Addressing Common Concerns (Part 3)

Notes
Transcript
Question:
If a church embraces a congregational form of governance in which the congregation, not the elders, is the highest authority under Christ and Scripture, should women be allowed to vote?
Yes.
22 Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers,
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.
6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”
Question
In Romans 16:7, Paul wrote, “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.” Isn’t Junias a woman? And wasn’t she an apostle? And doesn’t that mean that Paul was willing to acknowledge that a woman held a very authoritative position over men in the early church?
Where does it say Junia was a woman?
In Greek, the phrase “of whom” is a masculine relative pronoun (hou) and shows that Epiphanius thought Iounias was a man.
Origen (who was one of the ancient world’s most proficient scholars) thought Junias was a man.
Masculine names ending in -as are not unusual even in the New Testament: Andrew (Andreas, Matthew 10:2), Elijah (Elias, Matthew 11:14), Isaiah (Esaias, John 1:23), Zacharias (Luke 1:5).
So there is no way to be dogmatic about what the form of the name signifies. It could be feminine or it could be masculine. Certainly no one should claim that Junia was a common woman’s name in the Greek speaking world, since there are only these three known examples in all of ancient Greek literature.
The word apostle is used for servants of Christ at different levels of authority in the New Testament. Revelation 21:14 refers to “the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (cf. Matthew 19:28; Acts 1:15–26).
The twelve had a unique role in bearing witness to the resurrection of Jesus. Paul counted himself among the privileged group by insisting on having seen and been called by the risen Christ (Galatians 1:1, 12; 1 Corinthians 9:1–2).
Very closely related with this unique inner ring were the missionary partners of Paul, Barnabas (Acts 14:14) and Silvanus and Timothy (1 Thessalonians 2:6), as well as James, the Lord’s brother (Galatians 1:19) and perhaps others (1 Corinthians 15:7).
Finally, the word apostle is used in a broad sense as “messenger,” for example, of Epaphroditus in Philippians 2:25, and of several “messengers of the churches” in 2 Corinthians 8:23.
Therefore, if Andronicus and Junias were apostles, they were probably among the third group serving in some kind of itinerant ministry.
If Junias is a woman, this would seem to put her in the same category with Priscilla, who with her husband seemed to do at least a little travelling with the Apostle Paul (Acts 18:18).
The ministry would be significant but not necessarily in the category of an authoritative governor of the churches like Paul (2 Corinthians 10:8; 13:10).
Question
Paul seems to base the primary responsibility of man to lead and teach on the fact he was created first, before woman (1 Timothy 2:13). How is this a valid argument if animals were made first before Adam and Eve?
First off, in Genesis, the idea of “firstborn” refers to leadership within a human family.
The Hebrews understood that this responsibility applied only to people, not animals. When Moses wrote this, he knew his readers wouldn’t compare animals and humans in this way, and we shouldn’t either.
Secondly, the question that evangelical feminists must come to terms with is why God should choose to create man and woman sequentially.
It won’t do just to say, “Sequence doesn’t have to mean leadership priority.”
The question is: “What does this sequence mean?”
Why didn’t God create them simultaneously out of the same dust?
The most natural implication of God’s decision to bring Adam onto the scene ahead of Eve is that he is called to bear the responsibility of headship. That fact is validated by the New Testament when Paul uses the fact that “Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:13) to draw a conclusion about male leadership in the church.
QUESTION
Isn’t it true that the reason Paul did not permit women to teach was that women were not well-educated in the first century? But that reason does not apply today. In fact, since women are as well-educated as men today, shouldn’t we allow both women and men to be pastors?
1. Paul’s Reason Was Creation, Not Education:
Paul doesn’t cite lack of education as the reason for restricting women from teaching or leading men.
Instead, he points to creation order (1 Timothy 2:13–14).
It’s unwise to base an argument on a reason Paul didn’t use, rather than the one he clearly gave.
2. Education Wasn’t Required for Leadership:
The New Testament church didn’t require formal biblical training for leadership—many apostles weren’t formally educated (Acts 4:13).
Both men and women could read and study Scripture (Acts 18:26; Romans 16:1; 1 Timothy 2:11).
Historical evidence also shows that many women were educated in Greek and Roman societies.
3. Even Well-Educated Women Were Restricted:
Priscilla, a well-educated woman who taught Apollos privately (Acts 18:26), was part of the Ephesian church when Paul wrote 1 Timothy 2:12.
Despite her knowledge and years of learning from Paul, she wasn’t permitted to teach men publicly.
Paul’s restriction wasn’t about education but about creation order.
QUESTION
Why do you bring up homosexuality when discussing male and female role distinctions in the home and the church (as in question 1)? Most evangelical feminists are just as opposed as you are to the practice of homosexuality.
1. Minimizing Gender Roles Can Lead to Confusion:
Feminist arguments that reduce or deny God-given gender distinctions often lead to broader confusion about sexual identity.
Over time, this confusion has contributed to an increased acceptance of homosexuality in society, even among some evangelicals.
2. Real-Life Examples Show This Connection:
Scholars like Gerald Sheppard and Karen Torjesen, who initially advocated for women’s ordination, later argued for affirming same-sex relationships.
Other feminist thinkers have suggested that rejecting traditional gender roles undermines the primacy of heterosexual marriage.
3. Impact on Parenting and Identity Formation:
Rejecting natural gender distinctions makes it harder for parents to affirm their children’s masculinity or femininity.
Studies show that this lack of affirmation can lead to identity confusion, increasing the likelihood of children developing a homosexual orientation.
In short, abandoning biblical gender roles doesn’t just affect leadership in the church or home; it disrupts foundational truths about identity, marriage, and sexuality.
QUESTION
How Can You Be Sure Your Interpretation Isn’t Influenced by Culture Rather Than Scripture?
No interpreter of Scripture is entirely free from cultural and personal biases.
However, faithfulness to the biblical text is pursued through the following principles:
1. Self-Examination and Prayerful Dependence:
Regular evaluation of motives helps lay aside personal or cultural biases that could distort understanding.
Prayer is essential for seeking humility, wisdom, and clarity in interpreting God’s Word.
2. Rigorous Study of the Biblical Text:
Grammatical-historical exegesis, rooted in the original languages (Greek and Hebrew), focuses on discerning the authors’ intent.
3. Learning from Church History:
The history of interpretation helps guard against cultural blind spots and offers valuable insights from faithful believers throughout history.
4. Testing in Ministry and Community:
Interpretations are assessed in real-world ministry and through feedback from mature, godly Christians who reflect the Spirit’s wisdom.
5. Commitment to Transformation by God’s Word:
Scripture, not culture, is the standard for renewing the mind and shaping convictions, as described in Romans 12:1–2.
While fallibility remains a reality, these practices provide confidence that interpretations aim to reflect God’s unchanging truth rather than cultural influence.
Conclusions are submitted to public discussion, welcoming correction in the pursuit of truth.
QUESTION
Why Is It Acceptable to Sing Hymns Written by Women and recommend books written by women but not say the same things audibly in church?
It is not that a woman cannot share the same message audibly in other contexts.
When Paul speaks of being “filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” (Ephesians 5:18–19), it is understood that women can recite or sing what God has given them for the church.
This allows for women’s poetic ministry to edify and encourage the congregation, potentially including elements similar to prophecy as described in 1 Corinthians 11:5.
Nor is it that what woman writes in books and articles cannot be spoken audibly. “The Gospel Comes With a House key” by Rosaria Butterfield.
The issue is whether she should function as part of the primary teaching leadership (=eldership) in a fellowship of women and men.
This does not rule out ministries of teaching other women.
Neither does it rule out occasional lectureships and periodic addresses (as distinct from recognized Bible teaching in the church) in which women address men as well as women,
for example, at the Urbana Missions Conference or any number of local and national conferences and convocations.
We use the qualifiers occasional and periodic because the regularity of teaching one group of people is part of what constitutes the difference between official teaching leadership, which is withheld from women in 1 Timothy 2:12, and the unofficial guidance given by Priscilla and Aquila in Acts 18:26.
These lectures and addresses could be delivered in a spirit and demeanor that would assault the principle of male leadership.
Ineffability
QUESTION
Since many leading evangelical scholars disagree on the questions of manhood and womanhood, how can any layperson even hope to come to a clear conviction on these questions?
Serious students of the Bible must walk a fine line between two dangers.
On one side, there is the risk of oversimplifying interpretation by neglecting the necessary historical and grammatical disciplines.
On the other side, there is the temptation to overwhelm laypeople with inaccessible data and complex contextual issues, leading to a lack of confidence in understanding.
16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
On one hand, we must be careful of overstating the simplicity of Scripture.
But on the other hand, we must not forget the usefulness of all Scripture.
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
29 “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.
2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.
We must view controversies over important issues not only as evidence of our sin and ignorance but also as evidence that truth matters, that it is worth striving for, and that harmful error is and always will be rampant until Christ returns.
This is why Paul says to the Corinthians:
18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.
The point here is that controversy is necessary where truth matters and serious error is spreading.
Laypeople should therefore take heart that the battle for truth is being fought.
They should realize that many of the plain things they virtually take for granted in their faith today were once hotly disputed and were preserved for them through controversy.
On this issue of manhood and womanhood, laypeople must consider the arguments available to them, think for themselves, saturate themselves in Scripture, and pray earnestly for what Paul promised in
15 Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you.