Part of post
This thread was started back in the first week of January. Back when I first joined in 2011 or so this topic routinely came up, and has continued to come up it appears, and I suspect will continue to come up. The root issue that causes it to resurface continually ultimately isn't a different in understanding in scripture, a difference in methods of interpretation, or a difference in honesty. Ultimately it's a difference in culture.
The reason I say it's a difference in culture, is because we in the west especially have become like fish swimming in water with know understanding of what it means to be wet because we have known nothing else to compare the experience of being wet to. Like so living in the west we have not known anything other than a completely degenerate and self-destructive society hell-bent on undoing every good thing that God has given us. We have not lived in a society let alone a civilization for hundreds of years that actually has an respect for God, the scriptures, or good order. We have lived in a rebellious land with rebellious people so long, that what the scriptures teach is actually appalling to us.
The scripture is quite clear it seems, whether looking at the English or at the original Greek and Hebrew that male leadership in the Church and in Israel as a whole was typically male with only few exceptions. That norm was established both by commands from God in the Old Testament and the New Testament.
The Old Testament establishes the pattern in part by appointing Aaron as a priest over the people of Israel:
Leviticus 10
8 And the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying, 9 “Drink no wine or strong drink, you or your sons with you, when you go into the tent of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations. 10
You are to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean, 11 and you are to teach the people of Israel all the statutes that the Lord has spoken to them by Moses.”
Exodus 29
7 You shall take the anointing oil and pour it on his head and anoint him. 8 Then you shall bring his sons and put coats on them,
9 and you shall gird Aaron and his sons with sashes and bind caps on them. And the priesthood shall be theirs by a statute forever. Thus you shall ordain Aaron and his sons.
Exodus 40
12 Then you shall
bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance of the tent of meeting and shall wash them with water 13 and put on Aaron the holy garments. And you shall anoint him and consecrate him, that he may serve me as priest. 14 You shall bring his sons also and put coats on them, 15 and
anoint them, as you anointed their father, that they may
serve me as priests. And their anointing shall admit them
to a perpetual priesthood throughout their generations.”
We do see some exceptions in the Old Testament, and of course this is usually offered up in the series of "what abouts?" that are raised by people who want to be more similar to the current culture. We see exceptions such as Miriam, and with Deborah who was a prophetess. I would first point out that a Prophet and a Priest although very similar are somewhat separate in their nature, and objecting to a Priest/Pastor role that excludes females by appealing to a prophetess is a bit disingenuous. It's still a valid and interesting point, just not entirely a good one. The case provided with Miriam shows us the pattern we should follow on a routine basis.
What about Miriam?
Exodus 15
19 For when the horses of Pharaoh with his chariots and his horsemen went into the sea, the Lord brought back the waters of the sea upon them, but the people of Israel walked on dry ground in the midst of the sea. 20
Then Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a tambourine in her hand, and
all the women went out after her with tambourines and dancing. 21 And Miriam sang to them:
“Sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously;
the horse and his rider he has thrown into the sea.”
Notice here that Miriam is recognized as a prophetess, and that she sang to people. I ask you though to notice as well the gender of the people she sings to. Miriam is also possibly punished for attempting to usurp male authority in Numbers by being cast out of the camp for seven days after she had already been healed of leprosy by Aaron.
Throughout the Old Testament we will see a similar pattern and realize that female prophetesses usually functioned not to usurp male authority but rather to support male authority in the execution of its godly duties. This same role is given to us in the New Testament multiple times. Let's consider a common passages, Ephesians 5.
Ephesians 5
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For t
he husband is the head of the wife even as
Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, s
o also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed
her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.[
a] 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Of course before we even begin with this passage to explain male and female relationships or church leadership, people will always go to verse 21 which says: "submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ." Usually this will be followed with some rendition of "A-hah! I have nullified verses 22-24! You're point is moot!" The problem with this is that it totally ignores the fact that verse 21 belongs to the topic of sexual immorality that Paul begins addressing in verse 3: But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints . It is a verse intended to teach us how to deal with our own sin and depravity as humans in a body, namely, the church. It is a relevant verse as a matter of general principle when it comes to a marriage or church leadership. It does not however directly apply to qualifications or duties of leadership in a spiritual setting.
Ephesians 5 along with others we'll get to reaffirm the role of male leadership generally and specifically in this case in that of marriage. We also see that it
typifies the nature of the relationship men and women have with one another. The female is to submit to the leadership of the husband, the reason stated is that the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the church. Who leads who with the Church-Christ relationship? Does the church lead Christ? No. So then why would the wife lead the husband? Only because the husband is weak and has abrogated his duties, or because neither of them particularly believe what God has to say. This will only be to their detriment. The male responsibility to his wife and as a leader in the congregation is to sanctify, to teach, to disciple, and to then present the woman or the congregation to Christ as a member(s) of the Bride of Christ.
1
