Other Books at Freedom's Ring

Chapter 12

Other Women, Other Scriptures

It is very interesting to note that the woman at the well at Samaria went into the city of Sychar and proclaimed to that city that Jesus was the Christ. She testified before the whole city. John 4:39 says, "and from that city many of the Samaritans believed on Him because of the word of the woman who testified." Christ certainly approved of this woman proclaiming Him to the city.

If she could testify to one, she could testify to ten. If she could testify to ten, she could testify to one hundred or one thousand. No Bible rule sets the limit on the size or place for this woman or any woman to tell others about the Lord Jesus Christ.

If Christ approved of her action, it must conform to the law and to His will. If this woman, who had been married five times and was living with another man, was not restrained by Christ from declaring Him to this city and making converts, how can anyone conclude that the Lord would then forbid Christian women today from declaring his "unsearchable riches?"

We must conclude, therefore, that "as also saith the law" did not prohibit this woman from declaring Christ nor did it refer to other women who prophesied or testified, or judged men, or ruled over men in official positions. The law only referred to the husband-wife relationship, not men-women relationships, when it mentioned submission.

These women judges and prophetesses of the Old Testament ruled and preached with God's full approval and anointing. But someone will try to argue He did so only because no man was a leader. If that were the case, would we not conclude, then, that women ought to preach and rule if and where men will not or are not? And with God's approval? Certainly they should.

But someone else argues that when women rule, God's plan is thwarted. It was not in the cases of Miriam, Deborah, Noadiah, Huldah, Anna, etc. Why would it be now? Of course, the Bible does not spell out a plan in the first place. This is a false assumption upon which the male dominance doctrine has been built.

In Acts 4:31, Luke writes, "And when they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were gathered together; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spake the word of God with boldness." These disciples, both men and women, "were all filled ... and spake the word of God." There is not the slightest suggestion that "only" men were filled or "only" men spoke the word of God with boldness; the assumption that both "spake" is the only logical conclusion anyone could reach, unless one is trying to force a preconceived notion onto this passage.

In Acts 11:19, Luke writes, "They therefore that were scattered abroad upon the tribulations that arose about Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch speaking the word to none save only the Jews." No one would suggest that only the men were scattered and went forth speaking the word to these Jews.

In Romans 2:21, Paul asked the question, "Thou, therefore, that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Thou that preachest that a man should not steal, doest thou steal?" No one would conclude that only men could and should do this teaching and preaching on stealing. Could a woman preach against theft? Of course she could - and she should!

In Romans 10:11-15, Paul says, "For the scripture sayeth, 'Whosoever believeth on Him shall not be put to shame for there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, and is rich unto all that call upon Him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.' How, then, shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe on Him in whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach except they be sent? Even as it is written, how beautiful are the feet of them that bring back tidings of good things?" Would someone suggest that women were ruled out of bringing glad tidings, or preaching and teaching to unbelievers? No one can argue that women could not be sent in the field to make converts and to testify as did the Samaritan woman. Can't women too have beautiful feet?

In Romans 12:7-8 Paul says of the ministry, "Let us give ourselves to our ministry, or he that teacheth to his teaching, or he that exhorteth to his exhorting, he that giveth let him do it with liberality, he that ruleth with diligence, he that showeth mercy with cheerfulness." Would anyone suggest that only the men could do the ministering, the teaching, the exhorting, the giving (especially the giving), the ruling, and that the roles of women were only to "give" and to "show mercy" from this passage? Or is that a general application to every Christian to be a part in God's ministry? It obviously has a general application.

In I Corinthians 14:3 Paul says, "But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification and exhortation and consolation." No one will suggest that only men were able and privileged to prophesy, edify and console.

Jesus, in Matthew 28:19, gave the Great Commission: "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them." The command to teach and baptize was not restricted to men or to the twelve apostles. That command is applicable to every Christian, male and female.

The apostle Paul told Timothy in II Timothy 2:2, "and the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men who shall be able to teach others also." "Men" here is the word "anthropois," not the masculine form of "man." So, Paul charged Timothy to commit the message to men and women who, in turn, could continue to pass the word on through their teaching to other men and women.

In Hebrews 5:12 the writer states, "For when by reason of time, ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that someone teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God. And are become such as have need of milk and not solid food." What is the conclusion? If there were male Hebrew Christians who still needed milk, and if there happened to be female Hebrew Christians who had gone on to solid food and had matured in the faith, these mature, full-grown Christian women should certainly be permitted by God to teach those men and women who were yet immature, needing milk, and who could not eat solid food. This conclusion is obvious.

What we allow in the church is considerably different from what we preach in the church. We quote the law, "Keep silent ... ask their husbands at home." Yet, we allow women to ask questions in the church. They ask for prayers. They ask if the congregation is aware of someone being sick, or that someone has died, or of someone who had special needs. In all of our Bible classes we allow women to ask all kinds of questions, to read scriptures, to comment on them, and in so doing they teach others, both men and women. They even argue for a particular point of view and often win the argument on the meaning of a scripture. Because a man stands up in front of a class, that, by no means, suggests that he will be the only one who teaches anything. More often than not, some of the most factual, insightful, spiritual lessons are taught by the women in our public Bible classes.

But someone will say, "I Corinthians 14:34-34 teaches that wives are to ask all their questions at home, so it is wrong if they ask questions in a Bible class." Such questions would be wrong if they created confusion and showed disrespect, whether asked by a woman or a man, to a man or a woman. But the Bible makes no distinction between class assemblies and other assemblies. Men do.

I have been privileged to attend services in small churches around the world where the church came together for worship. They sang; they had Bible studies; they had prayer; they had an offering; they had communion; and everything was combined into one service. No one thought it was unscriptural for a woman in the Bible study portion of those single services to read, ask questions, make comments, and teach others what she had learned from the Bible.

As a boy, I used to attend a worship service at a nearby neighbor's house. I went with my mother and an older sister, who were both baptized believers. About a dozen saints gathered in this good brother's living room. Often, he was the only man present. One of the women, usually one of this brother's daughters, led the singing. The Bible class was taken from a quarterly. The women read verses and made intelligent and instructive comments; they asked and answered questions. After the study this brother passed the bread and the fruit of the vine for which he had led the prayer. A contribution was then taken, and one of the ladies led a song or two, and this brother led a closing prayer. Occasionally visiting preachers came through and preached sermons at these Sunday afternoon services. But no one, to my knowledge, would have had then, or would have now, the audacity to say that those women sinned in answering questions or reading their verses, or making comments as it came their turn around the room as they followed the lesson from a Firm Foundation quarterly in those worship services. I know of no one who would suggest that, somehow, the singing, the communion, the giving, the praying, were all separate from that "Bible study" in the middle of the service when the quarterly was used or that one part was worship service and one part a private Bible class. The worship did not begin with the first song and end with the main prayer and begin again after the Bible study and begin again with the Lord's Supper. Who would dare use such illogical arguments?

No one ever suggested then or now that God was displeased because those ladies read the scripture, discussed it, and taught what they believed it meant in the presence of that dear brother and occasionally other men. Nor did anyone think that those ladies that led the songs were out of line and in violation of the scripture or that they were usurping authority or exercising dominion over men. Incidentally, some of those songs were songs of prayers, and those ladies led in prayer with music. I cannot even imagine anyone thinking God was displeased with those worship services.

These sisters not only led the singing, but they selected the songs to be sung. No one thought then, nor would think now, that this was usurpation, yet they were in charge of the song service.

If there were a congregation of seven people and only one was a man, would he have to lead in every act of worship even if he was unqualified? I know of no scripture which says "God makes allowances for violating the 'silence rule' because the men of the church are unqualified or refuse to lead, or that the rule must be observed only if it is a big city church." Our whole presupposition on the "silence rule" is that qualified men always be present to lead. This is not necessarily so, nor is that a logical conclusion from any scripture.

If that man in this seven-member congregation got out of line morally or doctrinally, could the six women speak up, ask him questions, or discipline him? Or would they have to remain in silence and submission "as also saith the law?"

A woman can read, comment, lead singing, teach, pray, etc., without being guilty of usurpation. If a woman may do so when one man is present, she can, by the same logic and scripture, do so with 10, 100, or 1,000 men present.

We ask a simple question to thoughtful readers. Would God wish the church to grow and mature rapidly in faith, in Christian works, and in Christian living under able Christian women, or would He desire that the church be held back and be led by an illiterate Christian man who was a babe in Christ, because women must keep silent in the church? The answer is obvious. Of course, God would not want His church to be strangled, to be suffocated, or to remain in infancy in its learning and growth because there were no able or willing men present to lead. Nor would He want women's talents buried, strangled, suffocated, or for them to remain in infancy just because qualified men were available. Logically, God would want the talents of every Christian maximized. One must conclude that the scriptures referred to in this chapter apply to men and women alike.