Biblical Eldership
Kurt Dahlin February 1, 2005
Strauch, Alexander.
Biblical Leadership.
Alexander Strauch has
written a book titled Biblical Eldership.
He believes there is an urgent need to “restore biblical church leadership.” His
book is a popular guide to constructing a church structure that is all male
leadership.
One of the fifteen chapters
in his 337 page book centers on the issue of Male Leadership. He states, “A
biblical eldership, however, must be an all-male eldership” (51). Strauch
believes that “God designed male-female distinctions” for specific gender roles
that preclude leadership to women (51). He
believes that modern women are deceived and exploited by the feminist
philosophers. He states that the restriction of women from leadership in the
church “is just and good for the welfare of the family, the local church, and
the whole human race” (52). The restriction against women is “not
discrimination” because it is “a part of Creator’s wise plan” (52). Strauch is
clear, “My specific purpose is to show that Scripture excludes women from the
church eldership” (56). As far as Strauch is concerned it is good for the entire
human race that no woman ever has any valid leadership in the church. The next
section will list Strauch’s reasons for the female exclusion.
THE MODEL OF MALE LEADERSHIP
WITHIN THE APOSTOLATE
First,
Jesus was male. He was the “Son of God, not the daughter of God. His maleness
was not an arbitrary matter” (52). Strauch wrote, “Jesus could not be a woman
because in the male-female relationship the male partner alone is invested with
the headship-authority role (Gen. 2:20, 22,23; 1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:12)”
(53).
Second,
Jesus chose, appointed and trained 12 men called apostles “as an affirmation of
the creation order” (53). He concludes, “Thus these men were God the Father’s
choice. Jesus’ choice of male apostles was based on divine principles and
guidance” (53). Strauch contends if Jesus is the “hailed liberator of women”
shouldn’t he have “chosen six women and six men apostles?” If Jesus was the
“supreme egalitarian that some would like Him to be” he could have picked at
least one woman apostle. Strauch views the choice of 12 men as proof that “Jesus
ratified the Old Testament creation order of male headship” (53).
Strauch states, “Jesus Christ established
an all-male apostolic office as the enduring foundation of His Church (Eph.
2:20; 3:5; Rev. 21:14)….There is no clear example of a woman apostle in the
entire New Testament” (54).
Third,
the apostles follow the example of Jesus and only appoint men to church
leadership positions. Peter “taught both role distinctions and male-female
equality” (54). Strauch boldly states, “Those who try to justify women elders
find little help from the examples and teachings of Jesus and the Twelve” (55).
SOME REBUTTAL
First,
the fact that Jesus was male does not by itself prohibit women from leadership.
The fact that Jesus was male is an observation not a doctrinal statement about
women in ministry. Jesus was also the Son of God—no man can claim that divine
title, therefore no man can lead unless he is Jesus? Why focus only on his
gender? Why not focus on his age, social status, ethnicity or martial status.
Therefore, only 30 year old Jewish carpenters who are also the Son of God can be
leaders in the church. Jesus wore sandals. Therefore only men who wear sandals
can lead the church. The fact that Jesus was a male has nothing to do with
whether or not a woman could minister effectively by the Holy Spirit.
Second,
let us examine Strauch’s theory that Jesus picked only men—therefore only men
can lead. Why is it that Strauch only focuses on their gender? Jesus did not
choose any Gentiles for apostles. Let us re-write the Male Leadership Model by
focusing on ethnicity instead of gender. Let’s change the formula by
substituting Gentiles for women and see how the logic flows. I will rework the
quotes from Strauch using Gentiles instead of women as the focus of exclusion.
Not only
were the 12 apostles men they were also Jews. In fact the 12 men appointed by
Jesus were only Jews. Jesus’ choice of Jewish apostles was based on divine
principles and guidance. Therefore, the Jesus Model necessitates that all
leaders in the church be Jews. This would follow the divine order for leadership
as modeled in the entire Old Testament. Jesus is hailed as the liberator of
Gentiles; shouldn’t he have chosen six Jews and six Gentiles. Jesus failed the
Gentiles at a crucial moment. If Jesus wanted there to be a global mission to
the Gentile world—he should have chosen one Gentile apostle.
Jesus could have appointed at least one Gentile if he was so ethnically
sensitive. Yet he didn’t. Therefore, it was God the Father’s divine choice to
preclude any Gentiles from leadership positions in the new Christian movement.
Jesus ratified the Old Testament creation order by excluding Gentiles from
leadership. The all-Jew apostolic office was the enduring foundation for the
church. There are no clear examples of non-Jewish apostles in the New Testament.
The apostles only appointed Jews to
leadership positions. Even when Judas, one of the original Twelve, was replaced
only Jews were considered for the job of apostle.
The saddest part about this
horrible caricature is that there were many at the time of Jesus in the
legalistic Pharisaical party that would agree with the exclusion of Gentiles
from significant leadership positions in the church. There was a huge debate
over the inclusion of Gentiles. Fortunately the Pharisaical legalists lost the
debate and Gentiles were given full access to all spiritual gifts and positions
of leadership in the church. Yet, the inclusion of Gentiles found
no precedent in the ministry of Jesus.
The full inclusion of Gentiles into church leadership goes beyond the Old
Testament, Jesus, the synagogue and Judaism. The inclusion of Gentiles was a
break from the past and any pattern established by the Old Testament codes.
Please note that Jesus
didn’t pick any Blacks, no Reformed White Europeans, no Mexicans, no Italians,
no Greeks, no Russians, no Southern Baptists, no seminary professors, no German
theologians, no Calvinists, no one by the name Strauch: only Jews. The majority
of the apostles were also fishermen. Therefore, the leadership of all churches
everywhere should only be male Jewish fisherman and one tax collector. Strauch
said, “Jesus is Founder and Lord of the Church, and we must follow His example
and teaching” (52).
Please realize that the
selection of the 12 Jewish men does not limit, restrict or prohibit the Holy
Spirit from choosing other ethnicities for full leadership in the church. If we
relied only on the Old Testament Elder Model and the Jesus Model—no Gentile
would ever be incorporated into eldership or pastoral leadership. However, it is
clear in the teaching of Peter that the Holy Spirit is no longer the exclusive
property of one race or ethnic tribe (Acts 2:17). What happened to bring about
such a radical change in leadership structure? Pentecost happened. The
outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost changed the old rules on
leadership allocation. It is not a part of the “Creator’s wise plan” to restrict
leadership to only Jews. It would be discrimination and an affront to
Bible-believing Christians to prohibit ministry by non-Jews. As wonderful as the
OT is as an exemplar—there was a remarkable change that occurred at Pentecost.
The radical inclusion of Pentecost reached out beyond old ethnic boundaries to
embrace and empower all genders, ages and social categories. It is no longer a
part of the “Creator’s wise plan” to restrict, prohibit or exclude Gentiles or
godly women, youth or social outcasts from meaningful ministry opportunities.
Jesus prophesied that there
was much more truth to be revealed after he ascended to the Father. The Holy
Spirit would come and guide into all truth. The Spirit will speak of things to
come.
John
16:12-13
12 "I
still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you
into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He
hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. NKJV
Jesus was looking toward the
future—not the past. The Spirit would come and reveal many things that the
apostles could not bear at that time. Future revelation had to do with the full
incorporation of the Gentiles, women, youth and slaves: male and female into
Spirit appointed ministry.
Eph 2:18
18 For
through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father. NKJV
There would come a big
change that would supersede the Old Testament. No longer would the church be
only Jews and no longer would ministry be allocated by gender. The old structure
would become obsolete (Heb 8:13).
Acts 2:16-18
16
But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
17'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God,
That I will pour out of My Spirit on all
flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy,
Your young men shall see visions,
Your old men shall dream dreams.
18
And on My menservants and on My
maidservants
I will pour out My Spirit
in those days;
And
they shall prophesy. NKJV
Gender differences, gender roles, ethnicity and youth do not exclude full access
to spiritual gifts. On the other hand, full access to spiritual gifts for women
does not negate male headship, gender distinctions or the created order of
things. The new system does not overturn roles or gender distinctions. Men will
always be expected to head the family. Women will always have the babies. Yet,
God can choose to use godly women to build the church if he wants to.
Pentecost incorporated and empowered Gentiles, Samaritans, women, slaves and the
young for Spirit gifted ministry (Stronstad,
Luke 26,58).
The Holy Spirit outpouring on Pentecost marked a new
In Acts 2:17,18 the various
classes of people that were formerly excluded from the religious life of
1) all flesh,
2) sons,
daughters,
3) young men,
old men,
4) male
slaves, and female slaves.
In the new charismatic
church structure, there would be no more barriers between races and cultures,
genders, ages, or clean and unclean that typified Judaism.
No longer would a person's ethnic background, gender, age or social
status be the reason for exclusion from the
THE REDEMPTION MODEL
Strauch countered his critics, “Other critics contend that Jesus’ work of
redemption abolished all male-female distinctions. Yet if Jesus intended to
abolish all male-female role differences through His work of redemption, the
choosing of the Twelve was the crucial moment in history to act and appoint
women to the apostolate” (53).
REBUTTAL:
Strauch forgot that the
redemption by Jesus took place on the cross. If there were to be a new model of
inclusion it would occur after his resurrection not before. The choosing of the
Twelve male Jews was prior to redemption and prior to Pentecost. The choosing of
the Twelve did not represent the new era of redemption and the Holy Spirit but
the old era of the law, the
If the scripture is our
guide then we can see the immediate effects of the post-redemption model. The
first people to learn of the resurrection were women. The first gospel
messengers were women. The first to see the resurrected Jesus were women. The
angels were excited to teach the women about the resurrection and commanded the
women to go and tell his male disciples the incredible news. The post-redemption
change is profound and instantaneous, “And Go quickly and tell his disciples.”
The women were not forbidden, restricted, limited, banned, silenced or lectured
about male headship, submission, the order of creation, all male eldership,
gender distinctions and male-female roles. The angel of God said, “Go tell the
men.”
Matt 28:5-8
5 But the
angel answered and said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you
seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said.
Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly and tell His disciples
that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into
8 So they
went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring His
disciples word. NKJV
The women were filled with
joy. They couldn’t believe that the angel from God had entrusted them with such
an important mission. First they were shocked, “Are you talking to us—mere
women?” Second, “You mean us—you want us to go and tell the men—mere women? You
want us to go and speak?”
They went out quickly with
great joy. When was the last time your theology brought joy to women? The women
were on their way, obedient to the angelic vision to proclaim the resurrection
of Jesus from the dead to men. Could you imagine how free they felt? How happy
the women were to be empowered to speak and trusted to speak such important
news? They were bringing the word to
his disciples. Word (NT:518
apaggello ap-ang-el'-lo) in Greek
means to bring news; bring word; to announce, to proclaim, declare, report, to
inform, to publish (Thayer's Greek Lexicon; Strong’s Concordance; Greek-English
Lexicon; Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words). The women were asked
to bring the word of God to men.
However, here is the way it
would look at the tomb before the resurrection in the all male pre-redemption
order. The women went to the tomb and the angel ignored them. Jesus stopped them
and forbade them saying, “Since women are not to teach or lead men. Wait here
until a man comes, any man even the gardener. I don’t want to overturn my own
divine order by allowing you to speak or teach.”
However, here is the new post-redemption model from the Bible.
Matt 28:9-10
And as they went to tell His disciples, behold,
Jesus met them, saying, "Rejoice!"
So they came and held Him by the feet and worshiped Him. 10 Then Jesus said to
them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell My
brethren to go to
The cultural, religious and
traditional prohibition against women was over. Jesus encouraged them and
commissioned them to preach, speak and declare the core doctrine of Christianity
to the male apostles. The mandate from Jesus to the women was to rejoice and go
tell the men the good news. Why were the women so joyful? They were overjoyed
because they had never been asked to do something so important before. They had
been asked to prepare and cook food for family and guests, grind the grain and
bake the bread. They had been asked to carry the water for the household, guests
and their animals, gather the wood, spin the wool, weave clothes, do the
shopping, birth and nurture kids. Jesus was asking the women to step out of
their traditional gender roles as dictated by Judaism and culture. Jesus was
asking them to go and instruct, inform, announce, declare and proclaim the most
important doctrine of the Christian religion.
Can you imagine how happy
these women were to be entrusted by their risen Christ to disclose the most
significant event in the history of the world—to men? The women were overjoyed
with the opportunity to show their faithfulness, devotion and reliability.
The joy of finally being seen as capable, trustworthy and morally
responsible for so much more than culture and religion allowed. Then their
euphoria turned to fear. Jesus said to the women, “Don’t be afraid. Go and tell
the brethren.” Why would the women become so quickly afraid? They feared men and
the traditional restrictions on women. They were raised in fear, taught to fear
men. They were controlled by fear. They feared talking to men. They feared what
the men would say and do to them. They feared mocking and ridicule. They feared
rejection. They feared being silenced, dismissed and belittled by the men. Yet,
their fears were overcome by the mandate from Jesus. They had the authority of
Jesus with them. The Lord and head of the church had commissioned them to go and
disclose the glorious resurrection. The doctrine of the inferiority of women
that excludes women is embedded in religion as a cultural value but it is not
embedded in Christ. Jesus told them to rejoice, don’t be afraid and go tell the
disciples the good news. The new post-resurrection freedom for women modeled by
the incarnate word of God should take precedent over the old traditional system
of inferiority, restriction and limitation. The
message of Jesus needs to be spoken to women today, “Rejoice. Don’t be afraid.
Go and tell the brethren.”
The male reaction to the
women was typical disdain and disregard. Jesus later rebuked the men for their
hard hearts toward the women. The rebuke of Jesus continues today toward those
men who silence godly women from proclaiming the gospel.
Mark 16:14
Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at
the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did
not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. NKJV
Jesus could have appeared to
anyone he desired. He walked with the two men to Emmaus. He appeared to the
apostles at will. Yet, he first appeared to women as a statement that a new
redemptive era had begun which radically incorporated women. The curse no longer
applied to godly women. Strauch said,
“Jesus is Founder and Lord of the Church, and we must follow His example and
teaching” (52). I agree. Let us disciple men and women and release them to
speak, teach, and proclaim the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Let there be
joy and rejoicing for women in the new era of redemption and the Holy Spirit.
Let the era of fear be over. Let men give back the control of the Church to the
Lord and head of the Church: Jesus Christ.
FEMALE APOSTLES
Alexander Strauch writes,
“There is no clear example of a woman apostle in the entire New Testament” (54).
REBUTTAL:
Rom 16:7
7 Greet
Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note
among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
NKJV
Junia was a female apostle.
She was in prison as a missionary witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ along
with the apostle Paul. Her ministry as an apostle is only repudiated by those
men threatened by women in any leadership position in the church. This is only
“no clear example” to those theologians already resolved and committed to
restrict and prohibit women from church leadership. Instead of using the Bible
as our authority, commentators strip this remarkable passage of any power to
profit doctrinally, to instruct, reprove and correct. The predisposition to
ignore prominent Christian women is not Bible-believing but Bible-blindness. It
is not correct to defrock the honorable apostolic ministry of Junia for the sake
of an anti-female bias. Junia is not prone to deception, morally inferior and
incapable of defending truth. She is honored in the canon of scripture as an
apostle. God chose Junia to be an apostle. Why not celebrate her gifts, courage,
devotion and sacrifice as a disciple of Jesus Christ? Why not release the
Junia’s in today’s church to reach the lost for Christ?
2 Tim
3:16
16 All
Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, NKJV
FEMALE ELDERS
Alexander Strauch writes,
“Those who try to justify women elders find little help from the examples and
teachings of Jesus and the Twelve” (55).
REBUTTAL:
Again, Jesus used the old
pre-Pentecost model in choosing the apostles. However, we would expect to see
some change after Pentecost that included women. The women of
Titus 1:5
For this
reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are
lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you — NKJV
Elders
(NT:4245 presbuteros pres-boo'-ter-os)
is the comparative or relative of presbus for elderly or
older. In this Pauline epistle Titus is given the order to appoint elders. Some
of those elders are godly women. Could these godly women be trusted to teach and
disciple other women the cardinal principles of the word of God—sure? However,
could these mature female saints with advanced years and advanced doctrinal
training teach a new male convert the same biblical truth? Some commentators
would reject godly women elders on the basis of 1 Timothy 2:11-12. In order to
do so they must ignore Titus 2:3. Not surprisingly, Strauch does not ever quote
Titus 2:3 or discuss the female elders of
Titus
2:1-5
But as
for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine: 2 that the
older men be sober, reverent,
temperate, sound in faith, in love, in patience; 3 the
older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not
slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things —
4 that they admonish the young
women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet,
chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God
may not be blasphemed. NKJV
Older Men
(NT:4246 presbutes pres-boo'-tace);
aged, old man, an adult male advanced in years; from the same as presbyter or
elder (NT:4245 presbuteros
pres-boo'-ter-os); a term of rank or office, members of the great council or
Sanhedrin. An elder was a person of responsibility and authority in matters of
socio-religious concerns, both in Jewish and Christian societies. Among the
Greeks, presbutes conveys the
suggestion of gravity, significance and importance.
Older Women
(NT:4247 presbutis pres-boo'-tis) is
the feminine form of NT:4246 presbutes.
It means the same thing for a woman that the male form means for a man: an older
woman, an adult female advanced in years. Elder women/presbutis is used in the plural in Titus 2:3(Strong's Concordance;
Thayer's Greek Lexicon; Greek-English Lexicon; Vine's Expository Dictionary).
These good women were female
elders with specific responsibilities and authority in the church.
They were to teach biblical truth to strengthen the family and protect
the word of God. It is a major oversight to ignore the vital role these elder
women preformed in the church for the
It is interesting that
Strauch forgets to mention these female elders in his quote of Titus 2:1-5 on
page 57. On page 55 he writes that there are no examples of female elders in
“teachings of Jesus and the Twelve” (55).
In the section on
Headship and Submission he
mysteriously omits Titus 2: 2-3 which clearly mentions the female elders. The
way he deletes the two verses from his Bible reference makes it read as though
the male elders are the teachers of doctrine to the younger women in
1 Tim
5:17
Let the
elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who
labor in the word and doctrine.
NKJV
No one is opposed to male
leadership. Yet all male leadership is
only possible if certain scriptures are ignored or glossed over. Why is that the
godly women in
APOSTLES AS FOUNDATION FOR THE CHURCH
Strauch writes, “the fact
remains that Jesus Christ established and all-male apostolic office as the
enduring foundation of His Church (Eph. 2:20; 3:5; Rev. 21:14)” (54).
REBUTTAL:
A closer look at the
scriptures chosen by Strauch to prove his all-male point of view reveals a small
oversight. The foundation of the Church was not just the all-male apostles but
apostles and prophets. Let us review
his first biblical reference from Ephesians 2:20.
Eph
2:19-22
Now,
therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with
the saints and members of the household
of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
Jesus Christ Himself being the chief
cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole
building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in
whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the
Spirit. NKJV
The
apostles and prophets are the foundation of the early church. The
reason this is important is because in Acts 2:17-18 women are twice called to
receive the Spirit of prophecy. If prophets are also a vital part of the life
and structure of the Church—then women must be included as a part of the
prophetic foundation of the Church, as scripture dictates. There are many godly
women whose words and actions form a large part of the New Testament record. The
gift of prophecy was not restricted to only men. Therefore, according to
scripture, the apostolic and prophetic foundation of the church is not all-male.
Eph
4:11-14
11 And
He Himself gave some to be apostles, some
prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping
of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,
13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;
NKJV
The foundation of the church
is the apostles and prophets.
Prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers are also instrumental in equipping
Christians for ministry, edification and maturity. Strauch forgot that in his
biblical paradigm for church structure women were also included as prophets,
teachers, evangelists and pastors. These key ministry and leadership positions
are not an all male domain.
Eph 3:1-7
For this
reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles —
2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which
was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the
mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may
understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5
which in other ages was not made known to
the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles
and prophets: 6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body,
and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a
minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective
working of His power. NKJV
Rev 21:14
14 Now
the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the
twelve apostles of the Lamb.
NKJV
Women were
scheduled for prophetic gifts in Acts 2:17. I cannot think of any reason why God
would give a prophetic ministry to a woman unless he meant for her “to speak”
authoritatively. Prophecy is a
speaking gift. The Greek word for prophecy means to publicly expound divine
truth (Stouffer 13). Does the
prophetess of God proclaim the Word of God with authority, as the oracle of God,
or is she merely a channel or mindless instrument such as Balaam's donkey?
Those interpreters of scripture who theorize that Paul forbids
authoritative speaking, teaching and ruling to women must devalue the gift of
prophecy. For example, concerning
women as prophets, George Knight III declares:
The one prophesying is essentially a passive instrument through
which God communicates, (this) does not necessarily imply or involve authority
or headship over others (compare, if we may be permitted a hopefully inoffensive
note of humor, Balaam's ass) [Num. 22:22 f.f.] (Role 46).
When Knight
states that prophecy does not necessarily imply a position of authority or
leadership he refers only to women.
When a man of God speaks prophetically it is always authoritatively. Yet, when a
woman of God speaks the same revelation of God she is merely a passive
instrument likened to a mindless donkey. Why does Knight think it humorous to
compare the godly use of the prophetic gift to Balaam’s ass? What does Knight’s
association of God’s use of women to Balaam’s donkey have to do with objective
Biblical scholarship? The Word of God states, “your sons and daughters shall
prophesy” not “your sons and donkeys.”
True prophecy is
inherently authoritative. Prophetic
authority is an absolute authority over the entire community of God's people,
that is, unless the word of God need not be obeyed.
The kind of prophecy that sons
will expound is the same kind that
daughters will speak forth.
There is no difference made between male and female spiritual gifts. There is
not a blue prophetic gift for men and a pink prophetic gift for women.
There is not the “real thing” for men and a mere “toy” for women.
The “same gift” that was given to the Pentecostal Jews was also given to
Gentiles and to women, youth and slaves (Stronstad,
Luke 58).
The changes that Pentecost made for Gentiles and slaves it also made for
women (Gordon, “Women” 911). Why won’t these men allow a Pentecost for women?
THE DOMINION MANDATE
Strauch quotes David
Gooding, “God made the woman out of the man and designed her role to be that of
a partner, help and companion for the man, to complement the man in his
God-given tasks” (63).
REBUTTAL:
As nice and cozy as this
sounds it is not the complete picture. What specific tasks were given to the man
by God? In other words, what are the exact
God-given tasks that woman was designed to partner, help and
complement the man? The man was given the particular and singular task of sweaty
toil in the earth.
Gen
3:17-19
17
Then to Adam He said, "Because you
have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I
commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it':
"Cursed
is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
18 Both
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you
shall eat the herb of the field.
19
In the sweat of your face you shall eat
bread
Till you
return to the ground,
For out
of it you were taken;
For dust
you are,
And to
dust you shall return." NKJV
Woman was not ever asked by
God to assist, accompany, partner, complement or help man plow his sweaty dirty
fields. However, if Strauch meant the God-given task of fulfilling the dominion
mandate to rule the earth—scripture clearly records that the command was given
to both of them equally.
Gen
1:26-28
26 Then
God said, "Let Us make man in Our image,
according to Our likeness; let them have
dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the
cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the
earth." 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created
him; male and female He created them.
28 Then God blessed them, and God said to
them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it;
have dominion over the fish of the
sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." NKJV
The dominion mandate was
given to both Adam and Eve. The command to rule the earth was
not a male gift only. The mandate to
rule was never just his God-given task.
It is a major oversight to read the Bible as if God’s command to rule the earth
was only given to Adam. Why does Strauch write as though Eve had no real role to
play in fulfilling the dominion mandate? It was
their mandate not his. It
is not Bible-believing to ignore Eve’s divine authorization to rule. The mandate
to have dominion was not king and female servant but king and queen. If Eve were
given the mandate to rule she was also endowed by her creator with the gifts,
intellect and authority to rule.
Gen
1:29-31
29 And
God said, "See, I have given you
every herb that yields seed which is
on the face of all the earth, and every
tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to
every beast of the earth, to
every bird of the air, and to
everything that creeps on the earth,
in which there is life, I have given
every green herb for food"; and it was so. NKJV
Gen 5:1-3
This is
the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him
in the likeness of God. 2 He created them
male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day
they were created. NKJV
God’s original intention for
women was to equally share the leadership responsibilities with men to rule over
the earth. They were created to be co-regents. Therefore, the removal of the
curse of the fall in Christ restores not only men to full partnership with God
but also women. Christ became a curse for all of people not just men. Women are
full heirs with Christ not partial heirs. Women receive a full promise of the
Spirit not half a promise.
Gal
3:13-14
13
Christ has redeemed us from the curse of
the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is
everyone who hangs on a tree"), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon
the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit
through faith. NKJV
Gal
3:26-29
For you
are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were
baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28
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. 29 And if
you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed,
and heirs according to the promise. NKJV
Eph
3:4-6
4 by
which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),
5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been
revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 that
the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of
the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel,
NKJV
Rom
8:16-17
16
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our
spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs — heirs of
God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may
also be glorified together. NKJV
However, in Strauch’s world
women are still cursed by the fall, redemption is not complete and Pentecost is
at best a limited and restrictive event. It would be essential for full
spiritual formation to allow women to reach their full redeemed potential. It
would also be essential for the complete and proper functioning of the body of
Christ—since women are a major part of that spiritual body. Women were created
to share leadership beside men. They were not the footstool for men. The church
cannot function in proper coordination if the half body is bound, restricted,
and prohibited from moving as God intended. When new life poured into the dead
body of Lazarus, Jesus commanded that the grave clothes be removed. It would be
ridiculous to retain the bindings—not one shred from the grave should remain.
Why do we insist on binding women in grave clothes?
We believe that humans were
created in the very image or likeness of God.
Both male and female are
equally good, of equal worth and neither sex is
more or in greater
likeness of God than the other. It is argued that since God is revealed in male
terms that somehow men are better, superior, and more suited to represent God.
However, it clear from the scripture that
both are to represent God on earth in cooperation with his good purposes.
The five responsibilities or mandates of Genesis 1:26-28 were given to
both not to only the man. There was
not a To Do list for men and a different To Do list for women. Partnerships
often list names alphabetically. The fact that a partner is listed second or
third doesn’t make that partner less, inferior or subordinate. Male and female
were created by God as equal partners in the great enterprise of life.
The equality and harmony
within the Trinity, which is the image of
God, is to be reflected in the husband and wife relationship. The entire
context of the Bible is family. Even the redeemer is to come through family
(Genesis 3:15). Sexuality or gender distinctions are not a limiting or
restrictive aspect of dominion. Sexuality and dominion are equal components
necessary to fulfill the mandate to rule and be fruitful. Male sexuality does
not restrict or prohibit leadership neither should female sexuality prohibit
leadership. The scripture specifically lists
them as male and female and includes fruitfulness in the equation to
show that innate biological/sexual differences do not preclude but precede
leadership. Leadership and dominion for
both flows from biological
diversity. The mandate for dominion
follows the mandate for fruitful relationship.
Gen
1:26-28
27 So God created man in His own image;
in the image of God He created him; male
and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and
God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue
it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and
over every living thing that moves on the earth." NKJV
Of course, there are certain
impossibilities that result from sexual differences. For instance, only women
can have babies. Men will never be able to carry and birth a child for at least
two reasons:
1.
Physically we are
limited and incapable of having babies.
2.
Psychologically we
are wimps.
However, the dominion
mandate was given with full knowledge of those gender distinctions. Gender
differences do not preclude, prohibit or restrict the royal mandate simply
because gender differences are an integrated part of the divine mandate.
If female sexuality, as
Strauch supposes, prevents, excludes and disqualifies women from leadership—why
wouldn’t male sexuality exclude men from leadership? Why is it that only female
sexuality limits women and male sexuality releases men? Instead, the Bible
explicitly decrees that the mandate to rule was given to both: male and female.
What we discover is that
male and female sexuality is not a disqualifying factor for leadership but a
necessary part. I am glad that female
is recorded in the Bible in Genesis 1:27. Could you imagine if the scripture
said,
Gen
1:27-28
27
So God created man in His own image; in
the image of God He created him male 28 Then God blessed
him and God said to him,
"Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over
every living thing that moves on the earth." (Not Inspired Version)
|
However, this male first paradigm is the way most scholars read these
verses. The mandate to rule is his
God-given task. Strauch wrote, “the man uniquely reflects God’s
image and glory in headship and the woman uniquely reflects the glory of
the man by her submission...” (63). Then Strauch hurries over to Genesis
chapter 2 and points out that the woman was taken out of the side of
Adam. Gen
2:21-22 21
And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and
He took one of his ribs, and
closed up the flesh in its place. 22 Then the rib which the LORD God
had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
NKJV This descriptive
narrative becomes eminently prescriptive theology for many.
Instead of observing what God did and how God did it—Genesis
2:21-22 becomes a rule and regulation governing the place and position
of the woman in the church. As a conclusion Strauch wrote, “that the
woman…was created to directly reflect the man’s God-created headship
authority by submitting to and supporting his leadership;” (62). Strauch quotes David
Gooding as his authority, The
man was made first….He was, moreover, made direct and not out of the
woman. As he stood alone, fresh from the hand of God, he was, says the
Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 11:7) the image and glory of God,…his official
representative. The woman, on the other hand, says the Holy Spirit
(11:7-9) is the glory of the man. He is referring to the fact that God
made the woman out of the man and designed her role to be that of a
partner, help and companion for the man to complement the man in his
God-given tasks (63). Since Eve was made
from the rib bone of the man she is reduced to helper and companion to
man in his God-given tasks.
Strauch wrote, “she is the man’s vice-regent” (Strauch 62). Vice-regent
means a deputy for the regent of a country. A regent is somebody who
rules on behalf of a monarch. A deputy is somebody who has been
authorized or appointed to act on behalf of somebody else with full
authority; an assistant who is authorized to act in a superior’s place
(Encarta 2003). Strauch and others believe that woman is created as an
assistant to her male superior. Notice is she not co-regent with man but
man’s little deputy. The conclusion from their observation of Genesis
2:21-22 is that all women are therefore subordinate and under the
authority and supervision of men. The application of their
interpretation: women should not teach, influence or lead men. All of
this doctrine on the inferiority of women is based on the simple
observation that the woman was made from the man’s bone. Apparently
women are subject to the substance from which they were made.
Let us apply the same reasoning to the creation of man that is applied
to women. Let us go back and review the creation of man in Genesis 2:7.
Gen 2:7
7 And
the LORD God formed man of the
dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of
life; and man became a living being. NKJV Man
was made from dirt. What kind of grand theology can we draw from this
observation? Man is subject to the substance from which he was made.
Since man is made from dirt he is subject and subordinate to the soil.
The man is the vice-regent of dirt. Dirt was created before man. Dirt is
first and man is second. Therefore, dirt is leader, head and regent over
man. Man is deputy and assistant to his superior: dirt. Gooding waxes
eloquent about Adam, “As he stood alone, fresh from the hand of God…the
image and glory of God, God’s viceroy in creation, invested with God’s
own glory as his official representative” (62). Viceroy means a governor
who represents a sovereign in a province, colony, or country (Encarta
2003). This description of Adam is poetic—it almost brings tears to my
eyes. Was
man made from the hand of God? Yes, but from what substance—according to
the story line? He was made from ordinary soil. Eve was made from living
bone. If made from male bone
means subordinate, submission, unsuitable, deputy, assistant and
subjection—what does made from
dirt mean? Why is it better or so superior to be made from dirt?
Both Adam and Eve were made from the
very hand of God: one
from dirt the other from bone. Does the substance matter to such a great
extent or does the hand of the creator matter more?
Both were hand crafted by God.
Both received the breath of life from God. |
However, If we go back
further and review Genesis 1:26-28 we discover that both the male and the female
were given dominion over the earth. The divine mandate to rule is as much hers
and it is his. Both were blessed by
God. Both were created by the hand of God.
1 Cor
3:21
21 So then,
no more boasting about men! All things are yours, NIV
There is absolutely no hint
of inferiority or superiority in Genesis 1:26-28. The concepts of inferiority
and superiority are demonic. Inferiority and superiority do not reflect the
image of God. Male supremacy is as bad as white supremacy or other forms of
ethnocentricity.
Phil
2:1-4
Therefore
if there is any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship
of the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, 2 fulfill my joy by being
like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. 3 Let
nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit,
but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.
4 Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the
interests of others. NKJV
Mark
10:42-45
42 But
Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, "You know that those who are
considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones
exercise authority over them. 43 Yet
it shall not be so among you; but
whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant.
44 And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all.
45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and
to give His life a ransom for many."
NKJV
John
13:12-17
12 So
when He had washed their feet, taken His garments, and sat down again, He said
to them, "Do you know what I have done to you?
13 You call Me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am.
14 If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also
ought to wash one another's feet. 15
For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you.
16 Most assuredly, I say to you, a
servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he
who sent him. 17 If you know
these things, blessed are you if you do them.
NKJV
Woman as Man’s Little Helper
Gen
2:18-20
18 And
the LORD God said, "It is not good that man should be alone;
I will make him a helper
comparable to him." 19 Out of the
ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air,
and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam
called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So Adam gave names to all
cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam
there was not found a helper comparable
to him.
NKJV
Helper (OT:5828 `ezer
(ay'-zer) means aid, to help, to succor, comfort, relieve, one who helps
(Strong's Concordance; Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon).
Helper/Ezer is not a subordinate status.
Ezer is used 21 times in the Old Testament. 16 times
ezer is used of God as our help. It is
not used in relation to a servant, assistant or subordinate.
SOME EXAMPLES OF EZER
Ps 33:20
20 Our
soul waits for the LORD;
He is our help
and our shield. NKJV
Ps 70:5
5 But I
am poor and needy;
Make
haste to me, O God!
You are
my help and my deliverer;
O LORD,
do not delay. NKJV
Ps
115:9-11
9 O
He is
their help and their shield.
10 O
house of Aaron, trust in the LORD;
He is
their help and their shield.
11 You
who fear the LORD, trust in the LORD;
He is
their help and their shield. NKJV
Ps 121:2
2
My help comes
from the LORD,
Who made
heaven and earth. NKJV
Ps 124:8
8
Our help is in the name of
the LORD,
Who made heaven and earth.
NKJV
God has made his
help known to
Eve would be a
Help
Meet. Meet is generally
translated as comparable to, counterpart
or suitable for. However, the Hebrew
word used in Genesis 2:18,20 (OT:5048
neged neh'-ghed) is translated; in the presence, before, next to, across
from. Neged means in front of, in
sight of, what is conspicuous. This Hebrew word is used 150 times in the OT and
is never used for counterpart, mate or subordinate assistant. The Hebrew root
word basically denotes "to place a matter high, conspicuous before a person"
(Strong's Concordance; Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament; Brown Driver &
Briggs Hebrew Lexicon).
Eve would be in front of Adam, before him, conspicuous, face to face, next to
him as God’s agent of help. There is no hint of subordination, subjection,
vice-regent or submission in help meet.
She would not be his little helper to assist him in his important God-given
task. Adam is not the CEO of the world and Eve the pretty admin assistant.
The fact that a woman should
be in submission to a good husband like Adam does not preclude her from teaching
or leading. All the sons of Eve would learn from Eve and honor her as the one
uniquely formed by God and in intimate relationship with the Creator of the
universe.
Strauch has a special section in chapter 3 on MALE LEADERSHIP dedicated to
HEADSHIP AND SUBMISSION ROLES IN THE
MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP. He then works hard to show that a wife’s role to
submit to her husband means prima facie
that she cannot teach or have any meaningful authority in the church. Yet,
Christ is the head of man and every man should submit to Christ and also to
those in leadership over them. However, the headship of Christ over men is a
good and positive relationship. A man’s submission to Christ and other leaders
does not forbid ministry but releases
ministry. Headship and submission are all about the release of ministry and the
proper channel to access and express spiritual gifts. Headship and submission
are not a restriction or limitation except
for women. Let us review Strauch’s rendition of submission.
Paul exhorted
Christian wives to submit to their husbands. The basis
for his exhortation is given most compellingly in Ephesians 5:23:
"For the
husband is the head of the wife." If there is any question as to
what is intended
by the phrase, "the head of the wife," Paul adds the
analogy of
Christ's headship over the Church, "as Christ also is the
head of the
church." The word "head" (Greek, kephale) is used figuratively
to mean, as is its constant use, "authority over" and "leadership,"
not "source" or "origin," as biblical feminists assert.
Colossians 3:18 also states the principle found in
Ephesians 5: "Wives, be subject
to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord." Commenting
on the Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 passages, George Knight, III, biblical
commentator and New Testament professor at Knox Theological
Seminary, observes: "this particular exhortation to the wife to
submit to her husband is the universal
teaching of the New Testament.
Every passage that deals with the
relationship of the wife to her husband
tells her to 'submit to' him, using this same verb (hupotasso):
Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; 1 Peter 3:1;
Titus 2:4f."
According to
Ephesians 5, the manner
in which the wife is to submit to her husband is, "as to the Lord," and in
Colossians 3, "as is
fitting in the
Lord." This means that the wife is to submit to her husband
as she would submit to the Lord Jesus Christ (cf.
1 Peter 3:6).
Using the analogy of Christ and the Church, the wife is to submit to
her
husband "as the church is subject to Christ." Knight adds: "She
should submit to
her husband as she submits to the Lord. The comparative 'as to the Lord' conjures up what
should and does characterize the godly submission a Christian renders to the Lord
Jesus. This
one qualification says it all."
(57)
The Greek word for
submission is hupotasso. The Biblical
concept of submission/hupotasso is
much broader than simply the husband and wife relationship.
Hupotasso is used 40 times in the New Testament and in the following
samples of scripture.
JESUS WAS SUBJECT TO HIS
PARENTS
Luke 2:51
Then He
went down with them and came to
DEMONS WERE SUBJECT TO THE APOSTLES
Luke
10:17
Then the
seventy returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even
the demons are subject to us in Your name." NKJV
CHRISTIANS ARE SUBJECT TO LOCAL AUTHORITY
Rom 13:1
Let every
soul be subject to the governing
authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities
that exist are appointed by God. NKJV
Rom 13:5
5 Therefore
you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for
conscience' sake. NKJV
Titus 3:1
Remind
them to be subject to rulers and
authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, NKJV
1 Peter
2:13-14
Therefore
submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether to
the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the
punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. NKJV
THE SPIRITS OF THE PROPHETS ARE SUBJECT
1 Cor
14:32
32 And
the spirits of the prophets are subject
to the prophets.
NKJV
ALL THINGS ARE SUBJECT TO JESUS
1 Cor
15:27-28
27 For
"He has put all things under His feet."
But when He says "all things are put under Him," it is evident that He who put all things under Him is
excepted. 28 Now when all things are made
subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be
subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in
all. NKJV
Eph
1:22-23
22 And He
put all things under His feet, and
gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the
fullness of Him who fills all in all. NKJV
Heb 2:8
For in
that He put all in subjection under him,
He left nothing that is not put under him.
But now we do not yet see all things put under him. NKJV
CHRISTIANS ARE TO SUBMIT TO THEIR LEADERS
1 Cor
16:15-16
15 I urge
you, brethren — you know the household of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits
of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints —
16 that you also submit to such,
and to everyone who works and labors with us. NKJV
1 Peter
5:5
Likewise
you younger people, submit yourselves to
your elders. Yes, all of you be
submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for
"God
resists the proud,
But gives
grace to the humble." NKJV
CHRISTIANS ARE TO SUBMIT TO ONE ANOTHER
Eph
5:19-21
20 giving thanks always for all things to
God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21
submitting to one another in the fear of God. NKJV
WIVES ARE TO SUBMIT TO THEIR HUSBANDS
Wives,
submit to your own husbands, as is
fitting in the Lord. NKJV
1 Peter
3:1
Wives,
likewise, be submissive to your own
husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may
be won by the conduct of their wives, NKJV
SLAVES ARE TO SUBMIT TO MASTERS
Titus
2:9-10
9 Exhort
bondservants to be obedient to their own
masters, to be well pleasing in all things, not answering back, 10 not
pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of
God our Savior in all things. NKJV
1 Peter
2:18-19
Servants,
be submissive to your masters with
all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. 19 For this is
commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering
wrongfully. NKJV
CHRISTIANS ARE TO SUBMIT TO GOD
James 4:7
Therefore
submit to God. Resist the devil and
he will flee from you. NKJV
THE CHURCH IS SUBJECT TO CHRIST
Eph 5:24
24
Therefore, just as the church is subject
to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. NKJV
Submission/hupotasso
is more than one thing and applies to all Christians not just wives. Submission
is a normal biblical requirement for all irrespective of gender. No one should
be unsubmitted or unruly or doctrinally deviant. If submission is interpreted to
mean no ministry and no authority—than no one can work since we are all under
authority. It is selective and myopic to view submission as a restrictive
limitation for women and submission as an empowering authority and full access
to spiritual gifts for men. Strauch believes that submission means one thing for
women and a completely different thing for men.
CHRIST AS HEAD OF MAN
1 Cor 11:1‑3 (NIV)
1
Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.
2
I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the
teachings, just as I passed them on to you.
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.
Eph
5:23-24
23 For
the husband is head of the wife, as also
Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24
Therefore, just as the church is subject
to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. NKJV
Eph 4:15
15 but,
speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is
the head — Christ —
NKJV
Rev 19:7
7 Let us
rejoice and be glad
and give
him glory!
For
the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready.
NIV
Let us
re-write Strauch’s section on female submission on page 57 from a
different angle. Let us examine the headship of Christ over man by the same
principles that Strauch applies to the headship of husbands over wives.
Paul exhorted
Christian men to submit to Christ. The basis for his exhortation is given most
compellingly in 1 Corinthians 11:3, “the head of every man is Christ.”
1 Corinthians 11:3 also
states the principle found in Ephesians 5: 23
"Christ is the head of the church.”
If there is any question as to what is
intended by the phrase, "the head of every man," Paul adds the
analogy of Christ's headship over the
Church, "as Christ also is the head of
the church." The word "head" (Greek, kephale) is used figuratively
to mean, as is its constant use, "authority over" and "leadership,"
not "source" or "origin," as biblical masculites assert (Latin: masculus; source
for the English masculine).
A man
should not dishonor his head as clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 11:4. Commenting
on the 1 Corinthian and Ephesians passages, Kurt Dahlin brilliant biblical
commentator and New Testament scholar at the Breakwater
observes: "this particular exhortation to the
man to submit to Christ is the universal teaching of the New Testament.
Every passage
that deals with the relationship of the man to Christ tells him to 'submit to' him, using
this same verb (hupotasso).
According to
Ephesians 5:24 “the
church is subject/hupotasso to Christ.” Christ is the head of man and Lord of the
church. The manner in which the
man is to submit to
Jesus is as to the Lord.
This means that men are to fully submit to Jesus the Lord and head over all (cf. Hebrews 2:8).
Using the analogy of Christ and
the Church, the man is to submit to
him "as the church is subject to Christ." Dahlin adds: "He
should submit to Jesus as a bride
does to her husband. Christ is the Bridegroom and the church is the Bride. The
comparative analogy Paul
used of the church as the bride of Christ invokes a living picture which
characterizes the godly
submission a Christian man should render to the Lord Jesus. This
one qualification says it all."
(57).
Using the logic established by Strauch: Men
should submit to Christ as head and Lord of the Church. Submission for Strauch
means subordination, restriction, prohibition, and limitation.
Therefore, men cannot teach, lead, have authority or have full
access to spiritual gifts. However, the opposite is true. The headship of Christ
over men is a positive and empowering relationship for men and the model for
husbands to follow with their wives. I am supposed to be to my wife what Christ
has been to me. The headship of Christ over men cannot be interpreted negatively
as a prohibition, limitation or restriction of any kind.
Why then is the headship of men over women all
about “authority over,” restriction, prohibition, subordination and limitation?
There is nothing inherent within the biblical concept of submission that
necessitates a doctrine of female subordination.
Hupotasso does not assign women to a
position of secondary importance, slave status or inferior rank. Whatever
hupotasso means for men—it should also
mean for women. Whatever the headship of Christ does for men—the headship of men
should also do for women. Christ is our example not polytheistic culture.
The headship of the Father over Jesus is Yes and
Amen.
The headship of Jesus over the Church is Yes and
Amen.
The headship of Jesus over men is Yes and Amen.
The headship of men over women is No and Be
Quiet.
Strauch quoted as supreme support professor
George Knight III.
Commenting
on the Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 passages, George Knight, III, biblical
commentator and New Testament professor at Knox Theological Seminary, observes: "this particular
exhortation to the wife to
submit to her husband is the universal
teaching of the New Testament.
Every passage
that deals with the relationship of the wife to her husband tells her to 'submit to' him, using this same verb
(hupotasso):
Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; 1
Peter 3:1; Titus 2:4f" (57).
In each one of these verses quoted by George
Knight III the Greek words for husband/aner
and wife/gune are used together with
hupotasso. He states categorically
that every passage in the NT that
deals with the husband/aner and wife/gune
relationship tells her to submit/hupotasso
to him. In other words when hupotasso
is used together with the Greek words aner
and gune—it always is used for the
husband and wife relationship. In every case where these three words are used
together English translators of the Bible use the words husband and wife. I
agree 100% with Knight’s brilliant and exacting scholarship. The context for
these three words is always marital. A wife is submitted to her husband not to
every man universally. The four passages are clearly dealing with marriage
advice, so says Knight.
However, Knight forgot to mention that
aner,
gune and hupotasso are
also used in 1 Timothy 2:11-12. These same three Greek words are used together
in 1Timothy 2:11-12 and yet are translated differently than in every other case.
Translators don’t use husband and wife as they do in every other passage where
these three words appear together. Instead, translators use woman for
gune and man or men for aner
in1 Timothy 2:11-12. This unusual variant English translation is then used
to prove that women by universal
principle cannot ever teach publicly or exercise any authority over men in the
church.
Knight rejects the marital context for 1 Timothy
2:11-12 and instead contradicts his own exegesis by making 1 Timothy 2:12 a
principle of ecclesiological or church structure.
I don’t expect Strauch to know about this
omission of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 by Knight but Knight does and it betrays him. The
very principle he fights to establish is unbalanced by his neglect of fairness.
If every other verse with these three Greeks words is marital in context—then
1Timothy should also be a marital context. If we are fair minded—1 Timothy
2:11-12 is just typical marriage advice and not ministry prohibitions and
limitations for all women universally. The context of the entire Bible is
marital (Genesis 1:26-28).
Strauch takes advantage of the ordinary pew
potato. There is very little chance that any Christian would know that 1 Timothy
2:11-12 has the exact same Greek words as
Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; 1 Peter 3:1 and Titus 2:4f. There is
little chance that any Christian would know that Knight left out 1Timothy 2 from
the list of scriptures dealing with common marital advice. This oversight then
allows scholars to endlessly and enthusiastically interpret 1 Timothy 2:12 as a
church structure issue restricting all godly women from being used by the Holy
Spirit in any leadership capacity. Strauch used Knight’s information to
conclude,
The negative
statement, “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a
man,” directly forbids women from teaching and leading men in the church. Paul
is not prohibiting women from teaching absolutely (Titus 2:3; Acts 18:25,26),
but specifically from teaching men publicly in the household of God (cf. 1 Cor
14:34,35) (60).
Strauch and others feel free to add to the
biblical text the words publicly and
in the church. However, the context in
1 Timothy 2:12 is good marriage advice that is found in many other places in
scripture. The mere fact of male headship does not preclude or prohibit the Holy
Spirit from using a lowly woman if necessary to teach sound doctrine. Women are
capable of this.
Knight’s interpretation 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is used
to countermand any and all biblical examples of women in ministry. For instance
Strauch summarized, “Since 1 Timothy 5:17 states that elders lead and teach the
church and since women are not to teach or lead men, it follows, therefore, that
women cannot be elders in the church” (60).
However, Knight’s iron clad logic is faulty and
only works if 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is grossly manipulated into a ministry
principle.
Knight’s formula “since women are not to teach or
lead men” is used as a mantra to annual, cancel, belittle and reject all
illustrations of women in authoritative gospel ministry. Here is the way
Knight’s formula is used.
We
know that Junias is listed as an apostle in
Romans 16:7 but she can’t be a real apostle
“since women are not to teach or lead men.” Alexander Strauch wrote, “There is
no clear example of a woman apostle in the entire New Testament” (54).
We
know that Euodia and
Syntyche are listed as fellow workers
with Paul in Philippians 4:3 but they can’t be real missionaries “since women
are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know that the four daughters of Philip
(Acts 21:9) were prophets but they couldn’t be real prophets “since women
are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know the Corinthian women (1Cor 11:5)
could pray and prophesy in the church but they couldn’t really do that “since
women are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know that women were included
in the upper room (Acts 2:1-4) and
received power to witness for the Holy Spirit but they can’t really witness
“since women are not to teach or lead men.”
We know that
Priscilla taught men and was a church
planter and co-pastor (Acts 8:26,27; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Romans 16:3‑5; 2
Timothy 4:19) but she couldn’t have
been a real pastor, missionary or church planter “since women are not to teach
or lead men.”
We
know that Paul called Priscilla a fellow worker In Roman 16:3 but she wasn’t a real
missionary she just helped set the table while the men talked theology “since
women are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know that Phoebe in Romans 16:1 is
called a deacon but she can’t be real deacon or have any real authority “since
women are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know the women of Crete in Titus
2:3,4 are called elders and were appointed to teach but they aren’t real elders
and they were only to teach other lowly insignificant women “since women are not
to teach or lead men.”
We
know that women were promised the
gift of prophecy in Acts 2:16-18 but not really “since women are not to teach or
lead men.”
The words of
Anna (Luke 2:36),
Mary the mother of Jesus (Luke 1:45‑55) and
Elizabeth the mother of John the Baptist (Luke 1:41-42) are recorded
in the canon of scripture but their words are not really didactic or
authoritative “since women are not to teach or lead men.”
Mary
can bring Christ into the world but she can’t bring the world to Christ.
Mary’s word could be taught by men
but not by her “since women are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know Deborah was a prophet but she
was a mindless instrument like Balaam’s donkey “since women are not to teach or
lead men.”
We
know the women were told by Jesus
after his resurrection to “Go tell
his disciples” but they weren’t to say much just small talk or use sign language
and mime “since women are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know the women of
We
know that Mary the mother of Mark
organized a coed prayer meeting at her house in Acts 12:12 for Peter. Peter was
released from jail but that wasn’t because of the prayers of women “since women
are not to teach or lead men.”
We
know that Mary is commended in Romans
16:6 who worked hard for the apostles but it was only in the hospitality
ministry “since women are not to teach or lead men.” Mary was a great cook like
Martha.
We
know that Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis
are commended in Romans 16:12 for their work in the Lord—but they probably
served in Children’s Church before the boys turn 13 years old “since women are
not to teach or lead men.” They swept up after church service—quietly.
Many prominent
women of Thessalonica in Acts 17:4
and many prominent women of
Men and women were put in
prison in Acts 8:3; 9:2; 22:4 but the women could not speak to their male
captors about Christ “since women are not to teach or lead men.”
WOMEN NOT ALLOWED
I was walking through the park with my kids and I
noticed a sign prominently placed: Dogs
prohibited in the park. I realized that there are various signs also
displayed in the Church:
·
Women prohibited ministry in the church
·
Women not allowed to speak in the church
·
Women not allowed to teach in the church
·
Women not permitted authority in the church
·
Women: salvation only
·
No Pentecost for women
·
Women still under the curse
·
No women can ask questions without a male escort
·
Women welcome to our church
I
was reminded of the signs that we used to put on our clubhouse as kids:
NO GIRLS ALLOWED. However, we now have
a theologically based chauvinism that is brought into the church. The
Prohibitionists have a theology on women that looks nothing like the model that
Jesus bequeathed or Pentecost requires. The exclusion of women from honest
Christian ministry on the basis of gender is not based in the New Testament but
on an ancient cultural bias.
The Bible allows some godly men to teach and some godly women to teach. The
church has determined equitable qualifications for ministry.
This equal opportunity for ministry can best be approximated through the
paradigm of Jesus and Pentecost.
Female roles, created order and submission are only a smokescreen for a
culturally based interpretation of Scripture. If pre-Pentecost Judaism is the
model for the church then all women everywhere are to be silenced.
However, if Jesus and Pentecost form the model for today's church then
godly women are free to serve Christ in any capacity as willed by the Holy
Spirit!
WHAT CAN WOMEN DO?
Strauch wrote, “My specific purpose is to show
that Scripture excludes women from the church eldership” (56).
“The woman’s learning with full submissiveness
must take place under the church’s leadership authority, which is the male
teacher elders” (60).
Strauch believes that 1 Timothy 2:12 “directly
forbids women from teaching and leading
men in the church. Paul is not prohibiting women from teaching absolutely
(Titus 2:3; Acts 18:25,26), but specifically from teaching men publicly in the
household of God (cf. 1 Cor. 14:34,35)” (60).
“Since 1 Timothy 5:17 states that elders lead and
teach the church and since women are not to teach or lead
men, it follows, therefore, that women cannot be elders in the
church” (60).
“Paul’s restriction on women teaching and leading
men certainly caused heated criticism, just as it does today” (60).
“Paul prohibits women from taking the lead
publicly by speaking in an open, spontaneous church meeting. He again supports
his restriction by appealing to the Old Testament and a command from the Lord
himself” (63).
Strauch said it was
his purpose to exclude women from leadership. Next he states “that
God insists on an all-male eldership.”
The bottom line for Strauch is that women are forbidden to teach or exercise
authority over men. The words in the
church or in an open spontaneous
church meeting are added to the text by commentators. There is no specific
qualification in the Bible as to content of teaching or location where women are
forbidden to teach. There is no restriction of the universal principle as to
which men in particular that she is prohibited from leading.
She is not to teach is an
absolute prohibition. She is not to exercise any authority whatsoever over any
man anywhere. If the principle of female submission and subordination is limited
in scope in any way the injunction is no longer universal
but ad hoc. How is the prohibition against women a universal principle
if it only applies in the church service?
Therefore, women should not, by God’s design and
purpose, engage in any teaching or leading regardless of whether in the church
or in secular society.
We don’t have two sets of biblical principles one
for inside the church and one for outside. If women should not teach or lead
men—then they should not teach or lead men outside the church or anywhere else
for that matter.
Christian women should not teach co-ed classes in
secular schools.
Christian women should not hold positions of
leadership or authority in secular business, hospitals, schools, service clubs
or the entertainment industry.
Christian women should not lead worship or be
involved in any form of worship leading.
Christian women should not write books that might
be read by a man.
Christian women should not write worship songs.
We should not sing any worship songs written by a woman.
Christian women should not be on any church
council or church board.
Christian women should not be on any radio
program or compose any videos for church consumption.
Christian women should not ever give any advice
to a man or husband.
Christian women should not speak in church.
Christian women should not occupy any position
that would teach, instruct, lead or have any authority over any man or men.
Christian women should be on the faculty of any
co-ed school, college, university or seminary.
For instance, if a nurses station is all female
and a new male nurse arrives the existing female leadership should step down.
WOMEN SHOULD WEAR A VEIL
1 Cor 11:5
5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with
her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her
head were shaved.
NKJV
1 Cor 11:13
13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a
woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? NKJV
WOMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE SHORT HAIR
1 Cor 11:6
6 For if a
woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman
to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. NKJV
1 Cor 11:6
6 If a
woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a
disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her
head. NIV
1 Cor 11:15-16
15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to
her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be
contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God. NKJV
WOMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE BRAIDED HAIR, GOLD OR
1 Tim 2:9
9 I also want women to dress modestly, with
decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive
clothes, NIV
1 Tim 2:9
in like manner also, that the women adorn
themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided
hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, NKJV
1 Peter 3:2-3
3 Do not
let your adornment be merely outward — arranging the hair, wearing gold, or
putting on fine apparel — NKJV
WOMEN ARE SAVED THROUGH CHILDREARING
1 Tim 2:15
15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing
if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control. NKJV
WOMEN SHOULD NOT SPEAK IN CHURCH
1 Cor 14:33-34
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34
women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but
must be in submission, as the Law says. NIV
SEXISM OR MALE SUPREMACY
“Hence, a
major reason that God insists on an all-male eldership is because godly males
are more suited by divine design than godly females for leadership, particularly
for identifying and fighting off satanic false teaching and subtle, doctrinal
deceptions” (61).
According to Strauch, men are
more suited by creation for identifying and fighting false teaching
and subtle doctrinal deceptions. I’m not sure how he came to this conclusion.
The originators of most false teaching and doctrinal deceptions are men. Was
Montanus a woman? Was Cerinthus a woman? Was Hitler a woman? The church is in a
state of confusion and doctrinal mayhem because of men not women. There are
thousands of denominations, cults, independent store front churches, TV
evangelists that are often the result of male deception and false teaching. Is
there any indication that men have done a good job—let alone a great job in
leading the church or the world? Instead, men have caused the mess. How could
women do any worse than men?
The three main branches of Christianity are
divided over subtle doctrinal disputes. Women did not do this.
Suited means to be appropriate to or the right thing for somebody or
something; to be convenient or acceptable to somebody; to adapt something in
order to meet requirements or circumstances (Encarta 2003).
If men are
more suited by divine design, then women are
less suited by divine design. Women by design would be
inappropriate, the wrong thing, unacceptable, not adapted to identify false
teaching and doctrinal deceptions. Apparently, women could never reach the same
level as men in understanding doctrine. This female condition is gravely
different than an equal partner taking a lower or subordinate position. The
difference is due to God’s divine plan. Women come inferior from the factory. If
understanding doctrine is a male quality—women lack this quality. Therefore men
have a superior ability to ferret out false teaching than women. If men are
first, then women are second. If men set the standard, then women are
substandard. If men are more, then women are less. If men are higher, then women
are lower. In the dictionary this secondary condition is defined as inferior.
Inferior means lower or low in rank, standing, or degree; lower in
quality or value; failing to meet a standard of quality, ability, or
achievement; somebody of lower status, rank, or quality (Encarta 2003).
Equal means equivalent, like, alike, the same, one and the same: even,
uniform, on a plane, level, on level pegging; counterpart, compeer, peer,
parallel. The antonym of equal
is unequal (Encarta 2003). If women do not have the intellectual or moral
capacity of men—they are not equal. If women are not equal—then they were
created that way. Male primacy is the basis of male supremacy. The lordship of
men over women is a pagan world view.
The definition of supremacy: a position of superiority or authority over
all others (Encarta Reference Library
2003).
A supremacist is a believer in the superiority of a particular group:
somebody who holds the view that a particular group is innately superior to
others and therefore is entitled to dominate them (Encarta Reference Library 2003).
I’m positive the lordship of men over women is
included in what Jesus meant when he said to the Christian leaders, “Not so with
you.”
Matt 20:25-28
25 Jesus called them together and said, "You know
that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it
over them, and their high officials
exercise authority over them. 26 Not
so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your
servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first
must be your slave- 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to
serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
NIV
In the Gentile or pagan world the
lord it over model extended to male superiority over women. Christianity as
taught by Jesus rejected any aspect of supremacy. Jesus as the premier model of
servanthood gave his life to redeem women, incorporate women into the Church and
endow women with spiritual powers to build advance and serve the
Jesus said the first will be last. Yet male scholars still fight to be
king of the mountain.
Matt 20:16
16 So the last will be first, and
the first last. For many are called, but few chosen."
NKJV
Matt 19:30
30 But many who are first will be last, and the last first. NKJV
The first is last and the last first means a reversal of primacy. In
other word if the tables were turned—how would you like to be victim of you own
theology? How would men like it if they were treated like women? Using the
teaching of Christ let us reverse the dialogue and apply it to men. I have taken
numerous quotes from Christian male scholars about women and simply turned them
around.
ROLE REVERSAL
Men are created first and therefore inferior to glorious IMPROVED women
Men were made from dirt to be ruled like dirt
Women were made from man’s bone to rule over man
Men are vice-regent to women
Men are by nature lower and subordinate to women
Men are created morally incompetent
Men are more prone to deception and sin
Men are less able to see the importance of doctrinal formulations
Men are incapable of understanding doctrinal issues
Men are less likely to preserve the apostolic tradition
Men are the easy way for deception and false teaching to enter the
church
Men are the world entry way of rebellion, destruction, disease and
depravity
Men are banned, prohibited, restricted and forbidden to teach or have
any authority in the church
Men are intellectually inferior to women
Men are less interested in reason
Men are dominated by a base sensual
nature
Men do not have the moral and intellectual capacity to meet the doctrinal and
apologetic needs of the church’s public life
Men cannot have full access to Pentecost and spiritual gifts
Men should remain silent in the churches
Men can be saved only and no more
Men are a social liability
Men were spiritually
inferior to women
Men cannot pray before women
Men are less rational,
weaker and less honorable than women
Men can teach small boys,
rodents and other men
Matt 7:12
12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you,
for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. NIV
John 8:7
7 So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to
them, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first."
NKJV
Kurtechism: Headship is not in question. However, the
nature of headship is in question.
Jesus repudiated the lord over model used in all cultures. The appeal to lord
over models violates the expressed teaching of Jesus. Authority and headship are
not to be like the Gentile model. The words authority over and headship—whatever
they meant in Gentile and Greek dictionaries—do not apply to the church, the
family or the home. Why does Wayne Grudem take such pleasure in wallowing in the
murky non-Christian Gentile model of authority and headship? (Responding to feminism in the church
http://www.cbmw.org.uk/articles/respondingkephale.htm)
It
is futile to argue that the Gentiles lord over authority. Jesus gives authority
and headship a completely different