In this day of religious toleration and widespread acceptance of “new and better” things, many long-held beliefs and practices have come under scrutiny. Claiming that so much of old-fashioned religion is too old-fashioned for this modern day, many have joined a revolution that seeks to challenge doctrines which are incompatible with current trends. Such examination is not intrinsically wrong; yea, we should abandon doctrines and practices which do not pass Biblical standards. One of the doctrines receiving such a challenge in the last 100 years has been that of the gender boundaries of a preacher. For long, most agreed that God would only use a man as a preacher. Since the late 1800’s (particularly since Azusa Street in 1906-1908), many have claimed otherwise, saying our Lord equally considers a woman as a candidate for a preacher. When the debates have ended, the dust has settled, and the hair has quit flying, this question from Galatians 4:30 remains concerning whether God uses women as preachers: “Nevertheless what saith the scripture?”
The first reason I believe the scriptures forbid a woman to preach has to do with precedence. Nowhere in scripture did God set women over men ecclesiastically. A careful study of the entire scriptures will demonstrate that women were never in the offices of: priest, levite, tribal head, apostle, pastor, evangelist, or deacon (if you’re tempted to use the Greek to force “deaconess” over “servant” in Romans 16:1, what you’re really doing is correcting the Holy Word of God with corrupt Greek texts of which you know so little; parroting makes you look bad). There are a few mentions of women as prophetesses. We will deal honestly with these references, without dodging or hiding. In Exodus 15:20, we read of Miriam. The scripture says, “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.” This passage identifies Miriam as leading women, not men.
Judges 4 speaks of Deborah. The context of the passage indicates that she had to lead Barak because he was too afraid to lead for himself. And evidently he leaned on her for direction from the Lord. As a penalty for his dependence on this woman, Deborah herself tells him in verse 9, “… I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman…” Notice that the scripture never mentioned that God sent Deborah, but it does mention that He sent several other judges. Is what God did not say important as well?
II Kings 22 tells of a prophetess named Huldah. The leaders of the kingdom came to her for advice from the Lord, for whatever reason. But notice that she was not as the prophet Samuel, a man appointed to be a leader over Israel. This woman merely spoke God’s truth to men who inquired of her. She did not go about as did men like Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah. As a matter of fact, no Old Testament prophet who wrote a book in our cannon of scripture was female.
In Nehemiah 6:14 we read of another prophetess. Nehemiah prayed, “My God, think thou upon Tobiah and Sanballat according to these their works, and on the prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, that would have put me in fear.” This one evidently was a false prophetess, as is any modern woman seeking to be a preacher.
Two of the last three instances are in Luke 2:36 (Anna) and Acts 21:8-9. These are fulfillments of the prophecy made by Joel. Again, none of these women were found preaching in the streets of Jerusalem or any other city. Anna in particular seems to have spoken only to those who came to her.
The final mention in the New Testament of a prophetess is in Revelation. God chastised the church at Thyatira for allowing a woman prophet there, saying in 2:19, “Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.” Jezebel’s problem was the same as the modern preacher-woman – she called herself.
We would do well to note the definition of a prophet (and thus a prophetess). A prophet is generally defined as one who speaks for God and/or who foretells events at God’s direction. Hence a prophetess is a female who does so. But in every scriptural reference, no such woman usurped authority over men in doing so; they only spoke such things at the request of men (and hence the permission of God for that time).
We would further be wise to understand the distinction between a prophet and a preacher. Even if the Lord did allow for prophetesses, He did not allow for preacher women, because a preacher must be one who is capable of having authority over men as well as women. We will confront that topic shortly.
The Proponents
The next objection I have to women preachers deals with their proponents – those who support them. Most preacher women themselves have one major issue keeping them from being used of God even if they were called – rebellion. I have never met a “preacheress” who was in subjection to her husband (yea, how could she be?). Such defiance of a clear scriptural mandate is a certain indication of her rebellious spirit.
Not only are the preacheresses themselves detracting from their position, but their (oft weak) male and non-preacher female supporters do their position much harm. The vast majority of their proponents that I have met are not sure where the Word of God is. They use more bible translations than they know what to do with, often referring to the one that translates liberally enough to support their position for the moment.
Many who do not use perverted scriptures will still correct the King James Bible. In Romans 16:1, they refer to “the Greek” to change the word “servant” (referring to Phebe) into the word “deaconess.” Suffice it to say that, had the Lord wanted the word “deaconess” in the King James Bible, you would have found it there. If He cannot preserve His Word well enough to distinguish between a woman who is a servant and a woman who is an appointed deaconess (found nowhere, even in “the Greek”), then we do not have a Bible. Such a practice is Bible-correcting under the guise of clarification. If we are going to be plain, honest, and upright, let us do so without pretense.
Another problem with the proponents of women preachers is their false doctrine in areas other than the preservation of the Word of God. Most supporters of the preacheress cause also believe Tongues to be still used of God (while forgetting that no women ever spoke in tongues in the Bible). History indicates that the practice of women mumbling some unintelligible babble was a common practice of the short-haired priestess-whores of Delphi, across the way from Corinth. Such was likely the origin of the problems Paul corrected in I Corinthians chapters 12 through 14.
Other doctrines wherein supporters of preacheresses err are: eternal security (teaching we can lose salvation), local church (teaching that we’re all part of one big invisible church), and extra-scriptural revelation (implying the Word of God is not complete).
Propriety
My final objection (for this tract) to the preacheress issue is its propriety. In a nutshell, it is not appropriate for a woman to have ecclesiastical authority over a man (or for her to have any other authority over a man, but I have not space for that here). I shall likely be accused of being old-fashioned or male-chauvinist for this position; but if I am so, the Lord God is so, because He dictated so in His Word. And before I present scriptures, I recognize that many will say, “Well, the older societies would not support women preachers, but our modern society has learned better.” I hope no such fool will step forward, for I would have to remind him that this “modern society” has also “learned better” to the point that we have a preponderance of shacking up, children fornicating before age 13, plain lewdness on television, skyrocketing drug use (including alcohol and nicotine), classification of homosexuality as a birth-defect rather than a sin, the least churched society in history, over 200 bible translations that do not agree with one another, and a general tolerance for everything except truth.
I am well aware that there is a dearth of men with backbone, men who will stand for truth and lead others in the way of truth. But those things do not and cannot override the scriptures. In the home, the Lord ordered the man to be the leader and the wife to submit to him, as evidenced by Ephesians 5:22-23, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” 1 Corinthians 11:3 also makes some plain statements in this regard, “But 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.” Also notice verses 8-9, “For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
Taking the issue to the local church setting, Paul informed us in 1 Corinthians 14:34,
“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, as also saith the law.” He also instructed the young pastor Timothy in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” These verses do not apply solely to the home, but also to the local church.
Notice also, when Paul was telling Timothy the qualifications for the pastor of a local New Testament church, he rather closed the door on women. 1 Timothy 3:1-2 says, “This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach…” This passage presents two problems to the preacheress. The first problem is that Paul specifically stated that a man should be the one desiring the office. But almost as if anticipating that our Bible-correcting friends would try to relegate “man” to the generic meaning of “a person, male or female,” Paul also states that a bishop (pastor, etc.) should be the husband of one wife. So, unless you, preacheress, are capable of having a wife without sinning (quite impossible), you are no God-called preacher.
Some would further dilute the truth of 1 Timothy 3 by referring to verses such as Galatians 3:28, “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.” They would use this verse to say that women can be preachers, since God evidently sees no male nor female any longer. Well if that’s true, I challenge our preacheress friends to let their husbands bear the children from this day forward. What? You say that is impossible? You are correct. What Paul was telling us in Galatians 3:28 is that God is no respecter of persons when it comes to saving folks. He saves all who repent and believe on Him, whether male, female, bond, free, Jew, Greek, Black (I threw that in for any white-supremacist “Baptists” who would might get their racist hands on this), white, rich, poor, whatever. But when it comes to service, God has an order and the distinctions of that order are clear and unaltered.
The best encouragement I can offer a woman who thinks she has been called to preach is this: repent of the error someone led you into, submit yourself unto your husband (or father if you have no husband, and your pastor if you have no husband or father), find where and how God can use you teaching other ladies in your local church, and serve God to the fullest in that capacity. To usurp authority over men (whether in a pulpit, street-preaching, or pew-preaching) is sin and rebellion against God.
