Some have tried to establish the propriety of women teachers/leaders by appealing to Joel's prophecy reiterated by Peter in Acts 2, where our sons and daughters will prophesy; or to famous women of the Bible like Deborah, an obviously prominent and respected woman; or to the idea that Paul's commands were expressed in his particular cultural context, which some suppose should not be applied to the contemporary church.
We shall not consider these points, largely because we do not find them fully illustrative of the issue of the role of women. Instead, we shall examine various proof texts to see if they are accurately rendered. So we intend to ascertain if there is cultural bias in the translation of words to see if a reasonable alternative viewpoint is available.
As we make our case, we are not suggesting it is definitive. We are not theologians. But we do think the interpretation of Scripture has been colored by the culture in which translators are found. A translator in the 19th century would have a 19th century world view. This should be obvious.
We will also state at the outset that we do not believe women can be elders, which is the highest authority in the local church. We believe that this position is specifically reserved for men as the position of authority, but any other position in the church, like deacon, worship team, teaching, preaching, children's church, youth group, Sunday school, prayer ministry, facilities, and church fellowship can be filled by women. None of these positions are authority positions.
We should note as an aside that we do not believe the pastor or preacher is or should be the highest authority in the local church (1Pe. 5:1-2).
It should go without saying that this does not mean women are in any way spiritually inferior to men. We simply acknowledge what we discern from the Bible about proper church structure. In addition, we note once again that we are simply offering an alternative, not a definitive case.
With that in view, let's examine some Scriptures.
1 Timothy 2:12-13
This is the primary Scripture upon which the traditional view is based. It reads,
NAS: it was lawful for a man to divorce
KJV: lawful for a man to put away
INT: if it is lawful for a husband a wife to divorce
Objection
Gotquestions.org objects at this point:
This is quite obvious in the very same chapter, 1Ti. 2:15, which uses the word "women" and refers to childbirth. Most certainly, the Bible must be teaching about wives and childbirth and would never sanction generic unmarried women giving birth.
Further, there is most certainly something in the context that narrows 1Ti. 2:11-12 to husbands and wives, despite gotquestions' objection. It leaps out at us. In verse 1Ti. 2:13 Paul gives the reason for his instruction: For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Now, this is a somewhat odd reason for women to not teach or have authority. It doesn't seem to fit.
But it makes perfect sense if Paul is talking about husbands and wives. Paul writes: But Adam was formed first, then Eve. That is, the prototypical husband/wife relationship. Because Adam and his wife were first and second, husbands and their wives are first and second:
Most crucially, headship of men over women is unique to and only applies to marriage. There is no verse in the Bible that tells all women to submit to every man in the church. This is important. Again, women are not commanded to generally submit to men; wives submit to husbands! Therefore, it doesn't make any sense for Paul to be telling us what "a woman" is permitted regarding "a man:"
Therefore, Paul is cautioning Timothy to not let a woman domineer or take over. Or perhaps, that "a woman" should not have authority over "a man" on a one-on-one basis.
This is not to say that the role of women in the church is now settled. But what is settled in our view is that this particular passage could possibly be understood differently.
1 Corinthians 14:26-35
Notice that the word again is translated "women" and not "wife." Yet a verse later these "women" should be in submission, and ask their husbands at home. We point this out only to bolster our previous point that wives submit to husbands, and everyone submits to authority. And again, the Greek can be translated either "woman" or "wife" depending on context, and that the translation "woman" can still actually mean "wife."
We note that Paul is specifically writing about proper order in the church gathering. He just finished with the order of prophetic activity, and draws his conclusion: For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. Now he begins a new thought as Paul turns his attention to women.
Verse 35 gives us another hint: If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. This helps us in obtaining the context. And that context is that we think Paul was changing the subject in the course of explaining church order. We don't believe that what Paul said previously about prophecy is necessarily connected to what Paul is now discussing about women speaking.
Why? Apparently, women asking questions about things during the gathering, speaking out in church. Paul doesn't say they were trying to prophesy. Clearly, this is a point of order with Paul, which suggests that the occurrences were not incidental. This was disruptive, so Paul commanded that these women to remain silent and ask their husbands their questions at home.
This seems very specific. Paul is addressing something other than speaking to the congregation. Rather, he is addressing a particular concern about women talking about something they wanted to have explained.
As an aside, we would suggest that those who appeal to these verses to bolster their position that women aren't to preach are drawing the line arbitrarily. If women aren't to speak, why should they be able to say anything at all? Remember, Paul said "silent." Silent means silent, doesn't it? Not just forbidden from preaching or prophesying, but completely silent.
Is this what they believe? Do they say that women can't talk about the weather in church, they can't correct their children, talk with their friends, they can't even answer their husband's questions? No, we are certain that these people do allow women to speak in many other contexts when they are at church.
We would suggest that it seems arbitrary to single out teaching and prophesying only, but exempt other speaking. Paul's directives need to be read in context, and we need to abandon our preconceptions and allow the Scriptures to speak to us without forcing Scripture into our paradigms.
1 Corinthians 11:5, 16
We conclude that women were teaching and prophesying in the church and can do so today.
Some would say that this is a culturally-derived requirement, where men were important and women were little more than chattel. We would respond that never before had women been so empowered or imputed with so much value until Jesus saved us and established His kingdom on earth. He knows the true worth of every person, and assigns great value to each one.
Thus the message of salvation is liberating to every soul, including women. Jesus represents a radical change in every arena, including the earth shattering elevation of the value and worth of women.
So we would not be so quick to relegate Paul's commands to the dustbin of the culturally unenlightened. If we were to undertake to counter Paul's directives, we would want to base our arguments on the Scriptures. And there is no Scripture that acknowledges the possibility of women elders.
But we believe this is not true of deacons.
Here is another example of what we believe to be the cultural bias of translators. Here's the passage:
If we render the verses according to our discoveries, they would read,
Alternate reading of 1Ti. 3:8-11
It should go without saying that this does not mean women are in any way spiritually inferior to men. We simply acknowledge what we discern from the Bible about proper church structure. In addition, we note once again that we are simply offering an alternative, not a definitive case.
With that in view, let's examine some Scriptures.
1 Timothy 2:12-13
This is the primary Scripture upon which the traditional view is based. It reads,
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.We are going to parse this verse in some detail, since so many appeal to it in a way we consider to be in error.
"A Woman" or "A Wife"
Our initial premise is that since there is more than one definition supplied for certain words, the choice of words in context makes a big difference. This is why we suggested that translators can be subject to the cultural conditions of the times they live in. It would only be natural to select the interpretation of a word that conforms to that cultural understanding. Such it is, we think, with the word rendered "a woman:"
Our initial premise is that since there is more than one definition supplied for certain words, the choice of words in context makes a big difference. This is why we suggested that translators can be subject to the cultural conditions of the times they live in. It would only be natural to select the interpretation of a word that conforms to that cultural understanding. Such it is, we think, with the word rendered "a woman:"
guné: a woman, wife, my lady.
The Greek word can be rendered either "a woman" or "a wife," but every translation we have seen renders it "a woman" in this verse. Why? We think that translators assume that Paul he is instructing Timothy on church order and what "a woman" cannot do. But we don't think Paul is doing this. In fact, Paul doesn't get to issues of church order until chapter three.
Therefore, we suggest that Paul is not talking about church order at all. It is possible that he is actually referring to the relationship between husband and wife. We think the word should be "a wife," not "a woman."
"A Man" or "A Husband"
Like "a woman." The word "a man" has similar alternate meanings:
Like "a woman." The word "a man" has similar alternate meanings:
anér: a male human being; a man, husband.
Both "man" and "husband" are variously used, depending on the verse or the translation, and sometimes interchangeably. For example, Mark 10:2:
GRK: εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀνδρὶ γυναῖκα ἀπολῦσαιNAS: it was lawful for a man to divorce
KJV: lawful for a man to put away
INT: if it is lawful for a husband a wife to divorce
We see here that the word is rendered "a man" in the KJV and other translations, even though the verse is about divorce. This clearly suggests that the word "man" can be either "man" or "husband."
Context is relevant, but even then we find in this verse that the translation is interchangeable between "man" and "husband."
So despite the fact that the NIV renders the words as "a woman" and "a man" in 1 Timothy 2:12-13, we think the provided alternate meanings, "a husband" and "a wife," could be in view here. We believe that Paul was actually talking about marriage here and not church order and the role of women.
Objection
Gotquestions.org objects at this point:
A third objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words for “woman” and “man” in 1 Timothy 2 could refer to husbands and wives; however, the basic meaning of the words is broader than that. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8–10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse 8)? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9–10)? Of course not. Verses 8–10 clearly refer to all men and women, not just husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a narrowing to husbands and wives in verses 11–14.Notice that gotquestions completely botches its analysis. These two words are found all over the NT, variously translated as man/husband and woman/wife. Context determines which word to use, but even that seems to be a bit squishy, as we noted with Mark 10:2 being a good example. So 1Ti. 2:8 and 10 can indeed be translated "men" if the context demands it, without it being a problem to translate it as "husband" elsewhere.
This is quite obvious in the very same chapter, 1Ti. 2:15, which uses the word "women" and refers to childbirth. Most certainly, the Bible must be teaching about wives and childbirth and would never sanction generic unmarried women giving birth.
Further, there is most certainly something in the context that narrows 1Ti. 2:11-12 to husbands and wives, despite gotquestions' objection. It leaps out at us. In verse 1Ti. 2:13 Paul gives the reason for his instruction: For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Now, this is a somewhat odd reason for women to not teach or have authority. It doesn't seem to fit.
But it makes perfect sense if Paul is talking about husbands and wives. Paul writes: But Adam was formed first, then Eve. That is, the prototypical husband/wife relationship. Because Adam and his wife were first and second, husbands and their wives are first and second:
Ep. 5:23-24 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.We note in passing that this verse also uses the same two Greek words: A man/a husband, and a woman/a wife.
Most crucially, headship of men over women is unique to and only applies to marriage. There is no verse in the Bible that tells all women to submit to every man in the church. This is important. Again, women are not commanded to generally submit to men; wives submit to husbands! Therefore, it doesn't make any sense for Paul to be telling us what "a woman" is permitted regarding "a man:"
I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man...
This is completely at odds with the Bible's teaching by extending commands isolated to marriage into the church as a whole!
"...or to have..."
We have noticed that some apologists have a tendency to conflate teaching with authority when dealing with this phrase. That is, they suggest that to teach is to have authority because pastors teach and are in authority. As we noted, we don't think a pastor is the presiding authority over the local church.
The Greek is actually listing two prohibitions. Once again, the phrase is
I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man...
The literal Greek is
...to teach, however, a woman not I do, nor to use authority over a man...
The word "nor" is οὐδέ (oude):
Part of Speech: Conjunction, Negative; ...and not, neither... 1. and not, continuing a negation...
That is, Paul is adding to a list of what he does not permit. He is not expanding the word "teach" to include "authority." Teaching does not mean exercising authority. So I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man... means
- I do not permit a woman to teach a man
- I do not permit a woman to have authority over a man
Not,
- I do not permit a woman to teach a man, which is having authority over a man
"Authority"
The Greek word for "authority" in 1Ti. 2:12 is
authenteó: to govern, exercise authority
Usage: I domineer, govern, have mastery over.
831 authentéō (from 846 /autós, "self" and entea, "arms, armor") – properly, to unilaterally take up arms, i.e. acting as an autocrat – literally, self-appointed (acting without submission).
Interestingly, the KJV captures more of the nuance of this word, translating the phrase as nor to usurp authority over the man. This is a completely different word than the one Jesus uses regarding His own authority. For example, Mt. 28:18:
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me..."
That word is exousia, power to act, authority... This is the exercise of legitimate power, as opposed to domineering or acting as an autocrat.
That same word is also found in 1Co. 11:10:
For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
This is specifically referenced to a covering of the head while praying or prophesying. The woman is to operate in the church in submission to church authority.
Because there is a different choice of Greek words in 1Ti. 2:12, we need to clear what is being communicated in its context.
For the husband/wife relationship, the wife is commanded to submit:
Ep. 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
1Pe. 3:1 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands
As we mentioned, there isn't a single NT Scripture that commands women to be in generic submission to men, but rather that there should be a general submission to authority:
1Pe. 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority...
He. 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority.
Ep. 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Ja. 4:7 Submit yourselves, then, to God.
So, even if we were to grant that Paul is making command regarding "a woman," (So I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man...) it seems clear that Paul is not telling Timothy to keep women out of the pulpit, but rather, to keep women from unilaterally taking over. It sounds more like preventing a Coup d'état.
Therefore, Paul is cautioning Timothy to not let a woman domineer or take over. Or perhaps, that "a woman" should not have authority over "a man" on a one-on-one basis.
But our position is that it is a command a wife to not usurp authority over her husband.
"...she must be silent."
Literally, ...but to be in quietness.
"Silent" is ἡσυχία, ας, ἡ, (hésuchia), quietness, implying calm; for the believer, 2271 (hēsyxía) is used of their God-produced calm which includes an inner tranquility that supports appropriate action. This term "does not mean speechlessness, which is more directly indicated by 4602...
So this isn't a case of a woman being told to shut up in church, it is actually a case of appropriately quiescent, tranquil, and calm, we think with her husband.
Conclusion: Alternate Reading of 1Ti. 2:11-13
We have finally arrived at the end of our parsing and are now ready to reconstruct what we humbly consider to be a more accurate reading of the text. First let's remind ourselves of how the NIV renders the passage:
1Ti. 2:12-13 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.With this in view, let's offer another rendering of the passage:
1Ti. 2:12-13 I do not allow the wife to instruct the husband, neither to domineer over [or wrest power from] the husband; she is to be at rest and calm (with him). 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.Wow, what a difference. This really clarifies the issue for us. The context makes sense. Paul's command makes sense. Paul's stated reason makes sense.
This is not to say that the role of women in the church is now settled. But what is settled in our view is that this particular passage could possibly be understood differently.
1 Corinthians 14:26-35
26 What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. 28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. 29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30 If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church...This verse tells us that in the church gathering that women should not say anything. Generally, this is interpreted to be a public speaking ministry, or that women are not allowed to be pastors or to teach men.
Notice that the word again is translated "women" and not "wife." Yet a verse later these "women" should be in submission, and ask their husbands at home. We point this out only to bolster our previous point that wives submit to husbands, and everyone submits to authority. And again, the Greek can be translated either "woman" or "wife" depending on context, and that the translation "woman" can still actually mean "wife."
We note that Paul is specifically writing about proper order in the church gathering. He just finished with the order of prophetic activity, and draws his conclusion: For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. Now he begins a new thought as Paul turns his attention to women.
Verse 35 gives us another hint: If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. This helps us in obtaining the context. And that context is that we think Paul was changing the subject in the course of explaining church order. We don't believe that what Paul said previously about prophecy is necessarily connected to what Paul is now discussing about women speaking.
Why? Apparently, women asking questions about things during the gathering, speaking out in church. Paul doesn't say they were trying to prophesy. Clearly, this is a point of order with Paul, which suggests that the occurrences were not incidental. This was disruptive, so Paul commanded that these women to remain silent and ask their husbands their questions at home.
This seems very specific. Paul is addressing something other than speaking to the congregation. Rather, he is addressing a particular concern about women talking about something they wanted to have explained.
As an aside, we would suggest that those who appeal to these verses to bolster their position that women aren't to preach are drawing the line arbitrarily. If women aren't to speak, why should they be able to say anything at all? Remember, Paul said "silent." Silent means silent, doesn't it? Not just forbidden from preaching or prophesying, but completely silent.
Is this what they believe? Do they say that women can't talk about the weather in church, they can't correct their children, talk with their friends, they can't even answer their husband's questions? No, we are certain that these people do allow women to speak in many other contexts when they are at church.
We would suggest that it seems arbitrary to single out teaching and prophesying only, but exempt other speaking. Paul's directives need to be read in context, and we need to abandon our preconceptions and allow the Scriptures to speak to us without forcing Scripture into our paradigms.
1 Corinthians 11:5, 16
And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head — it is just as though her head were shaved.Paul again was concerned with proper order in the church gathering. We see that this verse is unambiguously dealing with women prophets. And it's clearly within the assembly of the saints. We know this because Paul concluded his instruction about women covering their heads with this:
1Co. 11:16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice — nor do the churches of God...
Women covering their heads while prophesying was the sole practice of every church, according to Paul. We conclude that women can speak in the congregation, particularly to deliver prophetic words.
As an aside, although it may seem quaint and old-fashioned, we would suggest that women indeed would cover their heads when prophesying. Paul's command here is clear and unambiguous, though we would admit that this may be a culturally-influenced command, since it does not address doctrines, roles or duties.
Revelation 2:20, 24
As an aside, although it may seem quaint and old-fashioned, we would suggest that women indeed would cover their heads when prophesying. Paul's command here is clear and unambiguous, though we would admit that this may be a culturally-influenced command, since it does not address doctrines, roles or duties.
Revelation 2:20, 24
While perhaps a strange Scripture to appeal to when dealing with the issue of what women should do in the church, we can glean information from it. Here we have a woman who was misleading Jesus' servants, leading them into sin.
Re. 2:20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols...
Re. 2:24 Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan’s so-called deep secrets...
Notice carefully how Jezebel is characterized, and also what she is accused of:
- She called herself a prophetess
- Her teaching was misleading the saints and leading them into sin
- Jesus commended those who disregard her teaching
- Her teaching was heretical
- Jesus condemns her claim to be a prophetess
- Jesus mentioned both prophecy with teaching
- Jesus does not condemn her for teaching
- Jesus condemned her false teaching
Elders are Men
Titus 1:6
Now we turn turn our attention to the issue of women in spiritual authority. This article is probably the most comprehensive view of biblical leadership we know of. The author makes a persuasive case that the church is to be governed by the eldership, not a chief pastor. While we don't agree with everything he writes, his perspective is important and worth reading.
An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife...1Ti. 3:2
Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife...Up to this point we have been dealing with what some say women are not allowed to do. However, we have concluded that women can specifically minister in the church in teaching, prayer, and the prophetic.
Now we turn turn our attention to the issue of women in spiritual authority. This article is probably the most comprehensive view of biblical leadership we know of. The author makes a persuasive case that the church is to be governed by the eldership, not a chief pastor. While we don't agree with everything he writes, his perspective is important and worth reading.
Peter is clear the church is governed by a plurality of elders. 1Pe. 5:1:
To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow-elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers...So we would assert that the eldership is the highest human authority in the local church. And that eldership has requirements. The specific requirement relevant to our discussion is in Titus 1:6 and 1Ti. 3:2 (husband [anér] of but one wife) The word here is singular. So Paul is unequivocal. An elder is a man (anér).
Some would say that this is a culturally-derived requirement, where men were important and women were little more than chattel. We would respond that never before had women been so empowered or imputed with so much value until Jesus saved us and established His kingdom on earth. He knows the true worth of every person, and assigns great value to each one.
Thus the message of salvation is liberating to every soul, including women. Jesus represents a radical change in every arena, including the earth shattering elevation of the value and worth of women.
So we would not be so quick to relegate Paul's commands to the dustbin of the culturally unenlightened. If we were to undertake to counter Paul's directives, we would want to base our arguments on the Scriptures. And there is no Scripture that acknowledges the possibility of women elders.
But we believe this is not true of deacons.
Deacons are Men or Women
Here is another example of what we believe to be the cultural bias of translators. Here's the passage:
1 Timothy 3:8-11
But wait.
"Are to be men" is not in the Greek!
Literally, "Deacons likewise [must be] dignified..." But the phrase "are to be men" is nowhere to be found. So why did the NIV translators insert these words? Because they needed to harmonize verse 8 with their translation of verse 11:
Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. 11 In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.Paul seems to make deacons men: Deacons, likewise, are to be men...
But wait.
"Are to be men" is not in the Greek!
Literally, "Deacons likewise [must be] dignified..." But the phrase "are to be men" is nowhere to be found. So why did the NIV translators insert these words? Because they needed to harmonize verse 8 with their translation of verse 11:
In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
Oh my. The mistranslation compounds. Again, let's look at the actual Greek, this time for verse 11:
"Women likewise [must be] dignified..." Notice the literal translation does not have "their wives," just like verse 8 does not have "are to be men." Hmm.
Hmm.
Remember our discussion above regarding the translation of "man" and 'woman?" These words can also be translated "husband" and "wife." We think vs. 11 ought to be rendered "women," not "wives," just as the literal Greek rendering shows. Why? Because Paul does not mention men in verse 8, which means that Paul is also not giving instruction for the wives of deacons/elders in vs 11. We would therefore suggest that Paul does not address wives at all.
"In the Same way" vs. "Likewise"
The NIV does us yet another disservice by changing the translation of the same word, which appears in two different spots (vs. 8 and 11). The Greek word in both places is hósautós, "in like manner."
"In the Same way" vs. "Likewise"
The NIV does us yet another disservice by changing the translation of the same word, which appears in two different spots (vs. 8 and 11). The Greek word in both places is hósautós, "in like manner."
If we render the verses according to our discoveries, they would read,
8 Deacons, in the same way, are to be worthy of respect... ("men" does not appear in the Greek)In other words, the exact same phraseology is in the Greek for both women and deacons. Deacons' wives aren't being discussed at all, rather, women. We also note that women are being discussed in the context of elders and deacons. Thus Paul is laying out the characteristics of categories of leadership. A certain type of woman is contained in these criteria.
11 Women, in the same way, are to be worthy of respect... (The second "women" does not appear in the Greek)
Alternate reading of 1Ti. 3:8-11
So let's render the passage with a little more honesty:
Bible teachers trace the idea of deacons to Ac. 6:2-3:
Interestingly, the phrase wait on is the same word used in 1 Timothy 3:10: let them serve as deacons. That word is
Having established the idea of service in the body can be either formal and informal, we now turn to the idea of women in the formal position of deacon.
The primary biblical reference to this would be Ro. 16:1:
As we read farther we see her importance:
Nor should we stop at verse two, but continue on:
1Ti. 3:8-11 Deacons in the same way (as elders) must be dignified, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
11 Women in the same way (as elders) must be dignified, worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
Deacons: Husband of One Wife?
Paul continues on. 1Ti. 3:12:
A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
Doesn't this make deacons men? Well, no. The literal rendering of this verse is
Deacons let be of one wife husbands...
This is different than verse 2, in that it uses the plural for "husbands." And, like gynaikas, can mean woman or wife, the word for husband can mean man or husband. A more English-friendly word order:
12 Let men deacons be of one wife...
We simply swapped the word "husbands" to appear before diákonos and changed "husbands" to the alternate meaning, "men" [anér]. That is, a married male deacon must be of one wife, managing his household competently.
More About Deacons
Bible teachers trace the idea of deacons to Ac. 6:2-3:
So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3 Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them...Here the apostles were transferring part of their duties over to a group of men so they could devote their time to spiritual matters. It is inferred from this that the apostles were creating an office of deacon, but it seems more likely at this particular time they were simply identifying a need and filling it.
Interestingly, the phrase wait on is the same word used in 1 Timothy 3:10: let them serve as deacons. That word is
diakoneó: to serve, minister
1247 diakonéō (from 1249 /diákonos) – actively serve – literally, "kicking up dust" because "on the move."Diakoneó is used 37 times in the NT, and certainly not every occurrence is regarding the official diaconate of a local congregation. For example, Ac. 19:22:
He sent two of his helpers, Timothy and Erastus, to Macedonia, while he stayed in the province of Asia a little longer.There is certainly the idea in the NT that there is a general ministering to the saints in practical service. However, we also note the an official position in the body whose members are specifically chosen for the diaconate, from 1 Timothy 3:8.
Having established the idea of service in the body can be either formal and informal, we now turn to the idea of women in the formal position of deacon.
The primary biblical reference to this would be Ro. 16:1:
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant (diákonos) of the church in Cenchrea.It has been argued that Phoebe was not positionally a deacon, but rather simply a woman who was being commended for her service. But notice she is not introduced as a general servant or helper, but rather she is of the church in Cenchrea. That is, her servanthood is in the specific context of a church.
As we read farther we see her importance:
2 I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me.Paul asks the Roman church to give her any assistance she needs. Clearly she is an important person, so much so that Paul recognized her ministry and instructed the Roman church to help her. We should therefore not be so quick to dismiss her as simply a general helper.
Nor should we stop at verse two, but continue on:
3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus. 4 They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them. 5 Greet also the church that meets at their house."Fellow workers" is sunergos, one who labors with another in furthering the cause of Christ... It's the same word Paul uses to describe Timothy in Ro. 6:21, Titus in 2Co. 8:23, Epaphroditus in Ph. 2:25, and Philemon in Phi 1. These are people of note, not just general servants.
6 Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.
12 Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord. Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.Notice that there are several women here who Paul fondly brings to the attention of the Roman church. They are noted as having worked very hard. The word is
kopiaó (κοπιάω): to grow weary, toil
Usage: (a) I grow weary, (b) I toil, work with effort (of bodily and mental labor alike).
from 2873 /kópos, "exhausting labor" – to labor until worn-out, depleted (exhausted).
This is not merely waiting on tables or general service, it's an intensive labor on behalf of the Gospel with physical and intellectual labor.
So Phoebe, identified as a diákonos, was one who worked physically and intellectually very hard to meet the needs of the Cenchrean church. This is not casual servanthood, or simply a generic service. She was a person of particular note for her noble labor.
Therefore, we are happy to include her into the diaconate of 1 Timothy 3:8, and for today's church, any other qualified woman into the diaconate as well.
So Phoebe, identified as a diákonos, was one who worked physically and intellectually very hard to meet the needs of the Cenchrean church. This is not casual servanthood, or simply a generic service. She was a person of particular note for her noble labor.
Therefore, we are happy to include her into the diaconate of 1 Timothy 3:8, and for today's church, any other qualified woman into the diaconate as well.
Conclusion
We have seen the spectacular faults with Bible translations that lead us to conclusions not borne out by the Greek. This has unfortunately colored great parts of the church's understanding regarding the role of women.
We therefore believe that the Bible permits women in a variety of serving roles, with the sole exception of elder. We also believe that the biblical testimony permits women to speak, or even teach, in church.
No comments:
Post a Comment