Critiquing: #047 — Should Women Preach and Lead in Church? What About Marriage?

November 19, 2020 | Ask NT Wright Anything – Premier

Gender Roles — Biblical Interpretation — Female Leadership — Church Governance — Marriage Dynamics

---

Episode Assessment:

		Commentary
Degree of Accuracy	B	The episode is mostly accurate in its interpretation of biblical texts, although some interpretations are subjective and open to debate. NT Wright provides sound biblical references but does not always incorporate diverse theological perspectives, potentially limiting the scope of accuracy.
Degree of Coherence	B+	The arguments are logically structured and coherent, following a clear line of reasoning. The discussion moves systematically through key points about gender roles and leadership, maintaining internal consistency and clarity throughout.
Absence of Fallacies	C	There are occasional instances of potential logical fallacies, such as appealing to tradition and selective interpretation of scripture. For example, the argument that Jesus choosing male apostles reflects an unchangeable divine order may constitute an appeal to tradition without considering the broader cultural context.
Degree of Evidence	C+	The episode provides biblical references but lacks extensive evidence from broader theological scholarship. While NT Wright’s arguments are supported by scriptural citations, there is a noticeable absence of references to contemporary theological research or historical-critical analysis.
Degree of Testability	D	The claims made are largely interpretative and not easily testable or verifiable. Theological interpretations and personal beliefs about gender roles are difficult to measure empirically, leading to a lower degree of testability in the episode’s assertions.
Rational Confidence	C	Confidence in the claims aligns with the degree of evidence, though some assertions are more speculative. The confidence expressed in traditional gender roles does not always match the varying degrees of biblical and scholarly support, leading to cautious rational confidence.

Potential/Apparent Weaknesses:

1. Appeal to Tradition

“The person who is commissioned to be the very first person to tell other people that Jesus is raised from the dead… is Mary Magdalene.”

The argument heavily relies on traditional interpretations without considering alternative scholarly perspectives. This can limit the depth of understanding and fails to acknowledge the complexity of biblical hermeneutics. The reliance on tradition as a primary argument without substantial engagement with contemporary exegesis can weaken the overall argument.

2. Selective Interpretation

“In terms of image-bearing, it’s quite clear in the Bible that men and women both and together reflect the image of God.”

The episode selectively interprets passages to support its views on gender roles, which may not fully represent the diverse interpretations within theological scholarship. This selective approach can lead to biased conclusions, as it overlooks the broader context and nuances of scriptural texts. Engaging with a wider range of interpretations would provide a more balanced perspective.

3. Lack of Testability

“Men and women are different and do different things and have different roles, etc.”

Such statements are broad and lack empirical testability. The episode would benefit from integrating more concrete, testable claims to support its arguments. For instance, exploring sociological or psychological studies on gender roles could provide a more evidence-based foundation for the discussion, enhancing its testability.

---

Formulations of Major Arguments:

Argument 1: Gender Roles in the Bible

Premises:

1. The Bible presents distinct roles for men and women.
2. These roles are rooted in creation and affirmed in scripture.
3. Women can have leadership roles but are traditionally limited in certain areas like preaching and eldership.

Conclusion:
Therefore, the biblical model supports distinct but complementary roles for men and women in church leadership.

Counter-Argument:
The interpretation of gender roles in the Bible varies widely among scholars. Some argue that the cultural context of the biblical era influenced these roles and that a modern understanding should emphasize equality. For example, Galatians 3:28 states, “There is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” suggesting an egalitarian approach. Additionally, early church history shows evidence of female leaders such as Phoebe and Junia, challenging the notion that leadership roles should be gender-restricted. The absence of female apostles can be seen as a product of the historical and cultural context rather than a divine mandate for all time. Moreover, interpreting scripture through a contemporary lens that values equality and inclusivity may offer a more holistic understanding of the gospel’s message.

---

Argument 2: Leadership and Image-Bearing

Premises:

1. Both men and women are created in the image of God.
2. This image-bearing includes reflecting God’s love and stewardship into the world.
3. Leadership roles within the church should reflect this shared image-bearing.

Conclusion:
Therefore, women should be allowed to take on leadership roles within the church, though traditional roles may still apply.

Counter-Argument:
While men and women both bear the image of God, the specific application of this principle to leadership roles is debated. The New Testament includes examples of female leaders like Phoebe and Junia, indicating early church inclusivity. Emphasizing traditional roles can restrict the full utilization of women’s gifts and undermine the principle of image-bearing. Galatians 3:28 highlights the equality of all believers in Christ, suggesting that leadership should be based on gifting and calling rather than gender. Furthermore, contemporary theological scholarship increasingly recognizes the importance of women’s leadership in reflecting the fullness of God’s image, advocating for a more inclusive approach that honors both men and women equally.

---

Argument 3: Marriage Dynamics

Premises:

1. The Bible describes a complementary relationship between husbands and wives.
2. This complementarity involves different but harmonious roles.
3. Effective marriages require mutual respect and understanding.

Conclusion:
Therefore, a balanced view of complementarian and egalitarian principles should guide marital relationships.

Counter-Argument:
The complementarian view can sometimes lead to hierarchical dynamics that are not in line with the mutual submission described in Ephesians 5:21, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Egalitarianism promotes equal partnership and shared leadership in marriage, which can prevent power imbalances and foster mutual growth. The Proverbs 31 woman exemplifies a partnership where both spouses support each other’s endeavors, challenging rigid role distinctions. Additionally, modern understandings of marriage emphasize the importance of equality, mutual support, and shared decision-making. By focusing on these principles, couples can build stronger, more resilient relationships that reflect the biblical call to love and mutual submission. Addressing the potential for abuse and power imbalances in complementarian models further strengthens the case for an egalitarian approach that prioritizes the well-being and flourishing of both partners.

◉ Addressing Argument #1:

The Universality of Paul’s Instruction in 1 Timothy 2:11-13

1 Timothy 2:11-13 is very clear in its instruction that women should not teach in the church. The passage states, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.”

11 γυνὴ ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ μανθανέτω ἐν πάσῃ ὑποταγῇ·
12 διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ’ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ.
13 Ἀδὰμ γὰρ πρῶτος ἐπλάσθη, εἶτα Εὕα.

Biblical Basis Beyond Cultural Context

The reasoning behind Paul’s instruction is not rooted in the cultural context of his time but rather in a universal principle that traces back to the very beginning of humanity with Adam and Eve. Paul explicitly references the creation order to justify his directive, stating that Adam was formed first, then Eve. This appeal to the creation narrative indicates that the rationale is timeless and universal, not limited to the cultural or societal norms of the first century.

Hermeneutical Integrity

To dismiss this passage as merely a cultural artifact is to abandon any hermeneutical standards that take the text seriously. Hermeneutics—the study of interpretation, especially of the Scriptures—demands that we respect the intention and context of the biblical authors. Paul’s reasoning is theological and rooted in the doctrine of creation, which transcends cultural and temporal boundaries.

Contemporary Scholarly Trends

The dismissal of this clear passage points to the extremes to which some Bible “scholars” will go to “modernize” Christianity. This often involves reinterpreting or disregarding teachings that are seen as outdated or incompatible with modern values. However, such an approach not only undermines the authority of the Scriptures but also contradicts the belief that these texts were inspired by God. By seeking to modernize Christianity in opposition to clear biblical teachings, these scholars demonstrate a willingness to prioritize contemporary cultural norms over the timeless truths of the Bible.

Conclusion

1 Timothy 2:11-13 presents a clear and unambiguous directive regarding the role of women in teaching within the church. The reasoning provided by Paul is rooted in the creation order, a universal principle that transcends cultural contexts. To dismiss this passage as a mere cultural artifact is to abandon the rigorous hermeneutical standards required for serious biblical interpretation. This approach highlights the lengths to which some scholars will go to align Christianity with modern values, often at the expense of the clear and authoritative teachings of Scripture.

---

We warmly welcome further discussion on this topic in the comments section. Let’s engage thoughtfully and respectfully as we explore this important aspect of our faith.