Over on
Prophetic Ministries Australia, a post was published titled
10 Points About Women in Ministry. Clearly this person's friend does not understand what women in ministry looks
like, or even what constitutes "women in ministry" as his 10 points are
extremely eisegetical, erroneous, ridiculous, and nonsensical. Allow me to
demonstrate:
1. The Bible names a female apostle (Romans 16:7).
No, the Bible
does not name a female "apostle." Most English translations say she was "
of
note among," "
noted among," "
notable among," "
prominent among," "
well
known among," "
outstanding among," etc. A few
per-versions (paraphrases and
not translations), such as The Message, NCV, and NIrV, actually try to claim that she
was an apostle. Wuest's literal
Expanded Translation renders the Greek in this way: "
who are of excellent reputation among the apostles." All the text means, and is saying, is that the Apostles recognized her reputation and deeds. She was esteemed (held in great respect; admired) among them. The word
episemos (
ἐπίσημος) properly means "having a mark on it, as spoken of money, meaning marked, stamped, coined." In the New Testament, it figuratively signifies (in a good sense) being well-thought-of, distinguished, or illustrious (Rom. 16:7), and (in a bad sense) being notorious, or infamous (Matt. 27:16). If I were "of note among," "prominent among," "well known among," "outstanding among" the kings of the Earth, it in
no way implies or infers that I myself am a king; it simply means that, for good or ill, my reputation and deeds are known among them. This person's friend is trying to read
into the text (eisegesis) something that
is not there.
2. The Bible names four female prophets: Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, & Anna.
While the Bible
does name four female prophets, nevertheless their ministries
were not ongoing like Elijah, Elisha, and others. Whether or not they were prophets has
nothing to do with whether or not women can be pastors/elders, which the New Testament makes
clear that they
cannot be (1 Tim. 3:1-7).
3. The Apostle Paul had a “spiritual mom” (Romans 16:13).
This text says
no such thing (nor does any other text). This text says
nothing about "spiritual" or "in the spirit"; it merely says "
his mother and mine."
If this woman is the birth mother of Rufus (quite possibly the wife of Simon the Cyrene, whose son was named Rufus), she may have been a "mother" figure that Paul looked up to as a mother. If so, maybe her life ministered to him in some way. Whether or not she was a "spiritual mother" to Paul, what does that have to do with whether women can be pastors/elders
in the church? Whoever this woman was, she certainly
was not a pastor/elder. To try and read that
into the text is, once again, eisegesis.
4. Paul did not think it as lowering himself to speak of his ministry
to the Thessalonians in motherly terms (1 Thessalonians 2:7-8).
What does this prove about women in ministry or whether or not a woman can be a pastor/elder? Clearly
nothing! Speaking in nurturing, compassionate terms is
no support for women in ministry,
nor does it support the idea that women can be pastors/elders. It is nothing more than a way of speaking. Again, eisegesis at its best.
5. Although the Greek word “Adelphoi” is used 14 other times in James
to say “Brothers and sisters” in the English, in James 3:1 it is
mistranslated in favor of only addressing male teachers.
Adelphos (
ἀδελφός) [G.80] is
masculine and strictly means "brothers."
Adelphe (
ἀδελφή) [G.79] is the
feminine of G.80 and strictly means "sisters."
Adelphoi is
masculine plural. Therefore, James 3:1 is
not
a "mistranslation," and this person's friend is completely ignorant of the
original languages and their grammar, as well as biblical interpretation.
Adelphoi speaks of
men in the
plural (a group of men),
and might even speak of men and women together collectively (in a combined group). Whether or not
women are to be included in this address, the Bible does not say that women
are not allowed to be teachers. It say they are
not allowed to "
teach or have authority over a man" (1 Tim. 2:12-14), and that they
are not allowed to be pastors/elders (1 Tim. 3:1-7). They can teach other women (the Bible commands them to do so; Titus 2:3-5) and children.
6. When Peter wrote that women are the weaker vessel, he was actually
saying that they are to be treated with dignity and respect like “fine
china dinnerware” (1 Peter 3:7).
And...? First, that has
nothing to do with women in ministry, and; Second, it has
nothing to do with whether or not they are allowed to be pastors/elders, which the New Testament makes
clear that they
are not allowed to be (1 Tim. 3:1-7). Yes, husbands should treat their wives with dignity and respect, but that has nothing to do with them as pastors/elders.
7. When Paul wrote to Timothy, he was addressing a specific
individual woman in Ephesus, which needed to be silenced in Timothy’s
meetings, He was not laying down a rule for all women for all time. (1
Timothy 2:11-12)
No, he was not. In the fuller context of the entire book, Paul addresses
men who were teaching strange doctrines (1:3) and straying from the truth (1:6). The immediate context of these two verses begins in verse 9, which begins with the
plural for women. No such singular individual woman is ever mentioned throughout this letter. To claim otherwise is, yet again, eisegesis. Even if that were the case, try using the argument here with regard to what Paul said
in 1 Corinthians 14:33-35. Immediately after saying this, he
rhetorically asks, "
Was it from you, women, that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only, women?" He then responds with, "
If anyone
thinks he [or she] is a prophet [or a pastor/elder] or spiritual, let
him [or her] recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. If anyone does not recognize this, he [or she] is not recognized [as a pastor/elder]." Women are
not allowed to preach or be elders. One further point: if Paul was referring to a single individual woman who was disrupting Timothy's meetings, then why does Paul use the singular
man? Why not say, "I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over
men"? The egalitarian interpretation here has many problems.
8. When Paul wrote to Corinth, he was replying to their previous
letter (1 Corinthians 7:1), and in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, he quotes
their letter and then rebukes them in verses 36-40.
Verses 34-35 are
not a quotation from the Corinthians' letter. This argument fails in light of what
Paul says in verses 37-38. If verses 34-35 is a quotation from their letter, where is
what he wrote to them? Where is the Lord's commandment? In between these
two sections, 34-35 and 37-38, all you have are two rhetorical questions. There is
no imperative there, no commandment. So this interpretation is
false! See #7.
9. Jesus had very special interactions with women: Speaking privately
to the woman at the well, Mary Magdalene crying on his feet, Mary being
the first to see the resurrected Jesus, Mary sitting and learning at
his feet.
Yes, He did.
And...? Jesus had high regard for women. Women were the
first to have seen the risen Saviour. All these women did was go and
report to the Apostles and other disciples. They were not ministering,
and they certainly
were not preaching or having authority over these men. While Jesus highly respected women, please note that He
did not choose a woman to be one of His 12 Disciples/Apostles. Even the replacement of Judas was between two
men.
There was no choice of a female, and I am sure there were many godly
female disciples there. Even if the men decided to choose between two
men themselves, if
God wanted a female, He would have cast the lots to indicate such.
10. The New Covenant removed the curse of the Garden of Eden, and in Christ equality is restored.
No, the New Covenant did not remove the curse. To claim otherwise is
ignorance of not only the curse, but also of Scripture as a whole. If it
was removed, why does Paul say in Romans that the whole Earth yearns
for the day of redemption when the sons of God are made known? When all
is set right again. If the curse was removed, why do we still die? Why
is there still sin? Spiritually,
all are equal in Christ. This
does not do away with our distinctions
or the differences in our roles and responsibilities in this world. Hierarchy exists
everywhere! Are an employer and an employee equal? Yes, they are. They have different
hierarchical positions and roles, yet they are
equal in personhood, dignity, and worth. Are a master and a slave equal? Yes, they are. They have different
hierarchical positions and roles, yet they are
equal in personhood, dignity, and worth. Are parents and children equal? Yes, they are. They have different
hierarchical positions and role, yet they are
equal in personhood, dignity, and worth. So, are men and women equal? Yes, they are. They have different
hierarchical positions and roles, yet they are
equal in personhood, dignity, and worth. Even in the Godhead, the Trinity, there is
hierarchical positions and roles, yet Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are
equal.
To argue that "in Christ equality is restored" is demonstrative of
knowing nothing of the Scriptures. Jesus said, "
you who have followed Me
will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
Even in Revelation 20:4, it acknowledges this judgment. That's
hierarchy.
While we are correcting errors, let us address a few other eisegetical references that are attempted as proof for women being pastors/elders:
