(ChatGPT was used for editing purposes)
We cannot obey without asking, at least implicitly, “why?” Whenever we hear or read something, we understand it through our prior assumptions, knowledge, and shared understanding with the speaker or writer. Even when we grasp the intended meaning immediately without consciously asking “why?”, interpretation still takes place.
A good servant relies not only on the master’s commands but also on their knowledge of and relationship with the master. The broader and deeper that relationship, the better the servant can discern both the meaning of a command and the intention behind it. An experienced and loyal servant knows the master’s character, purposes, and concerns, and draws on that knowledge to respond faithfully to any command or situation.
When we encounter difficult passages such as “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak…” (1 Corinthians 14:34–35) or “I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man” (1 Timothy 2:12), we must consider their context and compare Scripture with Scripture. These are well-known practices of faithful exegetes. Yet these practices also involve our prior assumptions and interpretations. As we undertake careful exegesis, we ultimately seek to understand how biblical instructions express the will, character, and mission of God, and then consider what faithful obedience would look like in our context in order to serve those same purposes.[1] Asking “why?” is integral to this task: it requires us to account for the instruction itself, its place within God’s purposes as revealed throughout Scripture, and its appropriate application in our own setting.
Galatians 5:16–26 provides an overarching framework for this discernment:
16 What I say is this: let the Spirit direct your lives, and you will not satisfy the desires of the human nature. 17For what our human nature wants is opposed to what the Spirit wants, and what the Spirit wants is opposed to what our human nature wants. These two are enemies, and this means that you cannot do what you want to do. 18If the Spirit leads you, then you are not subject to the Law.
19 What human nature does is quite plain. It shows itself in immoral, filthy, and indecent actions; 20in worship of idols and witchcraft. People become enemies and they fight; they become jealous, angry, and ambitious. They separate into parties and groups; 21they are envious, get drunk, have orgies, and do other things like these. I warn you now as I have before: those who do these things will not possess the Kingdom of God.
22 But the Spirit produces love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23humility, and self-control. There is no law against such things as these. 24And those who belong to Christ Jesus have put to death their human nature with all its passions and desires. 25The Spirit has given us life; he must also control our lives. 26We must not be proud or irritate one another or be jealous of one another. (TEV)
These verses contrast the destructive tendencies of our human nature with the illuminating, Christ-centered guidance of the Spirit. A key step in approaching the two difficult passages mentioned above, therefore, is to ask why Paul gave these commands. His purpose must be understood in light of the commission he received from Christ: how do these instructions lead us to walk by the Spirit and free us from the desires of our human nature? Paul’s teaching serves the gospel of Jesus Christ, the expansion of God’s kingdom, and the building up of the church.
From this perspective, we can understand these restrictions as addressing circumstances in which women’s speaking, teaching, or exercising authority—in whatever specific sense Paul intended—was undermining the work of the gospel, the growth of the kingdom and the health of the local church. This applies even if Paul did intend a universal restriction on women in leadership; such a restriction needs to demonstrate how it served those purposes in Paul’s time, and how any application in a contemporary church advances those purposes as well.[2] The scope and purpose of any restriction (or affirmation) needs clarity concerning the fulfillment of kingdom purposes before treating it as comprehensive. Although spiritual fruit alone cannot establish the legitimacy of every ministry arrangement, an interpretation that would exclude an evidently fruitful ministry must offer a compelling account of how that exclusion serves God’s revealed purposes.
This principle provides a pathway for considering women’s leadership in the church today. Does a woman’s speaking, teaching, and exercise of authority advance the gospel, serve God’s kingdom, and build up her local church? Does her ministry bear the fruit of the Spirit? Where it does, we have good reason to recognize the Spirit’s work through her and to affirm her participation as consistent with the purposes of Paul’s teaching and the mission of Jesus. A fruitful ministry does not prove that every aspect of its practice is correct. Nevertheless, sustained evidence of truthfulness, love, holiness, and the building up of believers deserves serious consideration when evaluating a disputed interpretation. In exercising that discernment, we must take care not to “quench the Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 5:19).
Jesus’ encounter with the religious leaders in Mark 3:22–30 brings the seriousness of such discernment into focus. The scribes attributed his work to demonic power, and Mark explicitly connects Jesus’ warning about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to their claim that he had an unclean spirit. Although this passage addresses a particular accusation against Jesus rather than the question of women’s leadership, his response should give us pause before condemning another person’s ministry as contrary to God’s will. Disagreement over ministry roles does not itself amount to blasphemy against the Spirit. Nevertheless, when a faithful servant’s ministry advances the gospel and bears the fruit of the Spirit, we should evaluate it with humility and care, lest we dismiss the very work of the Spirit we seek to honour.
Let us never be afraid to ask “why?” when interpreting Scripture. Asked with humility and a desire to obey, it is the question of faithful servants who want to know and please their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
[1] See Part 5: Developing theology through the hermeneutic of reading the Bible as revelation for further explanation of this way of interpreting Scripture.
[2] I do not address Paul’s appeal to creation and the fall in this article. However, the same question applies: Why does Paul make this appeal? An adequate interpretation must explain how his reasoning serves the purposes of the gospel and God’s kingdom. To interpret Eve’s deception as evidence that women alone—or all women by virtue of their sex—are inherently susceptible to deception and therefore disqualified from teaching is simplistic and demonstrably false. A coherent account of Paul’s reasoning must explain how Eve’s deception relates to women’s leadership and teaching roles in a manner that advances God’s mission and the mission of the church. I examine Paul’s appeal to “creation order” in Part 7 and Part 8 of Developing a Hermeneutical Lens to Consider the Place of Women in Ministry.
