Recently I was given a book of sermons by a woman who is the pastor of a Baptist church in New York City. I have read several of the sermons in it. Admittedly, it is difficult to give a fair evaluation of one’s ability to hold the attention of a congregation and/or convict them from the sermon in written form. But one of the advantages of the written sermon is the reader’s ability to evaluate what is written with a bit more precision than when the sermon is heard. The lady is highly educated and seems to be somewhat gifted in articulating her observations, interpretations, and applications of the passages she has chosen to expound. Her emphasis in the sermons I read seemed to be heavily Armenian, i.e., humanistic rather than toward the sovereignty of God. It is a man-centered emphasis that uses the Scriptures to support ideas that are much to the liking of men and women in an individualistic egalitarian society. "You can be much more than you are if you learn to look inside and draw out the hidden talent God have given you." "God can only use you mightily if you are open to His leading." This is the kind of preaching emphasis religious people love to hear. Biblically, what do we see when we honestly look inside? Jeremiah describes our inner being as a heart that is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9). And Paul teaches us that no one is truly seeking after the God who is, not even one. There is no one who seeks after God or naturally tries to fulfill the purpose of life in a loving, giving way (Romans 3:10-18). If God can only use us if we are open to being used by Him, the creature holds sway over the Creator. There is a tremendous difference between religion and Christianity. Jesus, the living Word of God said, "For without Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5)
On the up-side, the lady preacher who authored the book referred to, has a familiarity with the Scriptures that would send many male preachers to the back of the bus. She gives astute background information and somewhat sets the passage she is using as a guide in context. A few of her historical references are slightly amiss, but, as humans, we are all subject to such errors. None of them were glaring. Other than the man-centered emphasis, her applications were most appealing and some of them spiritually justifiable. The big question, however, is, can she qualify Biblically to be ordained, pastor a church, or preach to men who may be in the congregation? This question is prompted by First Corinthians 11:3, "But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." Here we have a succinct description of God’s economy which is substantiated throughout the Scriptures. To assume to preach the Word of God is simultaneously taking upon one’s self the authority of God’s Word in exhorting God’s people. In other words, if a man is in the congregation and his wife is in the pulpit attempting to exhort the congregation from the Word of God, she has authority over him. This is a reversal of God’s stated economy. According to this writer’s understanding of the marvelously preserved Word of God, few Bible believers would argue that the man is not to be the head of the physical family. The Church, in its several local settings, is a part of the family of God called out of the world to present a unique witness to the world. The known psychological and sometimes physical difficulties of matriarchal families are myriad.
To the woman He said: I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you" (Gen 3:16).
Genesis 3:16 is God’s curse upon the woman for allowing herself to be deceived by the serpent, Satan. We are reminded in I Timothy 2:13, 14, "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." It must be observed that there was nothing said about rule or headship until after the fall into sin. Initially, Eve was created to be a suitable helper comparable to Adam in every respect. They were different and were consigned roles in the Garden of Eden that were appropriate for each of them. The man, Adam, being created first was naturally the head of the two. Calvin’s comment on this verse is accurate and interesting:
It is credible that the woman would have brought forth without pain, or at least without suchgreat suffering, if she had stood in her original condition; but her revolt from God subjected her to inconvenience of this kind. The expression, 'pains and conception,’ is to be taken by the figure hypallage, for the pains which they endure in consequence of conception. The second punishment which he exacts is subjection. For this form of speech, "Thy desire shall be unto thy husband," is of the same force as if He had said that she should not be free and at her own command, but subject to the authority of her husband and dependent upon his will; or as if he had said, 'Thou shalt desire nothing but what thy husband wishes.’ As it is declared afterwards, "Unto thee shall be his desire," (chap iv. 7.) Thus the woman, who had perversely exceeded her proper bounds, is forced back to her own position. She had, indeed, previously been subject to her husband, but that was a liberal and gentle subjection; now, however she is cast into servitude.[i]
It seems coherent that this is the rational starting point in the discussion of whether or not women can Biblically qualify for ordained offices in the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Other commentators make comments that are somewhat in concert with Calvin on Genesis 3:16. One that is particularly noteworthy is that of Keil-Delitzsch, (the mention of the prospect of victory is a reference to Genesis 3:15):It was not till the prospect of victory had been presented, that a sentence of punishment was pronounced upon both the man and the woman on account of their sin. The woman who had broken the divine command for the sake of earthly enjoyment, was punished in consequence with the sorrows and pains of pregnancy and childbirth. … The sentence is not rendered more lucid by the assumption of a hendiadys. "That the woman should bear children was the original will of God; but it was a punishment that henceforth she was to bear them in sorrow, i.e., with pains which threatened her own life as well as that of the child: (Delitzsch). The punishment consisted in an enfeebling of nature, in consequence of sin, which disturbed the normal relation between body and soul,--- The woman had also broken through her divinely appointed subordination to the man; she had not only emancipated herself from the man to listen to the serpent, but had led the man into sin. "And he shall rule over thee." Created for the man, the woman was made subordinate to him from the very first; but the supremacy of the man was not intended to become a despotic rule, crushing the woman into a slave, which has been the rule in ancient and modern Heathenism, and even in Mahometanism also,-- a rule which was first softened by the sin-destroying grace of the Gospel, and changed into a form more in harmony with the original relation, viz. that of a rule on the one hand, and subordination on the other, which have their roots in mutual esteem and love.[ii]
We will see when we come to the New Testament passages that speak directly to the doctrine of ordination, and its exclusion of women, that it is based in part on God’s punishment for the fall into sin on Eve’s part. She was the subordinate female head of the human race. The brashness or forwardness of Eve can be seen in many women today. In some it is open and presuming, but in others it is rather subtle. Nevertheless, many women like to be in positions where they can call the shots, make the decisions, and have their way about things. This is no less a problem in the church than in the world. When there is strong Biblical emphasis and vocal opposition to the possibility of women being ordained in our church, those who were inclined to seek unwarranted spiritual leadership will either submit to the Scriptures or leave the church. It is not the purpose of this article to belittle or put women down, but to attempt to call your attention to the God-appointed role for women in the Church of Jesus Christ, which is His body, and also described as His bride.
"And Aaron and his sons you shall bring to the door of the tabernacle of meeting, and you shall wash them with water. "Then you shall take the garments, put the tunic on Aaron and the robe of the ephod, the ephod, and the breastplate, and gird him with the intricately woven band of the ephod. "You shall put the turban on his head, and put the holy crown on the turban. "And you shall take the anointing oil, pour it on his head, and anoint him. "Then you shall bring his sons and put tunics on them. "And you shall gird them with sashes, Aaron and his sons, and put the hats on them. The priesthood shall be theirs for a perpetual statute. So you shall consecrate Aaron and his sons" (Exodus 29:4-9)
Moses, receiving instructions for the building of the tabernacle, the sacrifices, the furniture, and the clothes for the priests in the wilderness, was told to see to it that it was done according to the pattern shown him. From the perfect moral law and throughout the Old Testament we see that God was, and is, particular about how He is worshiped. In the above passage we see that it was only the sons of Aaron who were chosen to serve as priests in the tabernacle. Can we assume that Aaron had no daughters? And if he did, why were they not included? This is an example and illustration of the sovereign election of Almighty God. It was not the choice of Moses or Aaron to make his sons priests to minister in the sanctuary of the tabernacle. The sons were also left out of the decision.
There is a glimpse of God’s scripture in worship and an illustration of His judgment on those violating the standard in the two sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu. They were consecrated to do the service of the tabernacle, and attempted to add to the ordinance God had given. They offered strange fire before the Lord, an offering of their own vain imagination. God caused fire to fall upon them. He struck them both dead on the spot. "Then Moses said to Aaron, "This is what the Lord spoke, saying: 'By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy; And before all the people I must be glorified.’" So Aaron held his peace. (see Leviticus 10:1-7) We cannot claim to be regarding God as holy when we blatantly go against the words and principles He has revealed to us in the Holy Bible. "For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope" (Romans 15:4).
Then the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron,saying: "Take a census of the sons of Kohath from among the children of Levi, by their families, by their fathers’ house, from thirty years old and above, even to fifty years old, all who enter the service to do the work in the tabernacle of meeting. This is the service of the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of meeting, relating to the most holy things" (Numbers 4:1-4).
In Numbers we see the setting aside of the sons of Kohath for the service of the tabernacle. Kohath was of the Levites. It was his sons who were charged with the service of the tabernacle under Aaron and his sons. Kohath was the second of the sons of Levi who were not of the sons of Aaron. Were there no daughters among the tribe of Levi? The numbering of the children of Levi who were to be sanctified (set aside) was of the males from one month old and above (Num. 3:1). God chose the tribe of Levi instead of the first born males of all Israel. The first born is the first male child of a family. Throughout the book the emphasis in numbering falls on the males of the children of Israel. The priestly duties and all of the services of the tabernacle were performed by the male gender. It is true that Christ fulfilled all of the types symbolized in the tabernacle, its services, the sacrifices and rituals. However the pattern continued in the calling of the twelve, the naming of Matthias, the election of Paul, and with the original deacons (Acts 6:1-7). There is no indication in the Old Testament that women partook of spiritual leadership activity related to the temple worship.
This may seem insignificant to women who feel that they have been called to preach the gospel, but such patterns are not to be ignored with impunity. If one’s opinion is at odds with clear patterns laid out in the Scripture, there is something drastically wrong with that person’s view of God’s Word.
Hear now my words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the Lord make Myself known to him in a vision, And I speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; He is faithful in all My house. I speak with him face to face, Even plainly, and not in dark sayings; And he sees the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?" (Numbers 12:6-8)
Moses is credited with the authorship of the Pentateuch. Those who wish to ignore the principles established therein are, in reality, speaking against God’s servant Moses. Throughout the Bible we are told to hear the words of the prophets and conform to them.The context of the Numbers passage quoted above is the complaint of Miriam and Aaron against Moses whom they thought had too much power among the children of Israel. Underneath the verbal complaint was their dissatisfaction with Moses’ wife. God was sorely displeased with their complaint, and Miriam was made a leper because of it. However, we also observe that Miriam is called a prophetess, nebiah, in Exodus 15:20. The Hebrew verb form nebiah means to preach. She was the sister of Moses and Aaron and did lead the women in song after the crossing of the Red Sea. But the record does not indicate that she had any part in giving commandments, statutes, or ordinances to the people of God. And she had no part in the service of the tabernacle. She is not mentioned after God’s judgment in giving her leprosy for complaining about the Ethiopian wife of Moses (Numbers 12:1, 2). Other than the song in Exodus 15, there is no record of her prophesying. She occupied a high position in the congregation because she was the sister of Moses and Aaron, but was subject to them.
Next we have the most interesting of the prophetesses, Deborah, the wife of Lapidoth, who was one of the judges of Israel. Her position was an extreme embarrassment to the men of Israel. Because of their stubborn disobedience God raised up a woman to judge them. But there is no record of Deborah attempting to lead Israel in worship or of her approaching the tabernacle. According to the original language of the Scripture, she was married, and thus subject to her husband. She refused to attempt leadership of Israel’s army in battle against Jabin, king of Canaan, but called the man Barak who said that he would not go to war without her. She prophesied that Sisera would be delivered into the hand of a woman who would kill him, That is what happened. Under her judgeship Jabin, king of Canaan, was destroyed (Judges 4:24). The very spiritual song of Deborah is recorded in Judges 5:1-31. She judged Israel for forty years and it is recorded that the land had rest. In studying Deborah we should keep in mind that Israel, after the death of Joshua and the men who saw God’s mighty works in deliverance from Egypt, and the conquest of the land of Canaan, the people fell into gross disobedience and idolatry. The sin cycles in Judges are obvious. Deborah was an exception indigenous to the divine prerogative. Indeed, she is outstanding in the history of God’s chosen people, but she was a married woman who, no doubt, was subject to her husband, and it is not said that she approached the tabernacle or attempted to lead Israel in worship.
During the reign of Josiah king of Judah, Hilkiah the high priest found the Book of the Lawin the temple. He gave it to Shaphan the scribe to read. After it was read, Shaphan took it to the king and read it before him. Josiah’s reaction to the Word of God was to send to the prophetess Huldah, who was the wife of Shallum. She was the keeper of the wardrobe and dwelt in Jerusalem. Her answer to the king is recorded in II Kings 22:14-20, and also II Chronicles 34:22-28. The latter is a parallel passage to the former. In the case of Huldah, like that of Deborah, she was married and consequently subject to her husband. And there is no indication that she led God’s people in worship or approached the holy place in the Temple. She gave an answer to the king, the Word of the Lord, when it was sought from her. According to the record, she did not exhort the people publicly.
The prophetess Noadiah is mentioned in Nehemiah 6:14, and from the context it seems as if she was for hire. She was among those who came to Nehemiah and he perceived that God had not sent them, but they had been hired by Tobiah and Sanballat who conspired to stop the work on the wall of Jerusalem. It seems that her purpose was to make Nehemiah afraid so that the wall would not be completed. This is the first, and last, that we hear of her.
And finally, in the Old Testament, there is the reference to the wife of Isaiah who is called a prophetess because she is the wife of the prophet Isaiah. (in some churches the wives of deacons are called Deaconess.) The child she was to bear would carry the prophet’s sermon in his name: "Then the Lord said to me, "Call his name Maher-Shalai-Hash-Baz." This woman is referred to as a prophetess but she is not named, nor is there any indication that she spoke a Word from the Lord either publicly or privately.
In the New Testament prophetess’ are mentioned twice. The Greek word translated prophetess means the same as that used in the Old Testament, i.e., female preacher. The first is Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, Luke 2:36, and the other is Jezebel, Revelation 2:20. The former is good, the latter is evil. Anna is the only widow who is called a prophetess in the Bible. And Luke gives us only three verses pertaining to her ministry, if indeed, she had one to the people at-large. In the Old Testament Daniel is referred to as a prophet, but he had no ministry among the people. Anna was of the tribe of Asher, "She was of great age, and had lived with a husband seven years from her virginity; and this woman was a widow of about eighty-four years, who did not depart from the temple, but served God with fasting and prayers night and day. And coming in that instant she gave thanks to the Lord, and spoke of Him to all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem" (Luke 2:36-38). Her ministry seems to have been prayer and fasting rather than preaching to the people. The mention of her coming in is a reference to her presence at the circumcision of the Baby Jesus.
JezebelThe other New Testament reference to a prophetess, is Jezebel. The name is most likely a metaphor for one of the corrupt women in the church. She constitutes the primary warning to the angel (the pastor) of the church at Thyatira, which was a corrupt church. This is what the Lord Jesus had to say about her: "Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and beguile My servants to commit sexual immorality and to eat things sacrificed to idols. And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent" (Rev. 2:20,21). Surely, this is not a model for any woman, especially when the Lord’s judgment upon her is considered. Archbishop Trench, in his commentary on Thyatira reminds us that the original Jezebel, wife of Ahab, was the female Antichrist of the Old Testament, who tried to impose Baal worship on Israel.[iii] Giving careful consideration to all of the women addressed as prophetess in the Bible, one cannot fairly conclude that they constitute reasonable Biblical grounds for women taking charge of a congregation. Women are afforded liberty under the new and better covenant that was unattainable under the old covenant. Nevertheless, God is consistent in His revelation to fallen mankind. He is not "Yes," and "No," and the Bible does not contradict itself. In this regard, Isaiah tells us that it is a judgment of God for women to rule over His people, and their leadership causes the people to err, and the right paths are destroyed. (Isaiah 3:12).
"Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business; but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word." (Acts 6:3,4).
From Matthew 10:2-4 we find the names of the original Twelve chosen by Jesus to be apostles. All of whom were men. In Acts six, when there arose a problem in the church, the apostles directed the church to select seven men who they could appoint over the business of daily ministration of needful things. They were to see to it that Hebrews had no advantage over the Hellenists. In Acts One and Two there were one hundred and twenty gathered in the upper room when the Holy Spirit fell upon them. We know from Acts 2 that there were women among the one hundred and twenty. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the apostles could have chosen women among the seven who were to be ordained deacons. But they were all men: Stephen, Phillip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas. The reason for this is explained in the qualifications for the office in the first Pastoral Epistle, I Timothy 3:6-13.
In Acts 21:8, 9, we discover that Phillip, one of the seven initial deacons, had become an evangelist. He had four daughters, virgins, who prophesied. Luke, being the careful historian that he was, would have mentioned their leading in the worship of the church if, in fact, they did. But this is highly unlikely since Paul informed the Corinthian church: "Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church" (I Cor. 14:34, 35). The reference to the law is to the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch. Specifically to the Genesis 3:16.
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control." (I Timothy 2:11-15)
The three Pastoral Epistles, I & II Timothy and Titus, deal primarily with church administration, i.e., the qualifications and conduct of pastors (bishop or elder), and deacons. And aside from the command in the text quoted above, under this heading, the specific qualifications for both the bishop and deacon are outlined in detail. The ideal situation for both offices is that one seeking to be a bishop or deacon should be the husband of one wife. "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, able to teach:… one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?)" (I Tim. 3:2, 4, 5). The same basic qualifications are required for deacons, and they too are to be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and houses well (I Tim. 3:12).
Several "Christian" denominations, and more than a few individuals, have ignored the God-given qualification for ordination in order to comply with what is perceived as being politically correct. In other words, the church is continuing to acquiesce to the secular mode rather than insisting that the Word of God be followed explicitly without wavering. Satan has not changed his tactic from the Garden of Eden: "Has God indeed said?" Has God said that women should not be ordained to offices in the church of the Lord Jesus Christ? The only reasonable conclusion a serious student of the Bible can reach is that the ordination of women is not allowed.
Etymologically the words used in the qualification passages leave nothing to argue about. All of the valid translations agree that it is the male gender only who can qualify. That is, only males can qualify if there is an adherence to the standard set by the Lord Himself.
In I Timothy 3:2 & 12, the qualifications call for the husband of one wife, for the bishop, and husbands of one wife, for the deacons. There are no manuscript variants noted in either verse.
Paul’s argument in I Timothy 2:11-15 is not based on local custom at the time of its writing, but rather on the creation order. "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived but the women being deceived, fell into transgression" (I Tim. 2:13, 14). He is obviously mindful here of the curse on Eve for her transgression, Genesis 3:16.
"For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:26-29)
The right interpretation of any verse of Scripture is not possible apart from consideration of the local context, the book in which it is found, and the overview of Scripture. In Galatians 3, Paul is addressing the doctrine of justification by faith apart from the law; the changeless promises of the covenant, the purpose of the law, and those who are justified by faith. Men and women are saved by faith in Jesus- there is no difference in persons when salvation is applied to the individual. Neither the passage, nor the chapter, nor the book of Galatians is found to be addressing the qualifications for officers or leadership in the church.
It has been shown herein that all of Abraham’s seed was not qualified or called by God to do the work of the tabernacle or the sanctuary. But they were, nonetheless, children of Abraham. The local context of Galatians 3:28, disallows an understanding that it is meant to indicate that all who are saved by Christ Jesus are qualified to stand for ordination.
This text is heavily leaned on by women who think they have been called, or are being called of God, to be ordained into the Christian ministry. If, however, they are right, then Paul did not know what he was saying in I Corinthians 11:3; 14:34, 35, or I Timothy 2:11-15, since the qualifications for the offices of bishop and deacon laid out in I Timothy 3:1-13 are in error. Since all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable (II Timothy 3:16), the underlying suggestion is that the Holy Spirit erred in these particular passages, and consequently the Bible is not without error. If we have come to grips with the sovereignty of God, we know that that is not possible.
However, for true believers, it can be rather easily proven that the Bible interprets itself, and is its own dictionary. Galatians 3:28 cannot possibly mean that every born again believer in Jesus, male or female, is eligible for ordination. While it is true that some of God’s women were termed preachers through their ability and gifts of prophecy, none of them, according to the Scriptures, led God’s people in worship or assumed authority over the congregation in the Old Testament or in the New Testaments.
When a woman is heard saying that she feels she has been called to preach, meaning that she thinks it’s alright for her to be ordained to the Christian ministry, and/or pastor a church, or one who is already pasturing a church, Jeremiah 17:9 comes to mind: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; Who can know it?" For a woman to have authority over God’s people in the assembly is so far from the truth of the Scriptures, the only reasonable conclusion one can reach from such an opinion, and/or action, is that that one’s heart is deceived. That person is relying on, and trusting in, their feelings rather than examining the truth of God’s Word with discernment.
There does seem to be a dreadful absence of qualified male leaders in some churches today. But is that a sufficient reason for women to skirt the truth of the Word and assume leadership? The syndrome may be compared to a woman thinking that since she does not have a husband it’s alright for her to commit fornication because she wants to have a baby. This thinking prevails in spite of her knowledge of I Thessalonians 4:3, 4. "For this is the will of God, your sanctifica-tion: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor." Circumstances do not allow or justify violating the Word of God.
The God-given role of the man is leadership in the home and in the family of God- the church. Women who usurp authority in the church, and the men who participate in their ordinations, are in violation of the Bible they claim to believe.
Praise be to God and our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ if you have taken the time to read this article. It is the author’s desire and prayer that the Holy Spirit will convict you in this matter if you are a woman seeking ordained leadership in the church of Christ. And for those who are otherwise in confusion or pondering this issue, may God give you clear understanding of His precious Word of Truth and enable you to take a positive Biblical stand in this matter. We should never allow secular modes to override the Holy Scriptures. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable." AMEN!
Sincere thanks to Rev. David Cummings for his corrections and helpful suggestions in this article.
The author is Pastor of Mt. Carmel Church (O.P.C.), 3