our all to God. Man or woman we are to give God our all. How can a woman do this if man places restrictions on her? She cannot and man should not. If God, the creator of the universe calls a woman into His service, who is man to say she cannot?