|
|
|
Christian Evangelism, Healing, and Teaching Resources
|
|
| Home > Questions and Answers > Can Women Teach and Be Pastors, etc.? | Email this article |
|
Question: "Did the apostle Paul say that women can't have short hair? (1 Corinthians 11:1-16). What did he mean about a woman's "covering," and about women being silent in church, and about women not teaching, and so on? Can women be deacons or elders or pastors or apostles?" Answer: Many Christians have some uncertainty or confusion about various Scriptural issues concerning women, and I have wrestled with these issues as well. Let's jump right in and look at one of the most confusing passages about women, which will help illustrate some important Bible study principles that we will see throughout this article: Women Will be "Saved" through Childbearing
1 Timothy 2:15: "But women will be saved [sozo] through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."When we talk about being "saved," we usually mean that we are saved from the penalty of our sins. In other words, our sins have been forgiven and we will go to heaven when we die. But notice what happens if we take the above verse at face value. We might be tempted to think that if women give birth then their sins will be forgiven and they will go to heaven when they die, because Paul said that they will be "saved" through childbearing. The problem with this interpretation is that if we do a thorough study of what the New Testament teaches about salvation, we will find that salvation is based solely on having faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Nothing else can save us, and therefore the apostle Paul was not speaking of salvation in the verse above. This illustrates an important point about studying the Bible. If we simply take a verse at face value, without doing a prayerful, thorough, and objective study of the rest of Scripture (or at least the rest of the New Testament), then it is easy to form some false conclusions. Now let's take a look at the Greek word for "saved" in the verse above. The Greek word that Paul used is sozo, which actually has several meanings. According to Strong's Greek Dictionary, sozo means "heal, preserve, save (self), do well, be (make) whole." So in addition to salvation, the Greek word sozo also has the meaning of healing a person, and saving a person (physically), and making a person whole. Here are some examples of how this Greek word is used in the New Testament: Matthew 1:21: "She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save [sozo] his people from their sins.""Since this Greek word for "saved" has several meanings, let's look at each meaning (using the examples above) and see how they relate to the idea of being "saved through childbearing":
As we can see, 1 Timothy 2:15 ("women will be saved through childbearing") is a difficult verse to understand. The important thing to recognize here is that Paul was not teaching that women will receive salvation (i.e. be allowed into heaven) based on whether or not they have given birth to children, because that would contradict the clear teaching of Scripture which says that salvation is based on having faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior. We have also seen that it is important not to simply take a verse at face value, but instead we should try to look at the greatest weight of evidence in the Bible to see what God is trying to tell us. In addition, we saw that translations of the Bible can sometimes be misleading, which is why it is often helpful to look at the meanings of the Greek words to get a better idea of what the author was saying. These and other Bible study principles will be important as we try to understand some of the difficult New Testament passages concerning women. Must Women Have Long Hair (or Cover Their Heads)?
1 Corinthians 11:4: "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head."Some of these verses are difficult for us to understand, but a number of Bible scholars agree that this passage needs to be understood in the context of the culture in which Paul lived. Here are some things that various Bible scholars say about this passage: "11:4 ... In the culture of Paul's day, men uncovered their heads in worship to signify their respect for and submission to deity. When a man prayed or prophesied with his head covered, he failed to show the proper attitude toward Christ.Now, when we come across passages that we don't understand (or we don't like), it would be very convenient to say that those passages were only valid in the first century and they don't apply to us today! But we need to be careful because that approach can easily lead us into error. Still, there's no doubt that some New Testament passages do not literally apply to Christians today. For example, in Romans 15:30-31 the apostle Paul urged people to pray that he would be rescued from the unbelievers in Judea, but now there's no point in praying for the apostle Paul because he has been dead for almost two thousand years. Therefore, certain New Testament passages do not apply today as they did in the first century. As we can see in the quotes above, there is some agreement among Bible scholars that in Paul's culture it was appropriate for a woman to physically have a covering over her head during public worship. There are different opinions about whether a woman's long hair was sufficient as a covering, or whether all women (or just married women) had to wear cloth over their heads, but there is general agreement that this was based on the social customs of Paul's time. For example, notice what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 11:6 (above): 1 Corinthians 11:6: "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."Paul said that a woman should cover her head if it is a disgrace for her to have her hair cut or shaved off. It was a disgrace in Paul's culture for a woman to have her hair cut in this way (see the Bible commentary quotes above), but this is not a disgrace in modern Western culture. Therefore, many Bible commentaries agree that Christian women today do not need to obey first-century social customs concerning hair length or a physical "covering." Now, notice that in 1 Corinthians 11:5 (above) Paul said that women should be "covered" when they pray or prophesy, which refers to public prayer or public prophesying in church (according to many Bible commentaries). Then in 1 Corinthians 11:16-18 (above), Paul specifically placed his instructions in the context of church meetings, which demonstrates that women are allowed to pray and prophesy out loud in church. This helps shed some light on another difficult passage concerning women's roles and actions in the church, which we'll look at next. Must Women Be Silent in Church?
1 Corinthians 14:26: "What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church."On the surface, it sounds like Paul was commanding all women to be completely silent in church (verses 34-35, above). But is that really what Paul was saying here? Should women be totally silent from the moment they enter the church until they leave the church? Are they not allowed to verbally greet anyone? Are they not allowed to manage their children while in church? Are they not allowed to have women's group meetings in the church building? Are they not allowed to say anything at all within the church building? To answer these questions, recall that Paul had earlier said that women are allowed to pray or prophesy out loud in church (1 Corinthians 11:5, in the previous section), and therefore Paul could not have been commanding all women to be totally silent in church in verses 34-35 (above). This "silence" means something else. In the passage above, notice that Paul said that everyone has gifts which can be used in church meetings, and he said that anyone can speak a message in tongues or give a word of prophecy in church as long as it is done in an orderly and considerate manner (verses 26-33). Notice that Paul did not exclude women from exercising their spiritual gifts in church. Then Paul said that if anyone (whether a man or a woman) is publicly speaking in tongues, that person should "keep quiet" if no interpretation comes forth (verse 28). "Keep quiet" is the NIV's translation of the Greek word sigao, which means "to keep silent...hold peace," according to Strong's Greek Dictionary. This is the same Greek word that Paul used in verse 30 when he said that a prophet (whether a man or a woman) should stop speaking when another prophet receives a word from the Lord, and it is also the same Greek word that Paul used when he said that women should "remain silent" (verse 34). So in order for a church meeting to be "orderly," there are times when men and women can exercise their spiritual gifts, and there are times when men and women need to be silent. Now let's compare verses 34-35 (above) in several different versions of the Bible. In the following Bible translations, the Greek word ekklesia is translated either as "congregations" or as "churches" or as "assemblies," which is fine, but specifically notice that the NIV has the phrase, "As in all the ekklesia of the saints," at the beginning of a new sentence (unlike the other translations below): "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations [ekklesia] of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches [ekklesia]." (1 Corinthians 14:33-34, NIV)As we can see, the NIV has the phrase, "As in all the ekklesia of the saints," at the beginning of a new sentence, but the other translations (above) have that phrase at the end of the previous sentence. The difference is significant, because if the NIV is correct then this command for women to be silent would be a universal command for all churches, but if the other translations are correct then this would be a command which was originally written to the Corinthian Christians concerning their assemblies (i.e. their church services). There are several indications that the NIV translation is not as accurate as the other translations (above), as we can see when we compare the NIV version of this passage with Young's Literal Translation: 1 Corinthians 14:33-34 (NIV): "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations [ekklesia] of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches [ekklesia]."Here are several things to notice in the NIV and YLT versions above:
We can see this even more clearly by noticing the larger context in 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 (above). Bible scholars often point out that Paul was writing to the Corinthian Christians in order to bring correction to their disorderly church meetings, as 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 (above) describes. In the context of Paul's correction concerning the disorderly church meetings in Corinth, Paul said that wives should stop creating disturbances during the service. Scholars have pointed out that in the first century it was rare for a woman to be educated (as we'll see in a moment), and it has been suggested that men and women might have been segregated on opposite sides of the room during church meetings in the first century. Therefore, if married women had questions about what the preacher or teacher was saying, and especially if they needed to raise their voices in order to ask their husbands across the room, then this would create a disorderly atmosphere in the service. Paul was trying to correct such disorderliness in the Corinthian church (for example by saying that wives should ask questions of their husbands at home), and he said that such disorderly behavior was "shameful." With all of that in mind, here are some things that Bible commentators have written: "Let the women keep silence in the churches. ...It may be that even this prohibition was due to the circumstances that existed in Ephesus, where Timothy was, and in Corinth, and would not apply everywhere. If so, it applies wherever similar circumstances exist, but not elsewhere. Both were Greek churches. Among the Greeks public women were disreputable. For a woman to speak in public would cause the remark that she was shameless. Virtuous women were secluded. Hence it would be a shame for women to speak in the church assembly. It is noteworthy that there is no hint of such a prohibition to any churches except Grecian. Wherever it would be shameful, women ought not to speak." (People's New Testament commentaryFor all of these reasons, the weight of evidence shows that Paul was not commanding all women to be silent in church, but instead he was bringing correction to the church in Corinth for their disorderly meetings. One type of disorderliness was brought about by married women who were creating disturbances by trying to ask questions of their husbands during the service. After saying that wives should ask these questions of their husbands at home, the next thing Paul said was that it is disgraceful for a wife to "speak" in church: 1 Corinthians 14:35: "If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman ["a wife"] to speak in the church."If we simply look on the surface and take this verse at face value, we might be tempted to say that women must not speak at all in church. But we have already seen that women are allowed to speak in church, so we must look deeper in order to properly understand this verse. When we recognize that there are several different Greek words (with different shades of meaning) which can be translated into English as "speak," it helps us discover the most likely meaning of this verse. For example, here is what one Greek dictionary of the New Testament says: "Paul says that it is shameful or vile for wives to speak in church and cause confusion. The word for "speak" is lalein, the inf. of laleo (2980) which in the context of 1 Cor. 14 means to speak in such a way as to cause confusion, in contrast to lego (3004) which means to speak intelligently and understandably. ... If a wife has a question which she needs to have clarified, she must not ask in church and embarrass her husband, but she should ask her husband at home. It should be borne in mind that at the time of Paul's injunction, it was rare for a woman to be educated. Neither should a wife speak in church in such a way as to usurp authority (authenteo [831]) over her husband (1 Tim. 2:11, 12)." (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.101, emphasis added)So when Paul said that it is disgraceful for wives to "speak" in church, the Greek word that he used specifically means, "to speak in such a way as to cause confusion." Paul was concerned about orderliness and peace in church meetings, he was not commanding wives to be totally silent in church. Therefore, if a husband and wife are sitting together in a modern church service, and if the husband and wife occasionally whisper to each other, then they are not violating Paul's command because they are not speaking in such a way as to cause disturbances or disorderliness in the service. The Outward Appearance
1 Timothy 2:8: "I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing."Notice that Paul was addressing all men everywhere (verse 8, above), which shows that he was not limiting these instructions to a specific local situation. Then Paul began verse 9 with the Greek word hosautos, which means "likewise" (see Strong's Greek Dictionary). For example, here is how verse 9 is translated in other versions of the Bible: 1 Timothy 2:9 (KJV): "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"So Paul addressed all men "everywhere" and then he addressed women "likewise," which seems to indicate that his remarks are general principles for the entire Church body. In this passage, Paul said that "women who profess to worship God" should focus on their outward good deeds above their outward appearance, as this Bible commentary describes: "The context requires that we understand these directions as to women, in relation to their deportment in public worship, though the rules will hold good on other occasions also.Paul does not seem to be saying that women cannot dress nicely or that they cannot accessorize, but rather that it would be wrong to overdo it by crossing the line into "luxuriousness" or "gaudiness," so to speak, which would be characteristic of a "spiritual harlot" (as the commentary above puts it). In other words, it's a matter of where our focus is being placed. Are we trying to call attention to our bodies (or our wealth) by the way we dress, which demonstrates pride, or are we focusing more on our inward beauty and outward good deeds to make us attractive? Notice that the apostle Peter echoed Paul's instructions: 1 Peter 3:1: "Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,"Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament says that: "Peter is not forbidding the wearing of clothes and ornaments by women, but the display of finery by contrast." (Robertson's Word Pictures of the New TestamentAgain, we should focus more on outward good deeds (which come from our inward beauty) to make us attractive rather than trying to call attention to our bodies or our wealth by the way that we dress. Are Women Allowed to Be Deacons?
1 Timothy 3:8: "Deacons [diakonos], likewise, are to be men [the word "men" is not in the original Greek here] worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain."In verse 8 (above), the NIV implies that deacons must be men. However, the Greek word for "men" does not appear in this verse in the Greek texts. For example, here's how this verse is translated in other versions of the Bible: "Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;" (1 Timothy 3:8, KJV)Now, in verse 8 (above), notice that the word "deacon" comes from the Greek word diakonos, which means "deacon, minister, servant" (see Strong's Greek Dictionary). Here are some ways that this Greek word is used in the New Testament: John 2:9: "and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants [diakonos] who had drawn the water knew."The above passages demonstrate that household servants are "diakonos," rulers are "diakonos," Jesus is a "diakonos," Paul and Apollos were "diakonos," servants of the devil are "diakonos," and so on. This Greek word is most often used in the sense of "servant," and in fact the function of a "deacon" (diakonos) is to serve in the local church. Notice that the above passages are not referring to the "office" of a deacon because they are not using the word diakonos in the context of the local church. Now let's compare what Paul said about "deacons" in 1 Timothy 3:8-9 and about "women" or "wives" in 1 Timothy 3:11: 1 Timothy 3:8 (KJV): "Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;"In verse 11 (above), some translations of the Bible use the expression "their wives." However, the word "their" does not appear in verse 11 in the Greek texts, which is why "their" is in italics in the KJV (above). When Bible translators add the word "their" (like in the KJV above), it gives the impression that verse 11 is referring to the "wives" of deacons. Verse 11 is referring to "women," and the Greek word for "women" here (a form of the Greek word gune) can have the meaning of "wives" if it's appropriate to the context. In Paul's discussion of deacons, there is nothing in the context which directly refers to husbands or wives or marriage, so it's possible that we should interpret gune as "women" rather than as "wives" in verse 11. But who are these women? Some people believe that they are the wives of the deacons, but again, the context does not directly lead to that conclusion. Another possibility is that they are female deacons ("deaconesses"). For example, notice that the list of qualifications in verse 8 (above) closely matches the list of qualifications in verse 11 (above), which is reasonable if Paul was saying, "Men serving as deacons must have these qualifications [verse 8], and women serving as deacons must be likewise qualified [verse 11]." Consider that if we say that only men can be deacons, then we would have to interpret verse 11 as meaning that a deacon must have a wife who is also qualified to be a deacon (even though she can't actually serve as a deacon) because of the similarity of qualifications in verse 8 and verse 11. But is this really what Paul intended? As we will see later, there is never any requirement that an apostle must have a wife who fits the qualifications for an apostle, nor is there ever any requirement that a pastor must have a wife who fits the qualifications for a pastor, nor is there ever any requirement that an elder must have a wife who fits the qualifications for an elder. It would be unusual if there is a requirement that a deacon must have a wife who fits the qualifications for a deacon, because this does not fit any pattern that we see for all of the other offices in the Church. For all of the above reasons, a number of Bible commentaries argue that Paul was referring to "deaconesses" in verse 11, as in the following examples: "11 - their wives--rather, "the women," that is, the deaconesses. For there is no reason that special rules should be laid down as to the wives of the deacons, and not also as to the wives of the bishops or overseers. Moreover, if the wives of the deacons were meant, there seems no reason for the omission of "their" (not in the Greek). Also the Greek for "even so" (the same as for "likewise," 1 Timothy 3:8, and "in like manner," 1 Timothy 2:9), denotes a transition to another class of persons. Further, there were doubtless deaconesses at Ephesus, such as Phoebe was at Cenchrea (Romans 16:1, "servant," Greek, "deaconess"), yet no mention is made of them in this Epistle if not here; whereas, supposing them to be meant here, the third chapter embraces in due proportion all the persons in the service of the Church. Naturally after specifying the qualifications of the deacon, Paul passes to those of the kindred office, the deaconess. "Grave" occurs in the case of both. "Not slanderers" here, answers to "not double-tongued" in the deacons; so "not false accusers" (Titus 2:3). "Sober" here answers to "not given to much wine," in the case of the deacons (1 Timothy 3:8). Thus it appears he requires the same qualifications in female deacons as in deacons, only with such modifications as the difference of sex suggested. PLINY, in his celebrated letter to Trajan, calls them "female ministers."" (Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown CommentarySo according to various Bible commentaries, Paul was probably referring to female deacons in 1 Timothy 3:11 (above). In fact, two of the above commentaries point out that Pliny (Pliny the Younger, governor of Pontus/Bithynia from 111 A.D. to 113 A.D.) referred to "female ministers" in a letter to the emperor Trajan (the word "minister" means "servant," as in the Strong's definition for diakonos above). Here are some translations of a portion of Pliny's letter to Trajan: "Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses." (University of PennsylvaniaSo according to these and other translators, the governor Pliny wrote to the emperor Trajan concerning some "deaconesses" whom he had questioned about Christianity. If that is the correct interpretation then perhaps there were female deacons back then. Now, imagine that I travel to your town, and I visit your church. Imagine that I am carrying some words of introduction written by my pastor, saying that I am a deacon of the church in my town. What picture does that bring up in your mind? It makes you think of me functioning in the office of a deacon (diakonos) in my church, right? With that in mind, take a look at the following passage: Romans 16:1: "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea."In the above passage, a lady named Phoebe was traveling to Rome, and the apostle Paul had written some words of introduction for her, saying that she was a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea. This is exactly the same as the illustration I described a moment ago in which I traveled to your town with some words of introduction from my pastor. Therefore, if my illustration caused you to picture me functioning in the office of a deacon at my church, then it is reasonable to picture Phoebe functioning in the office of a deacon at her church (based on the passage above). Some people might argue that Phoebe was simply a "servant," and that she did not hold the "office" of a deacon. However, the above passage does not make such a distinction, and in fact the essential definition of the office of a deacon is that a person is a "diakonos" in the local church (as we saw earlier). The above passage specifically describes Phoebe in this way. Notice that Paul gave her a strong recommendation, which indicates that she was faithful and effective in her calling. Paul specifically pointed out that Phoebe was a diakonos in her home church, for the purpose of informing the Roman Christians of her status at her church. Paul did not simply refer to Phoebe as a "servant," but instead he called her "a servant of the church," which is specifically the definition of the office of deacon. In addition, notice that in Romans 16:2 (above) Paul asked the Roman Christians to give Phoebe any help that she might need, and he said that she had been a great help to many people (including Paul himself). This is perhaps a further indication of her status as a committed and hard-working deaconess at her home church. Based on what we have seen so far, the weight of evidence leans heavily towards the view that women are allowed to hold the office of a deacon. However, it's important to try to be thorough when we study the Bible, and here is a passage which casts doubt on this view: 1 Timothy 3:12: "A deacon [diakonos] must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well."This is interesting, because Paul seems to have commended Phoebe as a faithful and committed deaconess of her church, yet in the above passage Paul stated that deacons must be married men who manage their children well. So can women be deacons, or can't they? Well, let's consider some questions for a moment. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who are unmarried? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who are childless? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who don't manage their children very well (perhaps their children are "wild" or they don't obey very well or they are hard to handle, etc.)? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense. So the question is, how literally are we supposed to take 1 Timothy 3:12 (above)? If Paul intended for his statement to be taken completely literally then that's fine, it just means that Phoebe was not a deaconess and that deacons must all be married men who manage their children and households well. But is it possible that Paul did not actually intend for his statement in 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) to be taken in its most literal sense? Consider that Paul made many male-oriented statements such as the following, which we don't interpret in their most literal sense: Romans 8:14: "because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God."In the above passages, notice that Paul had a tendency to speak in the masculine form by referring to "sons" and "brothers," and notice that we mentally interpret these statements as if Paul had said, "sons and daughters" and "brothers and sisters." In the majority of male-oriented statements that Paul made, we don't take them completely literally. In fact, in English we tend to speak in the masculine form as well, without meaning it completely literally. For example, imagine that you hear someone say, "If a Christian commits a sin then he should repent and confess his sin and God will forgive him." When we hear statements like this, we mentally interpret such statements as if they are referring to men and women, just as we mentally interpret Paul's statements above as if they are referring to men and women. Since Paul had a tendency to speak in the masculine form without intending for it to be taken completely literally, then perhaps this is what he was doing when he said that a diakonos must be the husband of one wife and must manage his children and his household well (1 Timothy 3:12). He might simply have meant something like, "If a deacon is married, then he or she must be a one-woman man or a one-man woman, and if he or she has kids then he or she must be able to manage his or her children and his or her household well." Notice how awkward it is when we try to be as specific as possible in such a statement, which is why we rarely use "he or she" and "his or her" in English. Instead, we tend to use "he" and "him" even when we are referring to men and women in general. What it boils down to is that if a church or denomination takes 1 Timothy 3:12 in its most literal sense then we would expect their deacons to all be married men who manage their children and their households well. But if a church or denomination takes 1 Timothy 3:12 as being simply a masculine form of speech (similar to many other male-oriented statements that Paul made), then they might have female deacons. One interesting fact is that the apostle Paul was unmarried and therefore probably childless (1 Corinthians 7:7-8). If his statement in 1 Timothy 3:12 was meant in its most literal sense then it would mean that the apostle Paul, who referred to himself as a diakonos in 1 Corinthians 3:5 and who wrote virtually half of the New Testament, was not qualified to function as a deacon in a local church! This hardly seems to make any sense. Granted Paul was called to be an apostle and not a deacon, but it seems beyond reason that he would be unfit to serve as a deacon in a local church. For example, Paul frequently described himself as a servant, and he often described the ways that he served the saints (see Romans 1:1, 9, 7:6, 15:8, 17, 25, 31, 1 Corinthians 3:5, 4:1, 2 Corinthians 4:5, 6:4, 11:8, 13:4, Galatians 1:10, Ephesians 3:7, Philippians 1:1, Colossians 1:23, 25, 2 Timothy 1:3, Titus 1:1). Since Paul had a servant's heart and served the believers in every way possible, is it reasonable to believe that he was unfit to be a servant in a local church (i.e. a deacon) simply because he was not married? Yet this is what we must assume if we take 1 Timothy 3:12 in its most literal sense. For all of the above reasons, the weight of evidence seems to lean toward the view that women can serve as deacons in the local church. Are Women Allowed to Be Elders?
Acts 20:17: "From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church."According to the above passages, elders were "overseers" and "shepherds" of the church, and they directed the affairs of the church, and some of them were the preachers and teachers in the church. Here are some of Paul's qualifications for an elder ("overseer"): 1 Timothy 3:1: "Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task."In the above passage, Paul described some qualifications for an "overseer" (which comes from the Greek word episkopos, meaning "bishop, overseer," according to Strong's Greek Dictionary). Notice that Paul gave similar instructions to Titus, using the terms "elder" (presbuteros) and "overseer" (episkopos) interchangeably: Titus 1:4: "To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior."A number of Bible commentaries point out that the words "elder," "bishop," and "overseer" all refer to the same office. For example: "In 1 Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:5, 7, an elder denotes the dignity of the office, and episkopos, bishop or overseer, denotes its authority and duties (cf. 1 Pet. 2:25; 5:1, 2, 4)." (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.635, emphasis added)So the words "elder," "bishop," and "overseer" all refer to the same office. In addition, some of the elders were the preachers and teachers in their churches, as the following passage describes: 1 Timothy 5:17: "The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching."Here are some things that Bible commentaries say about this verse: "Especially they who labor in the word and doctrine. The class we call preachers, or pastors." (People's New Testament commentaryAgain, the terms "elder," "bishop," and "overseer" all refer to the same office, and among the elders there were some who were the preachers (or pastors) and teachers. In order to determine whether or not women can be elders, let's take a look at most of the qualifications which Paul listed in the passages above:
If a church believes that the phrase, "husband of one woman," must be taken literally, then we would not expect any of their elders to be women. However, if a church believes that "husband of one woman" is a general statement which was simply written in the masculine form, does this mean that some of their elders can be women? Not necessarily. We still need to look at the weight of evidence in the New Testament concerning elders. For example, when we studied about deacons we saw several reasons why there might have been female deacons in the first and second centuries. Let's see if those reasons apply to elders as well:
Sometimes people will point out that the word presbutis (the feminine form of the Greek word for "elder") occurs in Titus 2:3, and they argue that this is an example of female elders in the New Testament. However, if we look at that word in context then it becomes clear that it has nothing to do with the office of an elder: Titus 2:3: "Likewise, teach the older women [presbutis] to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good."The above passage uses the feminine form of the Greek word for "elder," but it is simply speaking of "elder women" as compared to "younger women." It has nothing to do with the office of an elder. Occasionally I receive emails from people who argue that women are just as capable as men to hold the office of an elder (or pastor, etc.), and I completely agree! Throughout my 20-year secular career most of my bosses have been women, and I have had a good relationship with all of them, and they all did a great job. Similarly, I have known many Christian women who seem to have great leadership skills, and who know the Bible very well, and who have a strong relationship with the Lord. However, the argument that "women are just as capable as men" misses the point. The issue is not about men's and women's capabilities, the issue is about men's and women's God-given roles. If God does not have a problem with women being elders, then we should not have a problem with it either. Similarly, if God has not made that role available to women, then we should accept His decision. Now, when Paul said that an elder must be "the husband of but one wife" (1 Timothy 3:2, above), what exactly did he mean? The literal Greek in that verse is "aner of one gune," which can mean either "husband of one wife" or "man of one woman" (see Strong's Greek Dictionary, for example). This means that an elder must only be married to one person (which excludes polygamy), and it also means that an elder cannot be an adulterer. Notice that Paul did not specifically say anything here about an elder being divorced or widowed. Some people assume that Paul meant to exclude divorced or widowed people from being elders, but is that really a valid assumption? Consider that if an unsaved man gets divorced, and then later he receives salvation, then all of his previous sins are forgiven. At that moment he stands before God as a person who has done nothing wrong (because he has received the righteousness of Christ). Similarly, a Christian man might be married to an unsaved or adulterous wife who decides to divorce him, through no fault of his own. In such a case, the man is divorced for Scriptural reasons (see for example Divorce and Remarriage in the Church  ).
In addition, it is not a sin for a Christian man to be a widower (assuming that he didn't kill his wife, of course). In these scenarios the man has done nothing wrong, and we have no basis for punishing a person who has done nothing wrong. As the above scenarios demonstrate, a married person (male or female) who has not sinned can end up divorced or widowed. Since that person has done nothing wrong then he or she would be "above reproach" in those situations, which is the first qualification that Paul listed in 1 Timothy 3:2 (above). For this reason, it seems unreasonable to have a problem with an elder or a pastor or a deacon being divorced or widowed if he or she has not done anything wrong. In fact, even if a person
has
done something wrong in the past, if we see evidence of genuine repentance then there should be room for forgiveness and restoration.
Are Women Allowed to Be Pastors?
Before we try to answer the question of whether or not women can be pastors, let's first take a look at what the New Testament says about pastors. In the NIV (and in other translations), the word "pastor" only occurs in this verse: Ephesians 4:11: "It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers"The word "pastors" in verse 11 (above) is translated from the Greek word poimen, and here is what this Greek word means: "shepherd, pastor." (Strong's Greek Dictionary)So the Greek word which is translated as "pastor" really means "shepherd." Here is every place in the New Testament where this Greek word is used: Matthew 9:36: "When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd [poimen]."We can see that the Greek word poimen is always translated as "shepherd" in the NIV (and in other versions of the Bible), with the single exception of Ephesians 4:11 ("pastors"). The word "pastor" does not appear anywhere else in the New Testament. Notice that in modern times we refer to certain people as "pastors," even though the New Testament uses the Greek word for "shepherds." In the following passages we can see that elders were "shepherds of the church," and elders were "overseers" of the church, and elders "directed the affairs of the church," and there were elders "whose work [was] preaching and teaching." In other words, all of these duties that we normally associate as being a pastor's duties were in reality done by elders. As you read the following passages, notice the governmental or church offices which are described in the New Testament: Apostles, elders, and deacons. Where are the pastors? Every time you see the word "elders" or "overseers" in the following passages, ask yourself the question, "Why not pastors?" Acts 11:29: "The disciples, each according to his ability, decided to provide help for the brothers living in Judea."We saw earlier that the English word "pastor" only occurs in Ephesians 4:11, and it is translated from a Greek word which is always translated as "shepherd" in all of the other occurrences in the New Testament. Notice in the above passages that the governmental or church offices are apostles, elders, and deacons, and notice that the elders were "shepherds of the church," and elders were "overseers" of the church, and elders "directed the affairs of the church," and there were elders "whose work [was] preaching and teaching." Where is the office of a pastor? Consider that our modern church hierarchy often has a senior pastor at the top (who is the visible or physical head of that church and who does most of the preaching), perhaps followed by some associate pastors, then perhaps a board of elders, then perhaps a board of deacons. However, there is a growing number of people who feel that our modern form of church does not conform to the church structure that we see in the New Testament, and this has led many people to leave traditional churches and join the "house church" movement. Personally, I feel that people should attend the church in which the Lord has specifically placed them, which might or might not be a "house church" (for help in discerning which church the Lord wants you to go to, see my article called How to Hear the Voice of God). If you're interested in more information about "house churches," here are some websites that might be helpful: The question that we're trying to answer in this section is whether or not women can be pastors, and what we have seen is that there is no specific office called "pastor" in the New Testament. Instead, it was the elders who performed the functions which we think of as being a pastor's duties. Therefore, if we say that women can be elders, then we're also saying that women can perform the duties that we associate with pastors (because "pastors" in the New Testament were elders). Similarly, if we say that women cannot be elders, then we're also saying that women cannot perform the duties that we associate with pastors. In fact, some people argue that there should not be an office called "pastor" at all. Before we leave the subject of pastors, there is a woman named Priscilla who might have a bearing on this discussion. Here are all of the references to her: Acts 18:2: "There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them,"It's interesting that when Priscilla and Aquila are mentioned, Priscilla's name is usually mentioned first. This might imply that Priscilla was more prominent in some way than her husband was, as the NIV Study Bible suggests: "Priscilla and Aquila. The order of the names used here (but cf. v. 2) may indicate the prominent role of Priscilla or her higher social position" (NIV Study Bible, p.2135, emphasis added)Priscilla and Aquila held church meetings in their home (Romans 16:3-5, 1 Corinthians 16:19, above), which is an example of a "house church" in the New Testament. We're not told what roles Priscilla and Aquila had in that church, and they are never called elders or pastors (or anything else). All we are told is that the church met in their home. For example, last year the Lord placed me in a house church, and we had church in several people's apartments, although we never met in the home of the leader of the house church. In other words, the fact that we met in different people's homes did not imply that those people were the "pastors" or "elders." Similarly, Priscilla and Aquila are never called pastors or elders (or anything else); we are simply told that the church met in their home. Some people argue that Priscilla must have been a pastor of her church, but this is going beyond what we are told about her. What it boils down to is that there are no clear examples of female pastors anywhere in the New Testament. Most of us can probably think of Godly Christian women who would make good pastors, and I would like to believe that women can hold the office of a pastor (if there is really meant to be such an office), but where is the Scriptural evidence to support that? If God allows women to be "pastors" in the church, He didn't say anything about it anywhere in the New Testament! Are Women Allowed to Be Apostles?
Just as there are no clear examples of female "pastors" or female elders in the New Testament, there are also no clear examples of female apostles in the New Testament. Here are all of the people in the New Testament who possibly had an apostolic ministry: Matthew 10:2: "These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;"Based on the wording in the NIV, the above people might have had an apostolic ministry in the first century. One thing to notice is that they are all men, with the possible exception of one of the people mentioned in Romans 16:7: Romans 16:7: "Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."Some people argue that the above verse describes a female apostle, but this argument is based on two assumptions: One, that Junias was a woman, and two, that Andronicus and Junias were apostles. Concerning the first assumption, scholars are divided over whether or not Junias was a woman. Some ancient manuscripts have "Junia" in this verse, but other manuscripts have "Junias," so there are differences of opinion about whether this person's name should have a masculine or a feminine ending. Some people say that Andronicus and Junias must have been husband and wife based on the fact that their names are paired together in Romans 16:7 (above), which would mean that Junias was a woman. However, notice what Paul wrote a few verses later: Romans 16:12: "Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord."Tryphena and Tryphosa were both women, and notice that their names are paired together in this verse. Therefore, we can't claim that Andronicus and Junias must have been husband and wife just because their names are paired together. So the argument that there was a female apostle in the New Testament is based on a single verse (Romans 16:7, above), but scholars can't agree on whether the person named "Junias" (or "Junia") in that verse was a man or a woman. That's not very strong evidence to "prove" that there were any female apostles in the first century. In addition, notice that the vague phrase, "outstanding among the apostles" (Romans 16:7, above) does not prove that Andronicus and Junias were apostles. It might simply mean that they were highly esteemed by the apostles. For example, here are some things that several Bible commentaries say about this verse: "Rom 16:7 - Andronicus and Junias (Andronicou kai Iounian). The first is a Greek name found even in the imperial household. The second name can be either masculine or feminine." (Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament |