Let me summarize what we’ve discovered so far: Even though God declared His hatred of divorce, He gave no indication before or during the old covenant that remarriage was a sin, with these two exceptions: (1) the twice-divorced or once-divorced once-widowed woman remarrying her first husband and (2) the case of a divorced woman marrying a priest. Furthermore, God gave no indication that marrying a divorced person was a sin for anyone except priests.

This stands in apparent contrast to what Jesus stated about divorced people who remarry and those who marry divorced persons. Jesus said such people commit adultery (see Matt. 5:32). So we are either misunderstanding Jesus or Moses, or God changed His law. My suspicion is that we might be misinterpreting what Jesus taught, because it would seem strange that God would suddenly declare something to be morally sinful that was morally acceptable for fifteen hundred years under a Law that He gave to Israel.

Before we tackle this apparent contradiction more fully, may I also point out that God’s permission of remarriage under the old covenant did not carry any stipulations that were based on the reasons for one’s divorce or the degree of guilt one incurred in the divorce. God never said that certain divorced people were disqualified from being remarried because their divorce was not for legitimate reasons. He never said that some people were uniquely worthy to remarry because of the legitimacy of their divorce. Yet such judgments are often attempted by modern ministers based on one-sided testimony. For example, a divorced woman tries to convince her pastor that she is worthy to be permitted to be remarried because she was just the victim of her divorce. Her former husband divorced her–she didn’t divorce him. But if that pastor was given an opportunity to hear her former husband’s side of the story, he might become somewhat sympathetic for him. Perhaps she was a beast and shares some blame.

I’ve known a husband and wife who both tried to provoke the other to file for divorce so that they could avoid the guilt of being the person who filed for the divorce. They both wanted to be able to say after the divorce that it was their spouse, not them, who filed for divorce, thus making their subsequent second marriages lawful. We may be able to fool people, but we can’t fool God. For example, what is His appraisal of the woman who, in disobedience to God’s Word, continually withholds sex from her husband and then divorces him because he became unfaithful to her? Is she not at least partly responsible for the divorce?

The case of the twice-divorced woman we just read about from Deuteronomy 24 does not say anything about the legitimacy of her two divorces. Her first husband found some “indecency” in her. If that “indecency” had been adultery, she would have been worthy of death according to the Law of Moses, which prescribed that adulterers be stoned (see Lev. 20:10). So, if adultery is the only legitimate reason for divorce, perhaps her first husband did not have good reason to divorce her. On the other hand, perhaps she had committed adultery, and he, being a righteous man like Mary’s Joseph, “desired to put her away secretly” (Matt. 1:19). There are many possible scenarios.

Her second husband is said to have simply “turned against her.” Once again, we don’t know who was to blame or if they shared the blame. But it doesn’t make any difference. God’s grace was extended to her to remarry anyone who would take the chance on a twice-divorced woman, with the exception of her first husband.

Since it is common knowledge that women make up more than one-half of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ, it is important to understand their God-ordained role within the body. In most churches and ministries, women are viewed as valuable workers, as they often do the majority of the overall ministry.

Yet not all agree on women’s roles. Women are often restricted from certain areas of ministry within the church that have to do with speaking and leadership. Some churches allow for female pastors; many do not. Some allow for women to teach while others do not. Some restrict women from speaking at all during church services.

Most of these disagreements hinge on various interpretations of Paul’s words regarding women’s roles found in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 and 1 Tim. 2:11-3:7. These scriptures will be the focus of our study, particularly at the end of this chapter.

Let us begin with a foundational truth with which we can all agree. Most fundamentally, Scripture affirms that God is very much against divorce in general. During a time when some Israelite men were divorcing their wives, He declared through His prophet Malachi:

I hate divorce…and him who covers his garment with wrong….So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously (Mal. 2:16).

This should not surprise anyone who knows something about the loving and just character of God, or anyone who knows something about how divorce damages husbands, wives and children. We would have to question the moral character of anyone who was in favor of divorce in a general way. God is love (see 1 John 4:8), and thus He hates divorce.

Some Pharisees once asked Jesus a question regarding the lawfulness of divorce “for any cause.” His response reveals His fundamental disapproval of divorce. In fact, divorce was never His intention for anyone:

And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?” And He answered and said, “Have you not read, that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh’? Consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matt. 19:3-6).

Historically, we know that there were two schools of thought among Jewish religious leaders in Jesus’ day. We’ll explore those two schools of thought in more detail later, but suffice it for now to say that one was conservative and one was liberal. The conservatives believed that a man was only permitted to divorce his wife for very serious moral reasons. The liberals believed that a man could divorce his wife for just about any reason, including even finding a more attractive woman. These contradicting convictions were the very basis of the Pharisees’ question to Jesus.

Jesus appealed to verses of Scripture from the earliest pages of Genesis that show how God’s original plan was to join men and women together permanently , not temporarily. Moses declared that God made the two sexes with marriage in mind, and that marriage is such a significant relationship that it becomes the primary relationship. Once it is established, it ranks higher than one’s relationship with his or her parents. Men leave their parents to cleave to their wives.

Moreover, the sexual union between man and wife points to their God-ordained oneness. Obviously, such a relationship, one that results in offspring, was not meant by God to be temporary, but meant to be permanent. I suspect that the tone of Jesus’ response to the Pharisees indicated His grave disappointment that such a question was even being asked. God certainly did not intend that men would divorce their wives “for any cause.”

Of course, God did not intend that anyone sin in any way, but all of us have. Mercifully, God made provision to rescue us from our slavery to sin. Moreover, He has some things to say to us after we have done what He did not want us to do. Likewise, God never intended for anyone to divorce, but divorce was inevitable among humans not submitted to God. God was not surprised at the first divorce or the millions of subsequent divorces. And so He not only declares His hatred of divorce, but He also has some things to say to people after they’ve been divorced.

Interestingly, we also find a woman being called of God as prophetesses in the New Testament. When Jesus was just a few days old, Anna recognized Him and began proclaiming His messiahship:

And there was a prophetess, Anna the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was advanced in years, having lived with a husband seven years after her marriage, and then as a widow to the age of eighty-four. And she never left the temple, serving night and day with fastings and prayers. And at that very moment she came up and began giving thanks to God, and continued to speak of Him to all those who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem (Luke 2:36-38; emphasis added).

Note that Anna spoke of Jesus to all those ‘who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem.” That would of course include men. Thus Anna could be said to have been teaching men about Christ.

There are other women in the New Testament whom God used in the gift of prophecy. Jesus’ mother Mary is certainly in that group (see Luke 1:46-55). Every time Mary’s prophetic words are read in a church service, it could be said that a woman is teaching the church. (And God unquestionably honored womanhood by sending His Son into the world by means of a woman, something He could have done by many other means.)

The list continues. God foretold by the mouth of the prophet Joel that when God poured out His Spirit, both sons and daughters in Israel would prophesy (see Joel 2:28). Peter confirmed that Joel’s prophecy was certainly applicable to the new covenant dispensation (see Acts 2:17).

We are told in Acts 21:8-9 that Philip the evangelist had four daughters who were prophetesses.

Paul wrote of women prophesying in the church gatherings (see 1 Cor. 11:5). It is clear from the context that men were present.

With all of the scriptural examples of women being used by God as prophetesses and to prophecy, we certainly have no good reason to be closed to the idea that God might use women in such ministries! Moreover, there is nothing that would lead us to think that women can’t prophesy to men on God’s behalf.

What about women serving as pastors? It seems clear that the office of pastor/elder/overseer is intended by God to be held by men:

It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:1-2; emphasis added).

For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might set in order what remains, and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man be above reproach, the husband of one wife (Tit. 1:5-6; emphasis added).

Paul does not expressly say that women are forbidden from holding the office, and so we might exercise a little caution in making an absolute blanket conclusion. It seems that there are numerous very effective female pastors/elders/overseers around the world today, particularly in developing nations, yet they are still the overwhelming minority. Perhaps God does occasionally call women to this role when it serves His wise kingdom purposes or when there is a shortage of qualified male leadership. It is also possible that many of the female pastors in the body of Christ today are actually called to other ministry offices that are biblically valid for women, such as the office of prophetess, but current church structure only allows them to function in a pastoral role.

Why is the office of pastor/elder/overseer reserved for men? Understanding the function of that office might help us to understand. One of the scriptural requirements for the pastor/elder/overseer is that,

He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)” (1 Tim. 3:4-5).

This requirement makes perfect sense when we realize that the New Testament elder oversaw a small house church. His role was similar to that of a father overseeing his household. This helps us to understand why the pastoral office should be held by a man—because it so closely resembles the family structure which, if it is in line with God’s design, should be headed by a husband, not a wife. More on this later.

How about female teachers? The New Testament doesn’t mention any. Of course, the Bible doesn’t mention any men called to be teachers either. Priscilla (just mentioned above and also known as Prisca), wife of Aquila, was involved in teaching at least on a small scale. For example, when she and Aquila heard Apollos preaching a deficient gospel in Ephesus, ‘They took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26). No one can debate that Priscilla helped her husband teach Apollos, a man. Additionally, twice in Scripture Paul makes mention of both Priscilla and Aquila when he writes of ‘the church their house” (see Rom. 16:3-5; 1 Cor. 16:19), and he calls them both ‘fellow workers in Christ” in Romans 16:3. There is little doubt that Priscilla had some active role in ministry along side her husband.

Before we address Paul’s words about women keeping silent in the church and his forbidding women to teach men, lets consider one other scripture that will help us balance those.

When Jesus was resurrected, an angel commissioned at least three women to teach Jesus’ male disciples. Those women were instructed to tell the disciples that Jesus had risen and that He would appear to them in Galilee. But that is not all. A short time later, Jesus Himself appeared to the same women and commanded them to instruct the disciples to go to Galilee (see Matt. 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-7).

First, I think it is significant that Jesus chose to first appear to women and then to men. Second, if there was something fundamentally or morally wrong with women teaching men, one would think that Jesus wouldn’t have told women to teach men about His resurrection, hardly a trivial piece of information, and one that He could have delivered on His own (and in fact later did). No one can argue with this fact: the Lord Jesus instructed women to teach a vital truth and give some spiritual instructions to some men.

We have conclusively established that women can serve in the office of prophetess (if called by God). What about other types of ministries? It is enlightening to read Paul’s salutations in Romans 16 where he praises a number of women who served in ministry for the sake of God’s kingdom. One may even have been listed as an apostle. In the three consecutive quotations that follow, I’ve italicized all the female names:

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well (Rom. 16:1-2; emphasis added).

What an endorsement! We don’t know exactly what ministry Phoebe fulfilled, but Paul called her ‘a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea” and ‘a helper of many,” including himself. Whatever she was doing for the Lord, it must have been quite significant to warrant Paul’s endorsement of her to the entire church in Rome.

Next we will read about Prisca (Priscilla), who, along with her husband, Aquila, had such a significant ministry that all the Gentile churches appreciated them:

Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life risked their own necks, to whom not only do I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles; also greet the church that is in their house. Greet Epaenetus, my beloved, who is the first convert to Christ from Asia. Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you. Greet Andronicus and Junias [or Junia, as the KJV translates it, which is feminine] my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me (Rom. 16:3-7; emphasis added).

Regarding Junias, it would seem logical to think that a person who is ‘outstanding among the apostles” could only be an apostle. If the correct translation is Junia, then she was a female apostle. Prisca and Mary were workers for the Lord.

Greet Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord. Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ, and Stachys my beloved. Greet Apelles, the approved in Christ. Greet those who are of the household of Aristobulus. Greet Herodion, my kinsman. Greet those of the household of Narcissus, who are in the Lord. Greet Tryphaena and Tryphosa, workers in the Lord. Greet Persis the beloved, who has worked hard in the Lord. Greet Rufus, a choice man in the Lord, also his mother and mine. Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brethren with them. Greet Philologus and Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them (Rom. 16:8-15; emphasis added).

Clearly, women can be ‘workers” in ministry.

Lastly, we come to the second ‘problem passage,” found in Paul’s first letter to Timothy:

Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim. 2:11-14).

Surely Paul knew of Miriam, Deborah, Huldah and Anna, four prophetesses who spoke on God’s behalf to men and women, effectively teaching them God’s will. Surely he knew that Deborah, a judge over Israel, exercised some degree of authority over men and women. Surely he knew that God had poured out His Spirit on the day of Pentecost, partially fulfilling Joel’s prophecy of the last days when God would pour out his Spirit on all flesh so that sons and daughters would prophesy the word of God. Surely he knew that Jesus commissioned some women to take a message from Him to His male apostles. Surely he knew of his own words of approval, written to the Corinthian church, regarding women praying and prophesying during church gatherings. Surely he remembered that he had told the Corinthians that any one of them might receive a teaching to share with the body from the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor. 14:26). So what did he intend to convey when he wrote these words to Timothy?

Notice that Paul appeals to two related facts from Genesis as the basis for his instruction: (1) Adam was created before Eve and (2) Eve and not Adam was deceived, and she fell into transgression. The first fact establishes the proper relationship between the husband and wife. As taught by the order of creation, the husband is to be the head, something that Paul teaches elsewhere (see 1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:23-24).

The second fact Paul mentions is not meant to convey that women are more easily deceived than men, because they aren’t. In fact, since there are more women and than men in the body of Christ, it could be argued that men are more likely to be deceived than women. Rather, the second fact shows that when God’s intended order in the family is neglected, Satan can gain entrance. Humanity’s whole problem began in the garden when the relationship between a man and his wife was out of order—Adam’s wife was not submitted to him. Adam must have told his wife God’s instruction regarding the forbidden fruit (see Gen. 2:16-17; 3:2-3). She, however, didn’t follow his instruction. In a sense she even exercised authority over him when she gave him the forbidden fruit to eat (see Gen. 3:6). It wasn’t Adam leading Eve in that case; it was Eve leading Adam. The result was disaster.