Bruce McNair
Houston South, Texas

Synopsis:

Two of the primary arguments used to support the idea of ordaining women are the following: 

1)      There have been women prophets in the Old and New Testaments.  These women spoke with authority.  Since congregational teaching is also a form of authoritative speech, and since female prophets “speak with authority”, what would be wrong with women being ordained as pastors and teachers? 

2)      There was at least one women in the Old Testament who was chosen by God to lead Israel—Deborah.  If it was OK to have a woman leader then, what would be wrong with having a woman pastor or congregational teacher now? 

My purpose is to briefly examine the validity of these arguments. 

I Samuel 3:1  “The boy Samuel ministered before the Lord…”  This is the occasion of the calling of Samuel, when he was just a boy.  God gives a message to Samuel at this time, and this message is relayed to Eli.  In effect, this could be called Samuel’s first prophecy, the first time that he “spoke with authority”.   

My question is this:  If we are to say that a woman may be ordained to the office of pastor or teacher, supported by the argument that women were also prophets, then could we not say that boys may also be ordained to be teachers and prophets?  After all, Samuel was a boy, right?  

Judges 14:1  “Samson went down to Timnah, and saw there a young Philistine woman…”.  This is the beginning of the ‘ministry’ of Samson.  Samson, like Deborah, was a leader of the Israelites during the period of the Judges.  Unlike Deborah, he was not a prophet.  Still, God had chosen him to be a leader.  But Samson had some problems.  Judges 14 records his love affair with a pagan woman.  The next chapter refers to his vengeance against the Philistines.  Chapter 16 records his affair with a pagan prostitute, and his calamitous relationship with Delilah, another pagan woman. 

Is there anyone that believes that Samson would make a good candidate for pastor, elder, or teacher?  It seems fairly obvious that Samson had some serious hang-ups.  Yet God chose him to lead the Israelites, right?  Here’s what I’m getting at:  Some try to say that women should be eligible for positions of leadership in the church, citing the example of Deborah in the Old Testament.  They say “Hey, Deborah was a leader of Israel, so it’s OK for women to be leaders in the Church today.”  But couldn’t we use the same logic to say that it’s OK for people with serious character flaws to be ordained also, since Samson was of that sort, and God still used him to lead His people?  

Those who use the example of Deborah to support the notion that women may be ordained to positions of teaching or authority, seem to be basing their argument on the premise that “Old Testament examples are a sufficient basis for New Testament practice”.   This premise may seem to work well with Judges chapter 7, but it seems to me that the argument doesn’t hold up so well if we apply it to Judges 14-16. 

Num. 23:5  “The Lord put a message in Balaam’s mouth…”  Balaam is one of the most infamous characters of the Old Testament.  He would be close to the top of the list of “bad boys of the Bible”.  Balaam was a total pagan, an idolater, a false prophet, a man soundly condemned in scripture.  But there’s an odd foot-note to the story of Balaam:  His most famous message was actually a prophecy that he received from God—a prophecy concerning the blessing of the Israelites.  Chapter 24:2 actually states that “the Spirit of God came upon Him”!  Think of that.  God uses a false prophet to convey the truth! 

What is the relevance of this passage regarding Balaam?  The point has been made that the female prophets in the Bible “spoke with authority”.  This being the case, and teaching also being a form of “authoritative speech”, why not allow women to teach in the Church (or be pastors and elders)?”  Good question.  And some would answer:  “There’s no reason why not”.  But wait a minute.  If we allow women to teach the congregation, supported by the fact that women prophets “spoke authoritatively”, then could we not also make a case for ordaining unbelievers?  After all, Balaam, a classic unbeliever, spoke “with authority.” 

The prophecy of Caiaphas, the high priest who participated in the plot to kill Jesus, is in the same category.  God led Caiaphas to make a prophecy.  Hence “he spoke with authority”.  His prophecy was that “one man should die for the people” (John 11:50). 

The broader question here is this:  “What are the differences between the qualifications of a prophet and those of a church leader?”  If they are similar, the argument for the ordination of women would be bolstered.  It is not within the scope of this short paper to make any detailed analysis of this question.  However, a few observations do come to the surface, and may be relevant. 

First, the qualifications for church leader are explicitly stated in several NT passages, most notably, I Timothy 3, whereas there are no passages (that I am aware of), which address the qualifications for prophet. 

Second, church leaders are selected by others in authority, based upon an assessment of the person’s character and skills.  However, with regard to the selection of prophets, I can not think of a single case in which any person had any involvement—the selection was made entirely by the Lord, for reasons that are only his own.  Even apostles were selected (in at least one example—see Acts 1), with some human involvement.  The same can not be said for prophets. 

It appears that God did not use any list of “qualifications” when he selected prophets, both in the Old and New Testaments.  In fact, some of the prophets whom he selected seem to have had character flaws or ‘gift limitations’ which would have disqualified them from being chosen, were we to use I Timothy 3 as a guide-line. 

Consider the following ‘requirements’ that Paul listed as being important when selecting a person for leadership.  Note that God selected prophets who certainly did not meet these qualifications.   

v     I Tim. 3:2:  “…must be above reproach...”  But God chose Moses, who had committed murder (Ex. 2:12), to lead the Israelites, and to serve as a prophet.

v     I Tim. 3:2  “…the husband of but one wife…”  But God chose David, who had at least six wives, to lead Israel and serve as a prophet. 

v     I Tim. 3:2  “…able to teach…”  But God chose Moses, who had a speech impediment, to be his spokesman.

v     I Tim. 3:4  “He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect.”  Both Samuel and David failed as parents.  God, in fact, selected them to become prophets before they had even become parents, whereas Paul seems to make the ability to manage children as pre-requisite to the selection. 

We could add many other Old Testament leaders to the above list, but this is not necessary.  The above examples demonstrate emphatically that the qualifications for Old Testament leadership or “prophet-ship” are not a sufficient guide for New Testament leadership-selection. 

The conclusion of all this seems obvious:  The fact that certain women “spoke with authority” can not be used as an argument to support the decision to appoint women to positions of teaching within the congregation.  Why?  Because the same argument could be used to support the ordination of  children (Samuel), or unbelievers (Balaam and Caiaphas), since they all “spoke with authority.” 

 In the Old Testament, God spoke his message through righteous men and women.  But he also spoke his message through the unrighteous, like Balaam, when it suited his purpose.  In the Old Testament, God had women prophets—but he also appointed Samuel, a child, to be a prophet.  In the Old Testament, God chose Deborah to lead Israel--but he also led Israel by young children such as Joash and Josiah.  In the Old Testament, God chose a woman of good character to be a judge—but he also chose Samson, a man with poor character. 

In light of the above, it does not seem sound, in my opinion, to use the examples of female prophets, or of Old Testament female leaders, as an argument to support the ordination of women in the Church age.  Instead, we need to base such decisions upon scriptural passages that specifically address the issue of NT church-leader selection.