Women and Men: A Scriptural Analysis

This is a response I had to do for my theology class.  I have avoided this topic for as long as I can remember but the Lord has finally broken through in me and I needed to figure out what I believed on the topic of gender roles/women in ministry as it is foundational for what the Lord has called me to do later in life.  It's long but I feel very good about it. I choose to do this particular response not of my own will, for the Father has finally broken through in me to research and attempt to understand what He has set down in scripture regarding this topic.  I normally shy away from this debate because it creates so much division and hurt, not only within the church, but amongst friends and family as well.  All the times I have encountered this specific debate I have felt an extreme anguish in my heart and spirit, and have been tremendously saddened by hurtful comments and lack of concern for unity in the body.  People choose to be closed to hearing opposing views which creates walls and strongholds.  I think this is what I feel/sense whenever this discussion comes about.  However, the Lord has called me to speak truth to men specifically and contribute to revival of men of in our nation as well as the world.  As such, I need to be firmly rooted in what I believe on this topic as it will affect whatever ministry our Abba has called me to.  Furthermore, I did not expect to write the previous sentences in this thread, it just kind of happened.  I suppose I feel context to my response needs to be given. Anyway, I shall begin with a slight overview of the two very distinct sides to this 'disagreement.'  But first, what do evangelical Christians all affirm?  Well, that both genders are "created in the image of God."  This is straightforward and direct in Genesis 1:26-27.  Both men and women are formed with equal dignity, value and worth as stated in Across the Spectrum.  Second, all believers, male and female, are gifted with the Holy Spirit for ministry and the uplifting of the body.          There is no doubt in my mind that all of these things are true.  I affirm them with full confidence and believe there need not be debate on the aforementioned points.  However, the difficulties come with the interpretation of scripture in regards to gender roles and women in ministry.  What follows is my critique and attempted understanding of the views with personal thoughts thrown in.  I have been processing my thoughts for most of the day now and it has been enlightening/difficult/eye-opening.  Here' goes. The Egalitarian view essentially affirms the 'oneness' of humanity in that because we are all created in the image of God, there should be no distinction among leadership roles.  Equality among genders in regards to the church means leadership based on gifts, not gender.  This view has a difficult time with verses that "express forbid women to exercise spiritual authority over men."  Across the Spectrum cites 1Tim. 2:11-14 directly which says, "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness.  I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.  For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." But the next verse says, 15"yet she will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control."  I am not entirely sure what the implications are of verse 15 but I wonder why it was left out.  I do recall reading something today on this topic that we as humanity are made complete in each other.  Man is not complete without woman, as is the same for women not being complete without men. As for the command to "rule" over creation, yes it does seem to be given to both male and female.  As a matter of fact Gen. 1:27 says "...in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."  God then gives the command to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth."  But let's backtrack here.  God says in v26 "let us make man in our image, after our likeness."  First, man does not mean male here, it means mankind, or rather, humanity.  So then God says, "And let THEM have dominion over..."  How can there be a them if Eve has not even been created yet? (the Bible uses the word made in reference to Eve which actually means built, so God built Eve from Adam's rib)   She is not taken from Adam until v22!  Does this mean there was not necessarily gender yet?   The beginning of chapter 2 states how man/woman (as we understand it) came into being.  2:5-7 "When no bush of the field (or open country) was yet in the land (or earth) and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up--for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land (the first time it rains in history is during the flood of Noah), and there was no man to work on the ground, and a mist (or spring) was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground--then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature."  So mankind, humanity, did not even come alive until chapter two, after God had given the command to have dominion over all the earth.   Then God says, v18 "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make a helper fit for him (or I will make a helper corresponding to him).  Because God had given the command to man to work the garden he was alone.  And yet, God, in the previous chapter, had already created male and female in His likeness.  But now, in chapter 2, there begins a distinction between man and woman.  The following verses say how God brought all the animals to Adam (meaning man) to name, but there was no helper for him.   did not find this suitable at all.  So already, God finds that it is not good for humanity, us, to be alone.  We are created to be in relationship with others!  So God, in v21-22 now, causes Adam to fall into a deep sleep and God takes a rib 'out of' Adam and made (built) woman and "brought her to the man."  Adam then says, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken our of Man." Then follows one of the most important verses in scripture, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh (when the marriage is consummated in sex, well, it should be in marriage or else the one flesh things is screwed up and you have people becoming one flesh with many people.  This leads to terrible terrible emotional trauma and spiritual turmoil within and around said person).  Notice how it says, "hold fast to his WIFE," not girlfriend, not boyfriend, not random guy/girl at the club, but WIFE. Sex has now been set down for marriage between husband and wife in vs. 24. Back to 1 Timothy.  Yes, it is true that the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.  HOWEVER, let's take a look at the scriptures here.  In Gen. 3:1-6 there follows a conversation between the serpent (Satan) and the woman (Eve).  The serpent says to the woman, "Did God actually say 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden?"  (The word 'You' used here is in plural form in the Hebrew, so God commanded both man and woman this)  v2 "And the woman said to the serpent, 'We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, 'You (again in plural form) shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you (plural) touch it, lest you die.'  The serpent then goes on to say how you will not surely die, and then the woman sees that the tree of knowledge of good and evil is good for food, and then she "took of it's fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband WHO WAS WITH HER, and he ate." Whoa whoa whoa, so the man was with the woman the entire time!  This is evidenced by the plural form of you and verse 6 which clearly states that the man was with her.  So now, man and woman realize they are naked, make clothes to cover themselves and hide.  But God is walking in the garden "in the cool (or wind) of the day" as man and woman are hiding amongst the trees, and God "called to the man and said to him, "Where are you?"  OK. STOP.   The fact that God calls to Adam implies that Adam was the one with the responsibility here.    This also implies that Adam had spiritual authority because he was the one God had called to for an explanation.  Otherwise, would God not have called to woman?  I mean, she was the one who was deceived and then gave the fruit to Adam.  However, Adam shirked his responsibility in looking out for his wife and now is being held accountable by God for it.  God asks Adam in v11, "Who told you that you were naked?  Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?"  In chapter 2:16, before woman was even created from Adam, God tells Adam, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."  God gave that command directly to Adam before woman had even been created!  So it seems to me that it was Adam's responsibility to tell his wife about this command, which he did because woman tells Satan (the serpent) that they are not supposed to eat of that particular tree.  Therefore, it was Adam's responsibility to make sure neither of them fell into that temptation. Unfortunately, woman did, with Adam right there, and now there is punishment. To the serpent the Lord cursed him to go around on his belly in the dust for all the days of his life.  And this next part interests me, v15"I will put enmity (meaning hatred, hostile feelings, animosity, antagonism) between you and the woman, and between your offspring (seed) and her offspring; he shall bruise your head and you shall bruise his heel."  I wonder if that's the reason why a lot of women/children are afraid of, and/or hate creepy crawly things?  Now obviously there are men to who don't like them but from the years I've lived, it seems to me that girls and kids are more fearful and disliking of snakes and creepy crawly things.  Just a thought. To the woman, who still has not been named, at least to our knowledge, the Lord says, v16 "I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children.  Your desire shall be for (the meaning of this for is against, which I don't really understand) your husband and he shall rule over you."  We modern day folk take the words rule and submission to be a negative, hierarchal type of thing which it is most definitely not.    Man ruling over woman does not mean, forcing woman to be a slave, make all his food, bring him his slippers and paper, do all the chores, etc, it's not like that at all.  I think it means responsible for.  Man is to be responsible for woman.  That is a huge calling which I think men today, generally speaking, have failed greatly at.  To Adam He said, v17"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.  By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground..."  So here it seems that God is given Adam the curse of toil, or working the ground.  It seems to me that this is a role that men have been given: to work and provide by the sweat of their brows.  And to women it seems that they have been given the role of child birthing and, subsequently, rearing.  ONE ROLE IS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OTHER.  Each role is equally as important and serves as a compliment to each other, God created woman to be a helper, or correspondent, to Adam.  God created Adam to be responsible and take care of his wife, which is the place where lots of men today struggle, and quite frankly, fail at.   And in v20 woman finally gets a name, Eve, because she was the mother of all living. Woman is given the task of being a mother.  v23"therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken."  Man has been given the task to work and toil. So in the very beginning of scripture we see God create man and woman for a unique, and specific purpose.  One is not to be lorded over the other.  Our society has twisted the terms and created negative stigmas for words such as rule and submission.  These two were originally meant to be done in a respecting and helpful way, not an oppressive and indignant way. With these roles now laid out I would like to turn back to the original debate.  Paul is saying in 1 Timothy that he expressly forbids a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man.  But let's take a look at the context here.  First of all, Paul is writing a personal letter to Timothy who had been appointed to lead the church in Ephesus.  This church was plagued with false teachers, therefore needing doctrinal correction, and needed instruction on orderly worship as well.  In chapter 2:8 Paul writes, "I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling (this implies that there were men who were angry with each other and quarreling and praising God while perhaps judging others and then quarreling/arguing about how to worship); likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness--with good works."  This implies that there were women who were coming to worship at that church scantily clad, and super dressed up with ultra expensive items perhaps to get the attention of others.  Women who profess godliness, should not be doing these things but she be acting in a good way and in modesty. So Paul says that he does not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man because woman was created to be a helper to man.  In this particular church in Ephesus it seems that there were women who were lording knowledge over men and perhaps finding pride in that.  They might have been trying to teach deceptive things, (false prophets) and this these women should not be teaching over the men appointed to lead the church, namely Timothy and possibly others.  v15"Yet she will  be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.  This could mean that the women acting out should continue on in faith and love and holiness with self-control.  And it also seems that Paul is taking it back to Genesis with the whole child-bearing thing, maybe saying remember your role is to be a helper not a disruption. Also, a lot of people take this verse and others like in a mean and condescending way.  NOT AT ALL.  When Paul was writing this he was not thinking to himself, "Those darn women, why don't they just submit to their husbands and shut up in church?  Why don't they just be good women and let the men do all the teaching?"  UHHH, no.  Paul had a very good relationship with the women who were authority figures in the church.  Although there are not many, let's take Priscilla for example.  She is actually the only woman mentioned in scripture with any kind of authority in a church setting, other than Phoebe who Paul greets as a deaconess, and Dorcus (Tabitha) whom Peter raised from the dead.  I will get into that later though.  Priscilla, or Prisca, which was her formal name, was married to Aquila.  They had just come from Italy because the Emperor had made a decree saying that Jews could not live in Rome.  Paul lived with them and worked with them.  They had their own business as leather-makers which Paul took part in.  They came with Paul to Syria and then to Ephesus where Priscilla and Aquila stayed.  Here they set up a church in their own home where they taught the ways of Jesus.      Then Apollos came through, an "eloquent man, competent in the scriptures" (acts 18:24) and he began teaching.  v25 "He spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John."  So Priscilla and Aquila v26"took  him and explained to him the way of God more accurately."  The Bible does not say that Priscilla alone taught him, but that they both, as a couple taught him.  This was in a church setting.  If it were outside of a church setting I don't think it would such a big deal if it was just Priscilla.  I mean, I need clarity on a lot of things regarding spirituality and the scriptures and lots of times there are women who fill me with wisdom and can instruct me wisely.  But I think in 1Timothy Paul is referring to a pastoring and preaching to the church body. So the next time we see Priscilla and Aquila they are in Rome and Paul greets them specifically in Rom. 16. asking to  greet (Rom. 16:3) "Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks but all the churches of the Gentiles give thanks as well."  Prisca is mentioned before her husband Aquila numerous times which is odd for this time period, implying her as the more authoritative or stronger one perhaps.  However, this does not mean that she controlled Aquila or lead the household necessarily.   This is a prime example of a powerful husband/wife team in ministry.  In 1 Corinthians 16:19 Paul greets them "warmly" and uses Aquila's name first this time, adding power to the 'power couple' argument. And finally in 2Timothy 4:19, as Paul awaits execution, he heads his list of greetings with Prisca and Aquila.  Thus, it is demonstrated that Paul was excellent friends with a strong woman of the Lord and did not think women should shut up and be put in their place.  Also, I wonder if Priscilla and Aquila had kids.  Because if they did not then it may make lots of sense as to why Prisca was so active in teaching and working.  Or they had kids that were grown and gone.  Otherwise, the couple may have been busier raising them.  The same goes for Dorcus, she was a perfect example of a well respected woman in Jewish society.  She was a widow and probably fairly old so her children, if she had any, would most likely have been grown and doing their own thing in life.  She "was full of good works and acts of charity" and the community loved her dearly (Rom. 9:36).  Scripture does not say anything specific regarding her being a leader of any church though. But, during this timeframe it is incredibly important to note the Greek ideals of the time period.  Greek philosophy was greatly admired at the time in the Mediterranean world, and it had a profound impact on the way that people saw their world.  One of the greatest philosophers, Plato, proposed the theory of dualism, suggesting that everything in the cosmos had an equal and opposite other.  This theory had a profound impact on the way women were viewed, and it was not to women's advantage.  On the one side was man, civilization, reason\logic, good and light.  While on the other side was woman, nature, emotion, evil and darkness.  This next section was taken from a website which speaks on the issue of Jewish women and the current thought process of the surrounding cultures. Keep in mind that      Civilization was the ideal; Nature was mistrusted and potentially dangerous      Logic and reason were admired; emotion was something to be overcome      Goodness was always preferable to evil.      Light, especially in the pre-industrial world, was preferred to darkness. These are examples only, but they show that Platonic dualism placed women like Tabitha/Dorcas in a negative category. Women were closer to the natural/animal world than men. By nature they were irrational and untrustworthy, and therefore unfit to make their own decisions and govern their own lives. They had to be looked after and controlled, never treated as equals.  This differed from the traditional Jewish way of looking at the world, which saw all things in creation as integrated and complementary, rather than as opposites of each other. An example of this is the creation story of Eve, which relates that the first woman was created from a rib taken by God from Adam's side, thereby suggesting that a man could never be fully complete unless he was in partnership with a woman.  Jewish and Jewish/Christian women resisted the ideas of Platonic dualism, which patronized them and diminished their status. While Christianity remained a Jewish sect, the status of women within the Christian communities was high.But as the ideas of Christianity moved out into the Gentile, Hellenised world - of which Joppa was a prime example, the first Christians found they had to use the Greek philosophical framework. So Jesus' original ideal of mutual respect between the sexes was watered down and changed. Women were given roles that were acceptable in the outside, Hellenistic culture. The Christian church stepped back from the radical ideals of the first Jewish/Christians. We can also look at the two great female leaders in the Old Testament, Deborah and Miriam.  Deborah was a Judge during a time when Israel did not have a ruler.  She was a prophetess as well as the leader of the people at the time.  The people of Israel would come up to her for judgment.  Now the word judge is different than we think nowadays.  A Judge then was someone who in times of peace had authority to settle disputes and problems and, in times of war, act as a rallying point to gather tribes and organize resistance.  Deborah did all these things and helped defeat the forces of Sicera by appointing Barak to fight against him.  It is important to note, however, than she did not teach in a synagogue or temple or anything of that nature.  As a matter of fact, not even the rest of the  male judges taught on spiritual matters.  They were mostly appointed by God to rescue Israel from foreign countries who were afflicting and/or oppressing them. Miriam was the sister of Aaron and Moses and was a leader of the women of the people of Israel.  She was not a spiritual leader of the people as this was Moses job primarily and then Aaron after him.  When Aaron and Miriam questioned Moses authority in Numbers 12, the Lord calls all three of them together and says, "Hear my words; If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream.  Not so with my servant Moses.  He is faithful in all my house.  With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the Lord.  Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?"  After that, the Lord leaves them and Miriam is left leprous for questioning Moses authority. I do not know why just Miriam was leprous as Aaron spoke against Moses too but it is clear that spiritual authority is given to men.  The Levitical priests, those who could go into the Holy of Holies and perform the sacrifices for the whole nation of Israel, were all men. But, as stated earlier, this does not undermine the role of women whatsoever.  I personally see women as gifted specifically in song and dance.  Miriam lead the nation of Israel in song and dance.  Exodus 15:20-21 states, "Then Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a tambourine in her hand, and all the women went out after her with tambourines and dancing."  It then records the song of Miriam.  Deborah also sang in Judges 5 after the defeat of the Canaanite armies.  I have a couple sisters in Christ who will dance and sing loudly and beautifully when the Spirit of the Lord is upon them.  I also think Jesus chose men for his disciples for a reason.  The argument against it says that this was merely a cultural act to acquiesce to the culture of the time.  But Jesus had proven many times before that He was countercultural and was perfectly able to have chosen women to be his disciples and start the church.  However, he chose men, I believe because of the responsibility we have as spiritual heads. However, I certainly do believe that the Lord uses women to step up when men have failed to fulfill their roles.  I do not know if this was the case with the deaconess Phoebe mentioned in Romans 16 though.  Scripture does not expand upon this.  In Across the Spectrum the Complementarian View holds, "three considerations caution against interpreting this fact as evidence that the biblical ideal for male headship has been overturned.  God has demonstrated his willingness to accommodate his will to imperfect circumstances when necessary.  God was at times willing to use pagan kings, false prophets, even donkeys to speak his Word and further his purposes when other more appropriate means were not available.  So, too, God has at times acquiesced to using women as spiritual leaders when men were unwilling to fulfill the task." I don't know if I agree entirely with this statement as I feel that women have not been used in scripture to be spiritual leaders over men, once.  I find that each time women are seen in the Bible in reference to spiritual teaching or authority in the church, there is accompaniment of a man.  I also don't like how this is phrased with the donkeys and all that.  I feel like they are comparing women to pagan kings, donkeys etc, and I just don't like that at all. But again, I do think that when men fail at their role, as I think they have been recently, women will step up and take the reins.  This can result in chaos in the home and marriages as well.  Not because women are stepping up but because men are failing in their roles, which causes women to take on too much.  If you haven't noticed, there is a 50% divorce rate in the U.S.  The same is for Christian marriages as well.  We also have an incredibly high rate of child abuse, runaways, and suicides.  100 years ago, this was not the case.  I think it's because people understood more their God-given roles.  Men, generally speaking, want respect.  They will do whatever they can to get that respect, even if it involves yelling, abuse, power trips or anger.  Women, generally speaking, long to be loved.  And they will sometimes do whatever they can to get that love.  Sometimes it can be dressing inappropriately to get attention from guys or it could be cutting or becoming entrenched in anorexia/bulimia to get skinnier to be loved and accepted among a certain group. Whatever it is, God is the almighty King who rules.  His word is final and His plan for our lives is perfect.  I believe men and women are both equally gifted but society and our fallen, sinful minds have twisted biblical language to mean something that it is not.  Submission and rule is not something evil.  It is not meant to create inequality, it is meant to help husbands and wives work together to glorify God and work successfully in ministry, as we saw with Priscilla and Aquila.   Madeleine L'Engle writes, "Indeed we are in a bind.  For thousands of years we have lived in a paternalistic society, where women have allowed men to make God over in their own masculine image...To substitute person for man has ruined what used to be a good theological word, calling up the glory of God's image within us.  Now, at best, it's a joke."  Our pathetic attempts at equality are just ridiculous.  She continues on with the beginning of a desexed hymn, "Dear Mother-Father of personkind...   No.  It won't do.  This is not equality.  Perhaps we should drop the word woman altogether and use man, recognizing that we need both male and female to be whole."  I agree.   We need each other to survive.  We were created to complement one another and the enemy, I believe, has twisted words and word usage, he has twisted society and the way we interpret scripture, making us believe that scripture teaches that  men are to 'rule' over women and women are to be gentle, quiet spirits, and stupidly submissive in all things to their husbands and to men.  Well, to that I SAY NO. I hope this makes sense.  I seriously, studied and worked on this issue all day and I feel very strongly that the Spirit has helped me gather my thoughts and put them down coherently.  This also happened when I wrote my senior sem paper.  Thank you God.  I can't say for certain that all the views expressed in here are correct but I can say that it is what I believe about the topic.