Although men and women are of similar intelligence, they are not emotionally identical. Therefore there is no logical reason to assume that a woman's role should be exactly the same as a man's. If God created a husband and his wife to live together, it is logical to believe that the bond between them will be greater if they each possess qualities that are not in the other.
To avoid endless debate and argument it would seem logical to give either man or woman the authority in marriage. This is what God has done, and He has given the authority to the husband over the wife.
Moreover, because God has put in man and woman the emotional qualities suitable for this order, the authority of man is also applicable in church government. I will justify this view with Scriptures later, but first, in order to show that this view does not imply the superiority of the male, I will use as an analogy the example of politicians and scientists.
Politicians have the authority to decide whether to allow scientists to have funding to do what they want, and they often tell scientists what to work on. But we cannot conclude from this that politicians are superior to scientists simply because the politicians have the authority. Was Roosevelt superior to Einstein because the President had the authority? In the same way we cannot conclude that men are better or smarter than women simply because the authority has been given to men. People today think too highly of being boss, but what is important is not who is boss, but whether we have talent, and whether we are free to exercise those talents.
Thousands of years ago, before Christianity, the primitive beliefs of men were that the champion warrior was the superior being, and the one with the most power was to be the most highly thought of. But today there is more respect for qualities such as kindness and intellectual achievement, although the feminist movement is still obsessed with power.
The fundamental truth associated with the differences God made when He created man and woman, is that the woman was created for the man, not the other way around. According to Genesis 2:20-24, Adam was created first. The reason God gave for creating woman was, that it wasn't good for Adam to be alone, and God then made Eve as a helper. This truth is still relevant according to Paul: Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. (1 Corinthians 11:9)
Because God planned for man to be the leader, He made man less vulnerable to deception than woman. This is why the serpent was able to deceive Eve before Adam. The increased vulnerability of Eve to deception, even before the fall, is used by Paul to illustrate the need for women not to have authority over men in the church: For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (1 Timothy 2:13,14)
The Scriptures teach that a woman is more likely than a man to be deceived on a moral issue or when finding the will of God. But there is no evidence to suggest that a woman is more likely than a man to be deceived about the solution to a mathematical equation or science or accounting. I therefore believe that in the workplace a woman may have a certain amount of authority over a man in directing how a job should be done, providing this does not extend to reproving him for bad conduct. In such cases she should report him to another man. Perhaps advisory rather than authoritative positions are sometimes more suitable for women. However, when a Christian finds work in a non-Christian workplace, he may have to accept the situation that is, rather than that which should be.
In the important church government offices of apostle and pastor, decisions relate not to mathematical equations, but rather to moral issues and the will of God for men as well as women. Therefore it is not appropriate for women to hold these offices. It is in this context of deception regarding moral issues, that Paul said: I suffer not a woman . . . to usurp authority over the man. (1 Timothy 2:12) That this headship of a man is a universal truth in this age is clear from 1 Corinthians 11:3 where Paul associates it with other universal truths saying: I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
The Scriptures make it clear that in church: the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head. (1 Corinthians 11:10 NKJV) This symbol is a covering of her head: every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head (that is man). (1 Corinthians 11:5) The covering that a woman should use is long hair: if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering. (1 Corinthians 11:15) To function as an effective covering her hair must be shoulder length rather than being tied up on top of the head. Paul probably referring to the practise of tying up the hair says this is no better covering than a shaved head: every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered . . . is even all one as if she were shaven. (1 Corinthians 11:5)
Man, however, to symbolise that there is no authority between himself and Christ, should not cover his head: Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head (that is Christ). (1 Corinthians 11:4) This means he cannot have long hair: if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him. (1 Corinthians 11:14)
These customs were not just to suit the customs of the times. Both the symbol, and the truth of the headship of man, are important: because of the angels. (1 Corinthians 11:10) Angels see the order in a church on authority from God, and evidently regard both the symbol and the associated truth as important.
That Paul is affirming spiritual truth rather than temporary custom, is clear from his question: Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? (1 Corinthians 11:13) And he says that: even nature itself (verse 14) teaches men should not have long hair.
Paul disallows any argument about this, saying: if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. (verse 16) Were the matters of which Paul spoke just temporary customs that are no longer applicable, then there would have been, even in Paul's day, grounds for contention. But that there were not indicates that these truths are still applicable today.
Paul is not arguing the inferiority of women, however, as he says: Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman. (1 Corinthians 11:11,12)
Whether there are more good men in the world or more good women only God knows. I believe that there are more good women than good men. Men are often more aggressive than women and this is certainly not a plus. Women may also be more patient, compassionate and interested in people. Therefore we should not judge the relative merits of man and woman, but we must accept that they are ‘equal but different’ as one Christian women's group says.
But it is unfortunate that many churches acknowledging the authority of man, silence women completely in church. We should remember that women also have the Holy Spirit and their utterance is precious.
Women may pray in church, as in the context of church gatherings, Paul refers to: every woman that prayeth. (1 Corinthians 11:5) But, they may not take control of the church, and there is therefore sometimes a time for women to be quiet, because the authority has been given to man, So Paul says: Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience. (1 Corinthians 14:34)
Nevertheless, there is no reason why the silence of submission should prevent women from speaking to God in prayer, in church. To say the contrary is to say that God is more likely to listen to a man's prayers than a woman's, and that is to say that men and women are not equal in God's sight. But God affirms such an equality in Galatians 3:28,29: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Even in the Old Testament we see women worshipping. After Moses and the Israelites sang a song of praise, the women under the lead of Miriam also sang worship to the Lord: And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances. And Miriam answered them, Sing ye to the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (Exodus 15:20,21)
In both Old and New Testaments we read of women prophetesses. How can this be reconciled with the command that a woman should not teach a man. The answer, I believe, is that the Holy Spirit inspired gift of prophecy is fundamentally different from the gift of teaching. Paul affirms this distinction, saying: God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers . . . are all prophets? are all teachers? (1 Corinthians 12:28,29)
The Greek word for prophet means, one who foretells, although the word was also used in a wider sense. It is implied that what is foretold is what God is going to do. When prophesying of God there is no essential difference between one who tells what God is going to do and one who tells what God has done, or even one who tells what God is like. So the definition of a prophet which I will use in this section is one who makes the people understand God and His ways and is based upon Revelation 19:10: the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. So speaking of the nature and glory of God, is the ministry of a prophet, not just speaking of future events. (That the word ‘prophet’ is sometimes used in a wider sense does not affect the logic of my arguments, which are based more upon spiritual truths than word definitions.)
The Old Testament prophets spoke of the coming and redemptive work of Christ when this was in the future. New Testament prophets also speak of the redemptive work of Christ, although this is now in the past. So prophets speak of the glorious ways of God whether it is in the past, present or future. Prophesying of the future could focus on such things as the return of Christ (although not the date), the eternal rewards for the faithful, and the last judgement. Prophesying of the past could concern how God created the world or how He dealt with Israel or the church.
Prophets also speak of God's ways towards men in the present or near present; for example, blessings for obedience and cursing for disobedience. This was one of the main tasks of the Old Testament prophets, who would warn God's people of the coming judgement if they did not repent, but promised mercy and goodness of God to those who would. Prophets could interpret the present situation in the light of God's ways and say why God was doing what He was. For example Jeremiah told the Jews in Egypt that their evil predicament was because of their sin: did not the Lord remember them, and came it not into his mind? So that the Lord could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings . . . therefore is your land a desolation, and astonishment, and a curse. (Jeremiah 44:21,22).
In this present age, prophets explain the bible and bring it to life, but not by means of new revelations. If something is important to God's eternal purposes then surely it would have been revealed with the advent of Christ and His apostles. there may, however, be new revelation as the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.
Paul exhorts the church: desire . . . rather that ye may prophesy. (1 Corinthians 14:1) The fact that this exhortation was given to those who would not be writing Scriptures shows that the New Testament gift of prophecy does not necessarily mean new prophecies.
Prophets may be female, as shown by the example of the prophetess Huldah: So Hilkiah the priest . . . went unto Huldah the prophetess, and they communed with her. And she said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Tell the man that sent you to me . . . I will bring evil upon this place . . . because they have forsaken me . . . But to the king of Judah which sent you to enquire of the Lord . . . Because . . . thou hast humbled thyself . . . thou shalt be gathered into thy grave in peace; and thine eyes shall not see all the evil which I will bring upon this place. (2 Kings 22:14-20).
In the New Testament we read of Philip who: had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy. (Acts 21:9) Women were first to see the empty tomb and the risen Christ. Their declaration of what they saw and what Christ told them was in a sense prophecy. So prophetesses may prophesy to men and so they may prophesy to the whole church.
Whereas I defined a prophet as one who teaches about God and what He does, I will define a teacher as one who teaches about what men should do. I do not mean specifics, such as what car to buy, but rather how to conduct one's life and obey the Ten Commandments.
Regarding the teaching ministry of women, Paul writes: I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man. (1 Timothy 2:12) For this Scripture not to contradict other Scriptures allowing women to prophesy, we must assume that these are different gifts. The apparent contradiction may be resolved by taking the verse allowing women to prophesy to relate to speaking about God (according to my definition of prophesy,) and by taking the verse forbidding them from teaching men to relate to teaching them God's commandments. (The context of 1 Timothy 2:12 favours this interpretation as it is that of understanding God's commands, specifically not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.) Teaching what to do, even if not enforced, is a form of authority over someone, but teaching about God is not. This is why women are allowed to teach men about God (ie. prophesy) but women may not teach men the commandments, such as not to steal.
As women may not teach men what to do, they therefore cannot teach the whole church what to do. But women may teach commandments to other women and children as Paul writes: the aged women . . . that they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. (Titus 2:3-5)
Women have an important role to play in speaking the word of God, as is clear from Philippians 4:3: help those women which laboured with me in the gospel.
As both men and women are allowed to pray and prophesy in church, we must interpret the commands telling women to keep silent in church, not as absolute commands to silence. Rather they are commands not to disrupt or take charge of the church meeting, nor to teach men how to obey God. So the only restriction on women in the church is that they are not to have authority over men and I do not see why this should be thought of as a terrible restriction upon women.
In conclusion, regarding the situation within the church, I believe that whilst women's wishes should be considered, and whilst women should be able to fully use their talents both spiritually and naturally, the following situation should not occur, as when God said: As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. (Isaiah 3:12)