The Role of Women in the Church, Society, and Home

BETH EZRA TEACHING ............................ he that has ears to hear, let him hear................................ Volume One, Issue Ten ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ June 1997 The Role of Women in the Church, Society, and Home

One of the most confusing issues facing the present day believer who wishes to obey the Lord in all things is the question of the place and role of women in the church, society, and in the home. To many, the biblical prohibitions written by Paul seem out of step with our modern, societal evolution of the 'downtrodden', female minority. Women are granted 'equal rights' with men to occupy the same place in society and the workplace by constitutional law, earning the same pay, doing the same jobs, wielding the same power and authority, and even taking the same risks-- as in the military. This is the way the world, at least the 'broad-minded', non-fanatical societies and governments of the world, considers the issue. Islamic countries have a very different view of womanhood, as do the third-world nations just beginning to emerge into the enlightenment of the progressive, socialistic or capitalistic nations. Communism long ago discarded the stereo-typical roles of the male and female genders, treating all humanity as 'mono-gender' slaves of the state, discarding as bourgeois any idea that a Creator designed male and female for distinct and exclusively different purposes.

The nearly global collapse of communism and its ideals should have served as a warning to socialist and capitalist cultures that such godless methods are doomed to failure because they oppose the given order of nature. Nature, like truth, will ultimately be revealed. Any contradiction to nature will face irresistible pressure to revert back to conformity, or else, eventually be destroyed. This is not to suggest that communism's demise was solely due to the blurring of the masculine and feminine roles, but, without a doubt, it was a factor. If God created man for a distinct function, and woman for a completely different function, can those lines be crossed without wreaking havoc to the order of things? Furthermore, why are those who are so insistent on preserving the proper nature and environment of all other living things in the ecosphere so purposely blind when it comes to recognizing the specific, given natures of gender in our own species?

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

God places a great deal of emphasis on patterns in the Scriptures. To fully understand a biblical concept, one needs to observe how God utilized, ordained and restricted the original prototype. For instance, when He called out the Church, giving her instructions and establishing her as His representative on earth, He laid out the pattern for her establishment in the Book of the Acts. We can see how the Church is to operate, live, serve, grow, discipline, encourage, etc. by the examples given. That the Church has gotten off her foundations and is now constructed in opposition to the pattern given her will become evident soon enough. Had the Church remained true to the pattern given by the apostles and prophets, believers would understand the true purposes of God and gladly conform to His wishes instead of debate whether he meant this or that, or is it still valid for today?

The same is true of the 'woman issue'. Adam, male and female, was created last of all God's works as His crowning achievement, and given dominion over all that came before them (Gen. 1:27-28). Adam, since he was formed in God's image, represents God to all creation, including Eve. Adam, before Eve was taken from his side, gave names to all the animals God had created (Gen. 2:19). Whatever Adam called them, that was its name. Now this doesn't sound so profound until one considers that inherent in the name of a thing is the meaning or description of its nature. So, we find the Lord God willing to let Adam describe what the nature of each animal, and bird He had created would be. When Adam was finished, there was no creature fit to be his mate. None of the natures of the beasts God had created was suitable for human procreation. So God put Adam to sleep, extracted a rib, and out of the same stuff that Adam already was, formed a suitable mate. When Adam later named her, he called her Eve-- that is, described her nature as that of 'life bearer', or 'Mother of all living' humans (Gen. 3:20). God confirmed that nature of life-bearer to the woman. It became her privilege and responsibility to bear the offspring of the species. As such, God had endowed her with the physical accouterments necessary for this child-bearing function, placing her forever in a distinct and different role from her husband. Man is the hunter, farmer, gatherer, woman is the nurturer; man is the seed implanter, woman is the bearer and caretaker of the fertilized seed; man is the warrior-protector-provider, woman is the recipient of the protection and provision, for she alone carries the propagation of the species in her capabilities. It is interesting to note that Adam only named her Eve after the Fall, not before. Prior to the Fall he simply called her 'woman' or 'taken out of man'. After the Fall, God pronounces the curse of death upon Adam and the woman taken out of his side, and suddenly Adam gets inspired to name his wife! What does he name her? Does he name her 'Scapegoat' -- "its all her fault"? No. Does he name her 'Bringer of death"? No. He suddenly names her 'Eve' -- 'Mother of all living'. Right in the middle of God's pronouncements of death upon humanity for its disobedience (Gen. 3:16-20) Adam decides on a name for his wife. Adam perceived that God was willing to let them live on in the flesh, at least for a time, through the vicarious suffering and death of an innocent beast, even though progressive physical death had entered the human race, and they had already died spiritually, true to God's promise (Gen. 2:17). So Adam sees God's mercy working toward him, and responds by naming his wife 'Life' despite the pronouncements of death at his disobedience.

It is at that point that God slaughters an innocent animal in their place, temporarily putting off their execution with its shed blood, covering Adam and his wife sufficiently to allow the progression of the human race to accomplish God's true intent-- apprehending a Bride for the Pre-Incarnate Word. The pattern in Adam and Eve's formation is that of Christ falling into a deep sleep known to us as death, and from His opened side flows the blood and water that eventually comprises the Bride of Christ, the Church. Water is the teaching of the word, and blood is the living of the life taught by the word (the life is in the blood-- Lev. 17:11; Now you are clean [washed] by the word I have spoken to you-- John 15:3; see also I Jn. 5:6).

So, we see that God, through Adam, ordained very different roles for the male and female. To resist those roles is to court disaster, for nature cannot be successfully over-ridden. Much of the flap we see surfacing in our military in recent months is directly due to putting woman in a role that she is not designed for-- warrior-protector. Nature will express itself sooner or later, and the result is a series of scandals involving rape, seduction, adultery, and breakdown of morale as well as morality. The same scenario is true of the workplace. Eventually every family will be touched and involved to a greater or lesser degree because ultimately, the nation or society that allows or encourages such blurring of the gender specific roles suffers irreparable damage. But, that is the nature of the world under its usurper-- to resist God's ordering of things, even to the point of self destruction.

The very physiology of the man and the woman shouts that very different functions are ordained for each. Aside from the obvious organic sexual differences, man's bone structure and musculature is stronger and more durable for sustaining prolonged strenuous activity, whereas Peter describes women as the weaker vessels (I Pet. 3:7), admonishing husbands because of that fact to see to their duties of protecting and providing for them spiritually, emotionally and physically lest their prayers be hindered for dereliction of duty. Woman's arm bones are designed to carry children with them as they go about their 'nesting activities' for long stretches of time (a task that would quickly wear out a man's strength, as well as his nerves), and her body, unlike a man's, is uniquely constructed to feed, cradle and comfort children. Nature itself teaches that women should be protected and provided for by the male. Paul explains in I Cor. 11:14-15 and Titus 2:4-5 that a woman, whose main task is to be at home child-rearing and providing a proper nurturing environment, glorifies God, her husband, and herself by wearing her hair long. How is woman's long hair a glory to God? It's her submissive decision to line up with God's opinion and design. It glorifies her husband by clearly showing the God-given differences and making her more beautiful to him. Lastly it glorifies her own head as she submits to God's decision and does not have an independent or worldly, or even, masculine haircut. In an increasingly unisex society, Christians must especially not blur the roles ordained by God.

Man, however, is the image and glory of God (I Cor. 11:7). The God-ordained roles of male and female in society are one thing, but what of their proper roles in the Church? That the world under satanic rule has blurred the distinctive roles of men and women is understandable (though not excusable), for the world is trying very hard to blot out any reminder of its Creator and of responsibility to obey Him. These unisex trends cause a blurring of who God is and what He has done in the natural creation (Rom 1:19-20). [By the way, if you are not looking up these Scriptures to see if I know what I am talking about, how will you know whether to trust what is written in the BETs or not? You will only be getting my say so, and only part of the message.] Months ago, it was stated in one of the first BETs ( Vol. 1, issue two) that the main duty of the Church is to glorify God through Jesus Christ, to manifest Him to an unbelieving world in word and deed, i.e. lifestyle. The Church is the only organism through which He has deigned to do this work. He is not manifest through parachurch groups such as denominations or evangelistic organizations, though they may yield some fruit for a time. God has decreed that he will fully manifest only in the Church of which Jesus Christ is the head, for nothing else but the Church is the pillar and support of the Truth (I Tim. 3:15) through which He chooses to reveal His wisdom to the rulers and authorities in heavenly places (Eph. 3:10-11). How is this demonstration to be done? Not by word only! It is only when the Church joyfully obeys from the heart the commands of the Lord that the living demonstration of His Word is seen as right and true. As a wife fulfills her God-given role and submits to her husband, bringing the fruit of his gladness on her obedience, so too, the Church is to joyfully submit to the Lord in all He has commanded. Only then can she receive the fullness of His blessing. If a wife is selfish, not realizing what pleases her husband, such as having long hair, does not properly discipline the young children, nor keep an orderly house, but lets an independent spirit arise, she is an open rebuke to her husband. She shames him before those outside his home. So, too, with the Church and her Lord. If a man doesn't provide for and protect his wife, so that she can keep herself and their children and the house in order, he is a shame to the Lord over him.

We make quite a statement by our very appearance. The glory of the Lord hangs on even minute details that we often think can be glossed over or ignored entirely. These issues of gender role and appearance are not matters of salvation to the believer, but they may be the issues of life and death to unbelievers if they do not see a proper presentation of the Lord in our life and worship. Jesus, prior to His ascension, gave many instructions to the disciples, and later to Paul. Legalism was rife in the Jewish Church, that is, combining the commands of the Law with faith in Christ, in the belief that both the Law and faith in Christ were required for salvation. There is a distinct difference in obeying the commands of Christ out of a desire to glorify Him, and slavishly coming under a fear of losing one's salvation if certain traditions and commands are not observed. To be sure, disobeying direct commands will have a consequence sooner or later (but not loss of salvation), but legalism, by definition, is incorrectly understood as involved in keeping or losing one's salvation by doing certain things. Salvation is not the issue here. Only by denying Christ (2Tim 2:12) and turning from the faith (Col. 1:23) can one's salvation be lost, not by sin-- though there will be a judgment in heaven at Christ's judgment throne for that (2Cor. 5:10). Obeying our heavenly Bridegroom's instructions has to do with rightly presenting Him to the world and the universe, not salvation. Watchman Nee, in his basic series for believers, vol.#6, Love One Another, writes a chapter on head covering that reveals a difference between God's grace and God's government in the workings of the Church and believers. He states that government is God deciding how something should be done. Grace is His giving power to the individuals in the Church to accomplish what should be done His way, in His time. We have often confused the issue by thinking that because we are under grace we do not need to obey God's government. God's government basically requires women to be in the home, and not the workplace, though she can certainly apply her crafts and skills at home as Proverbs 31 indicates. When Christian women take up His governmental decisions as being what is really best for them, they glorify and vindicate His wisdom before the angelic forces in both camps, God's and Lucifer's. To fly in the face of nature and agree with worldly wisdom is to vindicate Lucifer, and dishonor God.

The Church is the arena where God chooses to reveal the rightness of His ways. What God cannot obtain from the world of men or the fallen angels, He should have no trouble obtaining from the redeemed. That is obedience. It is our privilege and responsibility to reflect His wisdom through our obedience to His instructions, and as we do so, he receives the glory due Him. But, as we deny Him that right of ordaining certain practices and restricting others, we glorify His opponent, our adversary. We, who should be so sensitive to our heavenly Bridegroom's slightest wish, expose Him to open shame by our blatant refusal to submit to His instructions. Oh, we have good reasons for our disobedience: "That would be legalistic"; "That is not for today"; "I'm under grace"; "Those are not important issues"; etc., thus we continue to excuse ourselves from obeying the very commands that manifest the greatest differences between the world's present evil ruler and the beneficial, holy One they have rejected. In effect, we have been robbed of our heritage of glorifying Christ by the flood of deceptive teaching spirits that have infiltrated the Church with their compromising doctrines. And He has been robbed of the glorious witness His Bride should lovingly present to Him through her obedience to His slightest whim.

Satan recoils at the sight of a godly woman in church wearing her head covered in obedience to this almost unknown command (yes, it too, is a command-- I Cor. 14:37 ) because he is shamed by such an act of willing submission. The woman is to be covered in the church meeting when she might be prompted by the Spirit to pray aloud or prophesy so that her head-- her husband, and by implication, the men present) are not dishonored. She declares that she is in submission to her God-given, governmental authority by wearing a sign of that authority which is over her on her hair. Many believers jump and shout at the devil, thinking they are shaming him by laughing at him or taunting him, singing or chanting, quoting verses, etc. In fact, Satan himself probably organizes some of these episodes (Jude vs.8-10). But God has ordained for the weaker vessels of the Body by this humble, submissive method to shame Satan for his rebellion. The woman Satan deceived away from her ordained covering has come willingly back under her covering simply because He wants it that way. Satan and his minions are in open rebellion, i.e. uncovered before their Maker in their defiance and disobedience. Their rebellion is shown as a shameful thing by the obedience of the women in the Church in this simple matter of head-covering.

A man is to be uncovered in the meeting when he might be prompted to pray aloud or prophesy, for he is the representative of Christ, his head. The woman's head-- the man, is visible, so the woman needs to wear a visible sign of being under that authority. The man's head, Christ, is invisible to our eyes, so he shows that he is in his rightful place taking the leadership given him from God by not wearing a sign of submission on his head. He disgraces his head-- Christ-- if he wears a covering, for that is only permitted to the women to wear a covering during the meeting. If a man wears a covering during the meeting, he shows that he abdicates his place of authority, and his preferences are feminine, and not as God created him, masculine. That disgraces God. This is also partly why homosexuality is an abomination to God, for it flies in the face of His creative genius. It is abomination to the Lord for man to wear what pertains to the woman, and for the woman to wear what pertains to the man (Deut. 22:5). Why is it abominable? Because it distorts His order in Creation. Doing otherwise than He directed implies that God did not know or do what was best, and we can improve upon it. It further implies that the distinctive roles God created are not important and we can do as we please. Satan thrives in such glorification of chaos, where roles become indistinct and the Creator's imprint is blurred into something unrecognizable. The Church is to stand opposite the world and its blurs and chaos instigated by Satan. She is to present her Sovereign's rule and order as something desirable and beneficial, and obtainable only by grace.

The same principle carries over into the realm of teaching and preaching. If a woman is to be in submission-- overtly portrayed by having a sign of authority on her head, does it seem sensible and proper for women to take over when it comes to the teaching/preaching part of the meeting? Paul did not permit it, nor did he give Timothy, a junior apostle, the latitude to allow it (I Tim. 2:9-15).

Scoffers state that Paul was operating in partial revelation, or that he was misogynistic, or that those rules only applied to that region and era. But Paul goes on to give the reason he is so adamant about this. It is because of God's ordering at Creation, and the events following, and nothing else. It has nothing to do with the changeable culture or era, but with universal truth. It is not permitted for women to teach those who are given as their head. Doing so defies God's wisdom in ordering creation and ordaining leadership. This is upside-down, when those who are to be under authority take charge and make their own decisions in opposition to the given order. That is rebellion, Satan's own fault. Eve was persuaded to obey a beast of the field that was to be under her authority, resulting in her falling away from God through deception, and in Adam's wrongful obedience to his wife who was to be under his authority. The demise of the whole human race was the result, with all creation being turned upside-down and bound in the futility of slavery. It is not a little, insignificant matter for a woman to take the pulpit and begin to expound God's truth to men, no matter if she is correct in what she says or not, for she is usurping a place reserved for men only. This is chaos; this is disobedience to God's revealed will, and it is Satan's doing, for it dishonors God and the way of Truth.

As he did in Eden, Satan continues to challenge God's revealed word. "Yea, hath God said...?"(Gen. 3:1). And many in the Church still fall for his subtle implications that God doesn't really have to be obeyed, we can do whatever we choose, without consequences. Women pastors? Sure, why not? Wear your head covered? Wouldn't it be legalistic to do that? Stay at home, keep house and watch the kids-- isn't that chauvinistic? The loving God I know wouldn't sponsor such rigid, repressive, authoritarian and humiliating regulations.

Thus the lie is perpetuated, not only in the world that is already defiant to God, but even in the Church where He should receive the respect and honor due Him. To believe those satanic lies is to accept the belief that God changed His mind about some things, that He didn't really understand the best way to ordain Creation , and is using trial and error to make adjustments over time. Either He is omniscient, or, He is not. Either the Holy Spirit knew which things to preserve in Scripture for all generations till the Lord returns (ITim. 6:14), or, He did not. Either He knew the harm of eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, or, He did not. All Satan's rationalizations and justifications did not soften the consequences of disobedience then, nor will they now.

"But she seems so anointed.""But I have learned so much from her.""But my walk with the Lord is closer than ever since she has been teaching.""Yea, hath God said... woman shall not instruct or have authority ...?"

The criteria for discerning truth is, as ever, "What does God say?" and not "Does it work?" It was Eve who 'taught' Adam about the knowledge of good and evil. What he learned was factual, but it was certainly not beneficial. Adam was rebuked by the Lord for letting his wife take the leadership from him (Gen. 3:17). Ultimately, truth will out. But meanwhile, we must be guided, not by seeming results, but by the Word of God. The alternative is deception. The deception Eve swallowed contaminated her husband and every one of their offspring. Furthermore, it required the Word to become flesh and sacrifice Himself for us. Nothing short of such a drastic countermeasure would suffice for our rescue. What consequences will result from disobeying God's word now? Surely the Son will not be crucified afresh, but the onus of distrusting God-- calling Him a liar, will be borne by those who condone and practice such ungodly things (Jude vs. 15).

Some will argue "But doesn't God's word also say that 'in Christ there is no male or female' ? (Gal.3:28)" This and other scriptures are wrenched out of context to excuse irresponsibility and seeking personal desires. First of all, Paul would not contradict himself. This obtuse interpretation of that statement is clearly a contradiction to what he had clearly stated to Timothy and the Corinthians; nor is the Holy Spirit prone to contradict Himself. So, obviously, Paul (and the Holy Spirit) is teaching a different principle here than the blurring of the roles between male and female. He also states here that there is no slave nor free. Now Paul makes it clear that slaves are still slaves after becoming believers, in fact, they are to be more productive for their masters (Col. 3:22) because they follow Jesus. The societal distinction of slavery was not obliterated by the master's and slave's relationship to Christ. What is Paul teaching here? He is stating the principle of sonship, that all who come to God through Jesus Christ are accepted as sons in the spiritual realm (3:26). Earthly distinctions have no bearing on the common ground of Christ. But that doesn't mean they cease to be slave and master in other aspects. Nor can it mean that gender distinction has passed away. It does mean that neither male nor female, nor slave nor master nor freeman, nor Jew nor Gentile hold any special place of privilege over others. In Christ we are all equal, on common ground. But in the Church there are still the distinctions that define our gifts and callings; in the home there are still the distinctions that provide order and protection, and in society at large, there are still the distinctions by which we glorify God with the observance. Conversely, we also discredit Him in our refusal to obey. The world loves it and cheers that more and more women are becoming pastors, for the Church is following the world's anti-masculine-pro-feminist lead in rebellion against God's Word, instead of holding it forth and being a living demonstration of the divine program of submission.

This is not to say, however, that women are not to contribute. The opposite is true. Women have valuable insights that men need to seek out and heed. But as to teaching and leading in the meeting, that is reserved for the men. When the world observes our meetings, they need to see a representation of the eternal truth of God being lived out in joyful obedience, for God is demonstrating His wisdom through us. If His wisdom is ignored, what will the world learn of our Lord? Outside the meetings we have the scriptural examples of Priscilla and Acquila instructing Apollos more perfectly in the scriptures (Acts 18:26); Phoebe the deaconess (Rom. 16:1) and those women who labored with Paul in the Gospel (Phil.4:3)-- but not in preaching or teaching the Gospel. How do we know they didn't teach or preach? Because the Holy Spirit would not contradict Himself, nor is it likely that Paul would. So, their area of service must have been in some other venue.

That it is the world which is so involved in egalitarianism ought to be an alarm to the Church to stay far away from anything that smacks of so-called equal rights. Inalienable human rights are something invented by politicians, not God. The world persecutes those who live by the godly standards taught in Scripture, ridiculing and mocking those who obey God in these very items of woman's role in the Church, society, and the home. When mockery fails to obtain our compliance in their rebellion, be assured that escalating hostility will follow. Sadly, many of those leading the attack against the obedience of the Church in these issues will be those who claim to love Him, but do not see the necessity of obeying Him (1Jn. 2:4). In Jude it says:

17 But you, beloved, ought to remember the words that were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, 18 that they were saying to you, "In the last time there shall be mockers, following after their own ungodly lusts.19 These are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit."

Causing division (denominations), worldly-minded (patterned after human reasonings, not God's Word), devoid (empty, vacant) of the Spirit. In other words, they will have a form of godliness-- they'll appear religious, but they will not be united with those in the Truth, nor will they be distinguishable from the world, nor will they have the life of the Spirit of God. They are 'mockers' or pretend (mock) Christians. And they will be pursuing goals which are not of God, using methods not sanctioned by God, criticizing the methods God Himself ordained to declare truth.

Satan's attack is always on the weaker vessel, and it has proven most successful in the past as well as the present. Many women think they have the blessing of God on their 'ministry' and can cite conversions, miracles, healed marriages, as well as discipled believers, yet, it is all contrary to what God's Word says. The one and only place in the New testament that a woman teacher of a church is mentioned is Rev. 2: 20-24. The woman is rebuked as being a Jezebel, and had been given time to repent of her immorality, and was told the dire consequences that awaited her since she had not. The evidence the Lord cites against her is that (1.) she calls herself a prophetess (self-appointed, not God-appointed, or Jeroboamism), and (2.) she teaches, and that (3.) she leads His bond-servants astray into immorality; and (4.) encourages them to eat things sacrificed to idols (vs. 20). This woman had taken it upon herself to uncover her own head, taking a place of leadership in God's Church. Such disobedience is immorality; and it will lead to deeper immorality-- eventually descending through all levels of human experience, spirit, soul, and body, resulting finally in sexual immorality and idolatry, demanding God's judgment. Like Eve, this woman had the power to seduce God's appointed leadership away from honoring Him, into a submissive role that dishonored his Creator. So too, today, anywhere women are taking over the leadership in homes or in teaching and preaching in church, even if on a limited basis, God the Creator-orderer is dishonored. Anywhere women are enticed to leave their duties of child-rearing and the protective environment of their husband's covering at home, God is discredited. Jezebel is actively seducing God's people to bow down to Baal, threatening the Elijahs who oppose her, thinking she has successfully usurped leadership in the Church from those ordained by God, attacking His testimony and credibility both in the world and in the heavenlies.

Paul gives a final, authoritative note:

If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. (I Cor. 14:37-38 NAS)

Paul is again affirming to the Corinthians that neither they, nor any church, were to allow women to preach or teach. The meaning of the word 'silent' as translated in the KJV doesn't necessarily mean soundless, but 'quiet, not giving a word, i.e. not teaching or preaching. This does not exclude women from praying aloud, or prophesying, so 'silent' cannot be the proper translation. Exercising any of the I Cor. 12 gifts, suggesting or starting songs, reading scripture, and testifying to God's faithfulness is open to the sisters if they are covered properly, but teaching and preaching are reserved for the men. Those who disagree are not as spiritual as they think they are! The Lord will not recognize their ministry, nor the ministry of those who condone such disobedience. This seems like a hard statement, and I am glad I am not the one saying it, Paul is. In effect, he is saying that those who are not spiritual enough to recognize God's government will not be recognized by Christ as authentic ministries, no matter how many people follow them. Exceptions may be named and raised in objection, but the Word of God stands quite clear and firm on this point. Perhaps those women who seem to be exceptions exceeded the gifting God gave them, after all, evangelism is not forbidden to women, just preaching and teaching in the meeting.

The notion that if a woman is 'covered' by her pastor-husband (such an interpretation is a stretch even in the realm of mixed metaphors) and he permits her to preach, it is all right. Nothing could be more of a bending of God's clear instructions away from truth. Firstly, no man has the right to countermand a directive of a true apostle. Paul made it quite clear that a woman-- (gk-- goonay, meaning married woman) is not to teach or exercise authority. Furthermore, those women who excuse their behavior on this flimsy interpolation don't even bother to wear the symbolic covering when they take the pulpit. Even if they did, they would still be out of place, for the word in the KJV (I Tim 2:12) is usurp, meaning to take a place not lawful for them to take.