Complimentarianism vs Egalitarianism - Role of Women in the Church?

Are you complimentarian or egalitarian?

I am definitely complimentarian.

I do not believe in women elders based on 1 Tim 3:1-7.

Anyways, what do you think the role of women are in the church? What are the parameters of acceptable activities? What are men generally better at? What are women better at generally? Is this a culturally-based issue?

1 Timothy 3:1-7 1 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. (ESV)

Note that I do not think most men qualify for the position, either.

Additionally, I will note that often when groups have allowed women elders, the tendency has been to get soft on homosexual ordination as well, so I believe it is a slippery slope.

Note ELCA and PCUSA.

To be honest, there's nothing more unattractive to me than a dominant, assertive woman. I don't particularly care for men who are overly dominant and assertive, but there is something totally inapproirate about women who are dominant and assertive.

And, before women attack me on that, I suggest that they read 1 Peter 3:1-6.

And, yes, this is talking specifically about how women should relate to husbands, but I still think that a dominant and assertive woman is very unattractive, even if she is outwardly beautiful.

It seems to be like some few women (thankfully, it isn't that many, as the vast majority of Christian women I know are well balanced and don't try to dominate men) have been conforming themselves to the world in this regard, rather than being conformed to the image of Christ.

Anyways, what's your thoughts?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's an article from gotquestions.org which may help with more details:


Question: "Complementarianism vs. egalitarianism—which view is biblically correct?"

Answer: Summarized by "The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood," complementarianism is the viewpoint that God restricts women from serving in church leadership roles and instead calls women to serve in equally important, but complementary roles. Summarized by "Christians for Biblical Equality," egalitarianism is the viewpoint that there are no biblical gender-based restrictions on ministry in the church. With both positions claiming to be biblically based, it is crucially important to fully examine what exactly the Bible does say on the issue of complementarianism vs. egalitarianism.

Again, to summarize, on the one side are the egalitarians who believe there are no gender distinctions and that since we are all one in Christ, women and men are interchangeable when it comes to functional roles in leadership and in the household. The opposing view is held by those who refer to themselves as complementarians. The complementarian view believes in the essential equality of men and women as persons (i.e., as human beings created in God’s image), but complementarians hold to gender distinctions when it comes to functional roles in society, the church, and the home.

An argument in favor of complementarianism can be made from 1 Timothy 2:9-15. The verse in particular that seems to argue against the egalitarian view is 1 Timothy 2:12, which reads, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” Paul makes a similar argument in 1 Corinthians 14 where he writes, “The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says” (1 Corinthians 14:34). Paul makes the argument that women are not allowed to teach and/or exercise authority over men within the church setting. Passages such as 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:6-9 seem to limit church leadership "offices" to men, as well.

Egalitarianism essentially makes its case based on Galatians 3:28. In that verse Paul writes, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” The egalitarian view argues that in Christ the gender distinctions that characterized fallen relationships have been removed. However, is this how Galatians 3:28 should be understood? Does the context warrant such an interpretation? It is abundantly clear that this interpretation does damage to the context of the verse. In Galatians, Paul is demonstrating the great truth of justification by faith alone and not by works (Galatians 2:16). In Galatians 3:15-29, Paul argues for justification on the differences between the law and the promise. Galatians 3:28 fits into Paul’s argument that all who are in Christ are Abraham’s offspring by faith and heirs to the promise (Galatians 3:29). The context of this passage makes it clear Paul is referring to salvation, not roles in the church. In other words, salvation is given freely to all without respect to external factors such as ethnicity, economic status, or gender. To stretch this context to also apply to gender roles in the church goes far beyond and outside of the argument Paul was making.

What is truly the crux of this argument, and what many egalitarians fail to understand, is that a difference in role does not equate to a difference in quality, importance, or value. Men and women are equally valued in God’s sight and plan. Women are not inferior to men. Rather, God assigns different roles to men and women in the church and the home because that is how He designed us to function. The truth of differentiation and equality can be seen in the functional hierarchy within the Trinity (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:3). The Son submits to the Father, and the Holy Spirit submits to the Father and the Son. This functional submission does not imply an equivalent inferiority of essence; all three Persons are equally God, but they differ in their function. Likewise, men and women are equally human beings and equally share the image of God, but they have God-ordained roles and functions that mirror the functional hierarchy within the Trinity.

By the way, I think women are better suited for some roles than men. As an example, I will submit that it is rare that a women will sexually abuse a child. Therefore, I think that women are better suited for taking care of children, or perhaps even youth. Additionally, instructing other women and young ladies in certain areas is more suitable for another woman. Same with men.

I suspect I'm kicking the hornet's nest again, because certain groups with weak men and dominant women hate this topic.

However, the reason I am thinking about this topic is due to being reminded about a woman whose books I have enjoyed.

Her name is Nancy Guthrie.

I know, though, that Nancy is in subjection to male leadership in her fellowship. And, she is not an elder.

I would highly commend her books.

https://smile.amazon.com/Even-Bette...9Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=

https://smile.amazon.com/Holding-Ho...&keywords=nancy+guthrie&qid=1588171175&sr=8-8


So, I don't think the gift of teaching is limited to men. However, at the same time, the qualifications for an elder specifically refer to men, and not women. This cannot be ignored, claiming cultural differences, without allowing others to use the same arguments to defend acceptance of undisciplined unrepentant homosexual behavior and even homosexual clergy.

Ive read that 1 in 5 sexually abused children is by female predators, I'm not so sure that is rare.

I don't know..but it's far less than males.

If 4/5 are abused by males.

Here's some figures from 2013:

Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse Are Often Related to the Victim. Out of the sexual abuse cases reported to CPS in 2013, 47,000 men and 5,000 women were the alleged perpetrators. In 88% of the sexual abuse claims that CPS substantiates or finds supporting evidence of, the perpetrator is male.

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens

12% female perps is not equal abuse yet far from rare.

I see no need for this thread, given that the subject was discussed for dozens of pages just a few weeks ago.

I think it's enough to make my point..

Women are much safer to have working with youth.

I believe statistics would possibly indicate the same thing with married men, though.

I don't know about you but if I was a pastor, I'd look twice if a single guy was volunteering for working with children, as compared to a lady. There are many other factors, such as how well you know them though.

I have a friend who was a ministerial trainee. He was young (22 or so at the time). Anyways he got involved sexually with a 17 year old girl who was under his care. He halted it after a few months, but it was discovered later and he is no longer being considered for being a pastor.

I am convinced that women do much better in certain roles, and much worse in certain roles.

Regardless, though, Scripture specifies that an elder must be a man who is the husband of only one wife, and has his home under control.

Well it’s best to keep your eyes open on any odd behavior rather a man or woman.

as far as pastoring not many churches alllow woman to teach anyhow so you probably won’t find much info on that

Honestly I don't know the difference between those two words so I didn't vote but regardless of any arguments or debates which there have been many it is my firm belief that God will call those who he calls.
If a man leading the church as the pastor become corrupt and fails at his role but speaks of how women are not to lead or preach in church God might humble him by placing a women pastor to take his place.

A good friend of mine who I always go to for council Angela is one such person, God has used her many many times and her being a women did not stop her calling. I know the arguments but this is my view on it, I am not for or against any beliefs that say this or that on the matter I just don't like to keep God in a box

I guess im kinda everything. While I believe God sometimes uses women i leadership...which we know of many woman in the bible who were leaders even in the new testament....I do believe that woman are a mans helper. We shouldnt rule over our man. Ruling as in taking his place and controlling him.

That’s a good way to look at it, similar to this verse below possibly

Galatians 3:23
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

We shouldnt rule over our man. Ruling as in taking his place and controlling him. Like every marriage ever And yeah I agree there is a time and place for everything after all

Theres a difference between saving u guys from your own selves and ruling. Guys have a talent to get into complicated situations and do the exact opposite of what you should do...sp superwoman needs to come to rescue

Just a quick note..

One of my lady friends became very irritated with me over this topic, as she is an egalitarian. She appealed to her theology degree as proof that she was more qualified than me to examine this topic

While I acknowledge the value in academic degrees in theology (mine is an undergraduate degree in business/accounting), I would also point out that numerous other conservative evangelical people with better credentials than her disagree with her egalitarian view on biblical grounds, including all the authors and authorities I would respect.

Be careful when examining their arguments. Are they presenting a strawman? Are they attacking a minority opinion within evangelical Christianity?

Are they considering the different roles within the Triune God? Can we call Jesus "inferior" if he has a different role as the one who atoned for sin on the Cross, versus the Father who elects and the Holy Spirit who regenerates? If there are distinctions in roles, then does this automatically imply inferiority?

Additionally, the claim is commonly made that Deborah was a judge over all Israel. However, we know that many of the judges had problematic characteristics. And, Deborah herself wanted the men in Israel to "wear the pants", and they refused to do so...her general was an example of this. And, it is likely they will not tell you that the prior judge's name hints at the likelihood that he was a Gentile. If this is true, we have a Gentile rulling over Israel, which was definitely problematic.

Scripture describes elders as men with one wife. Therefore, this implies that females cannot be elders. Additionally, this man needs to be ruling his household well. We know from other writings of Paul that the man is the head of the woman, like Christ is the head of the Church. Male headship is definitely a biblical concept, and handling this headship well was one of the qualifications of an elder (1 Cor 11, 1 Tim 3).

I would also point out that MANY groups which have allowed female elders have drifted off into permissiveness regarding homosexuality, approving of same sex unions and gay clergy. ELCA, PCUSA, the Anglican Church, and United Methodists are just some of those (although United Methodist Church will likely split over this issue).

I understand that the following books are some of the best books on the topic if someone wants to study the topic in depth:

Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More Than 100 Disputed Questions, Wayne Grudem

Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Wayne Grudem, John Piper

As a final comment, the reason I mentioned this relates to Nancy Guthrie. She is a talented author, and has produced some good materials. She leads conferences for women related to biblical theology. She is pursuing advanced studies in theology.

I don't think that she is disqualified from producing such materials and lecturing on these topics. It would not be the same situation if she was an elder in her congregation, particularly the head pastor. I simply would not attend a church with a woman head pastor.

And, this position is based solidly on biblical data.

Name one lady elder mentioned in Scripture. You can find none.

Phoebe will be brought up by the other side. She was not an elder.

Scriptures referring to women as deacons (which is actually a generic term for servant) might be brought up. There is no proof that a woman was a deacon in the sense of occupying an office. I really wouldn't have an issue with women being deacons anyways, though.

Scriptures which refer to women as "apostles" might be brought up. The word for "apostle" refers generically to anyone who is sent by the church, as well as referring to a specific office. There was no woman who was an "apostle of Christ". There were women who were sent by the Church for specific reasons, and in that sense, Scripture calls them "apostles", but not in the sense of a specific office.

Regarding the qualifications for apostleship in general, though, I like this article:

https://thecripplegate.com/are-there-still-apostles-today/

I have seen articles where charismatic women assume more titles than the Holy Spirit, including the title of apostle. It's really quite comical. Their spiritual resumes are nothing but one big brag-fest, with a few mentions of God. I digress, though.

Anyways, that's my view on the matter. In particular, my main issue is that I don't think any woman can be the head pastor of a congregation. For any role below the head pastor, I am open minded to considering the possibility. However, I strongly believe that men and women are equipped in different ways to serve God and fellow man. And, design itself declares this truth. I could go into a discussion of the male and female anatomy and how a woman is more equipped to nurse children, and men are more equipped for other activities, but I will spare you the details.

Most of all, though, I will point people to the fact that man and women were created in the image of God, to reflect their Triune God. I would focus on the unity yet complexity of the Triune God, and how this reflects itself in the family and the Christian community. And, I woudl also warn against egalitarianism because it is yet another attempt to blur the distinctions between the sexes, and has led to the acceptance of homosexuality within the Church. I am not saying every egalitarian approves of homosexuality and other aberrant behavior, but there is a definite trend in this direction evidenced in egalitarian churches.

Mary Magdalene was the first person Jesus sent to testify of His resurrection

I should have said "professing church" rather than the Church here, as I don't think real Christians would accept homosexuality, at least not long term:

"I would also warn against egalitarianism because it is yet another attempt to blur the distinctions between the sexes, and has led to the acceptance of homosexuality within the Church."

Here's an example of a bad argument:

It has been held by some that since God calls the woman a "helper" in Genesis 2:20 that women are somehow inferior to men.

It is rightly pointed out that the same Hebrew word for "helper" is used to refer to God himself, in his role as Savior. Obviously God is not inferior to men, so the word "helper" does not necessarily mean inferiority.

However, who is using this argument nowadays? I don't know anyone who is using it personally. If an ill-instructed Christian uses this argument, then he needs to be corrected on this, but I don't know people who are using it.

The current trend is to focus on the union between man and woman, and how this mirrors relationships within the Triune God, and relationships between Christ and the Church.

And, it is very clear to Reformed people anyways, that there are role distinctions within the Trinity. The Father elects, the Son atones, the Spirit applies. Role distinctions do not imply inferiority, especially in terms of essence, but also in terms of role.

So, this is another faulty argument, because it doesn't reflect the most well-ordered thinking within the evangelical community.

Another argument is that role distinctions are a product of the Fall, and these role distinctions are not to be maintained in a church of redeemed individuals. First, role distinctions are based on the Triune God and not the Fall. It is true that men do not reflect Christ like they should, and women do not reflect the Church as they should, and both of those issues are related to the Fall. However, I do not see evidence that role distinctions are inherently a product of the Fall.

As well, there are some issues related to the Fall that we have to deal with, even if we are believers. For instance, my body is wasting away regardless if I am redeemed spiritually or not. I await for the consummation of my redemption at Jesus' return. I don't believe these distinctions are related to the Fall, anyways.

This society is struggling in every way it can to eliminate proper role distinctions and to blur the lines related to God's created order, in order to cause chaos. I personally think it's a Satanic attack. At the same time, though, I do acknowledge that some men within the Church are Neanderthals in some of their understanding related to this topic. Unfortunately, their understanding is often used as a strawman to promote unbiblical blurring of role distinctions.

You are agreeing with him