By: Gen. Jim – 3/3/25
It has been said, and rightly so, “all Biblical evidence for women’s religious experience has been filtered through male eyes; thus much remains hidden.” –Mary Joan Winn Leith.
If one was to dig deep into the history of (religious) women, the entry on their roles & status consists of 4 articles: 1 – An Overview; 2 – Ancient Near East & Israel; 3 – Second Temple Period; 4 – Early Christianity. (taken from The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. B.M. Metzger & M.D. Coogan, 1993, p.806).
When we speak of an Overview, we mean the introduction of the status of women in Biblical times, starting with the creation (Gen. 1:26,27; 2:21-23; 5:1,2).
Before the Babylonian exile (587-586 B.C. or BCE), women in Israel enjoyed a status & freedom comparable to that of men.
Thus, the woman is understood in the 10th-cent. B.C. story of Genesis 2:18, “… I will make him (man) a HELPER comparable to him”. – NKJV. Paul, in his epistle to the Corinthians wrote: “For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.” (1 Cor. 11:8,9) NKJV, (see Gen. 2:21-23).
Helper
The KJV has “helpmeet” instead of “helper” (NKJV). The Hebrew word “help” is used often in reference to the Lord in the Psalms (see Ps. 10:14; 22:11; 28:7; 46:1; 54:4; 72:12; 86:17; 119:173,175; 121:1,2 etc.). Keep this in mind. Eve was to be a helper/helpmeet to Adam. Thus, it is not a degrading position for the woman. The verb form basically means to “aid” or “supply” that which the individual cannot provide for himself. The O.T. Greek (LXX) translates it “boēthos”, a word the N.T. used of “physician” (see Mt. 15:25; Mk. 9:22,24; Acts 16:9; Rev. 12:16). It conveys the idea of “aiding someone in need, such as the oppressed. Scholars say that certainly a godly woman meets this need of man. “Meet” comes from the Hebrew word meaning “opposite”. Literally it is “according to the opposite of him,” meaning that the woman will complement & correspond to him. The Septuagint (LXX) has “kat’ auton (“according to him”). This relates to a “norm” or “standard”. She is to be EQUAL to & adequate for man. She is also made in the image of Creator God, thus again EQUAL to man & not on the lower level of being.
But uneducated men (Biblically speaking) use & abuse women by taking certain texts out of context (see my articles on “women in the ministry-posted).
In short, helper/helpmeet means “aid” (‘êzer, from ‘âzar, a prim. root, “to surround, i.e. protect or aid, help.”
Malachi 2:14
“Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the LORD has been witness between you & the wife of your youth, with whom you have dealt treacherously; yet she is your companion & you wife by covenant,” (NKJV). Other versions have “compassion”, (Heb. chabereth), “consort”, from châbêr, “an associate, knit together, joined together, league.”
If women are so inferior/evil (as many men – both Christian & non-Christian believe), why would God put the two together in a marriage covenant? What does the Scripture say? “Be not unequally yoked? can light & darkness dwell together?” What about Eph. 5:33 & Col. 3:19? And what will you, wrathful husband, do with Eph. 4:31,32, with Eph. 5:25?
Image?
Male/female – husband/wife – both are necessary to show forth the image of God. The subordination of women to men is considered to be the result of human sin (Gen. 3), & the subsequent practice of polygamy (Gen. 4:19) is a manifestation of its spread. God created male/female to complement each other, not to have ultimate rulership over each other. But sin changed all this. But the New Testament (N.T.) covenant broke this sin-plague.
The N.T. declares: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28). What did Paul mean by this? First, the Greeks divided all men into 2 classes, the Greeks & barbarians, & the Jews called all others “goyim”. Even a proselyte could never be quite the “Jew” he or she might have been if he/she had been a blood descendant of Abraham. Concerning male/female – husband/wife, a wife was the property of her husband (because of wrong interpretation of Scriptures). The wife’s status ranked with SLAVES! Josephus has written: “In every respect woman is inferior to man” (Against Apion II.24). But in Christ all this changed. No longer was the female/wife to be “less” but in his epistle to the Ephesians wrote this: “For He Himself is over peace, who has made both one, & has broken down the middle wall of separation (or partition)” (Eph. 2:14). Greeks could come into Christ; women could be equal to men etc. No more racial Jews being the only covenant people. No longer are women to be separated from men in service.
The role of woman/wife still had/has its functions, but Paul’s concept of “equality”/ “unity” in Christ was an incipient revolution. Christ changed the “norm” to the abnormal. No longer was “foreigner equals inferior.” No longer could the Jew view the Gentiles as “dogs”, excluded from God’s Kingdom. (see how the racial Jews viewed the Gentile world & the females in my posted articles under “Women in the Ministry”).
“One Person”?
Paul’s radical, “… for ye are all ONE in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28), women were invited into the ministry to preach/teach etc. When the apostle said, “all Christians are “ONE PERSON” (——. Masculine) in Christ, he does not mean that they lose their individuality. The “unity” of “the faith” was not the crystallization of a dead/static doctrine, nor was it a deadly “sameness” of emotional assent & expression. NO! It consisted in EQUALITY of status before God & a ONENESS of purpose to bear the cross of Christ… to the END!
O.T. Women
Looking into the past, we find women serving as prophets (Ex. 15:20; 2 Kgs. 22:14-20). We also find them serving as Judges (Jud. 4-5), & queens (1 Kgs. 19; 2 Kgs. 11) in preexilic Israel. They were not excluded from “God worship” (Dt. 16:13,14; 1 Sam. 1-2). I Samuel speaks of them as models of wisdom (2 Sam. 14:16-22). They were model mothers (in law) (Ex. 20:12; Dt. 5:16. Also, as pointed out by Heb. scholars, the family rights of wives/mothers are protected by law (Gen. 16:5; 6; 38). Proverbs speaks highly of women (see esp. Prov. 31:10, which I’ve written on before). Song of Solomon exalts women, i.e. sexual love was a gift of God.
Scholars Metzger & Coogan et al. mention preexilic stories in the Bible that exhibit cruelty towards the opposite sex & treat the women as objects of degradation (as I have also written about). Genesis 19 & Judges 11 & 19 are some of these stories.
It also needs to be pointed out that during Israel’s exile in Babylon, her priests adopted some things that were against God’s purpose & plan for Israel. They wrote the Babylonian Talmud (see my article on this – posted) which contains many anti-Israel/anti-God things. Women were then separated in worship & society. Only through “males” could women have a life. Women’s vows were no longer valued (Num. 27:1-8). A husband could annul the vow of his wife (Num. 30:1-5). In the 2nd temple period, women were excluded from testifying in court; they had to be doubly veiled. They could not be taught the Torah (2 Kgs. 22:14-20). They could not be educated… and on and on it went. The males were KINGS!
Jesus the Revolutionary!
Jesus went against the Jewish rules, esp. the anti-women ones. He did not hesitate or flinch when He came in contact with both Jewish and pagan women. John 4:27 is a case-in-point: “… He talked with a woman (at the well).” This was a Jewish NO! NO! Not only this, Jesus ignored all strictures of ritual impurity (Mk. 5:25-34,35-43). If conversing with a pagan women wasn’t bad enough, He Himself taught women (Lk. 10:38-42). He called them daughters of Abraham (Lk. 13:10-17) (see also Lk. 7:35-50). He gave respect to them, unlike the old cranky male leadership of His day (Mt. 5:28). It is recorded in Lk. 8:1-3 that women were part of Jesus’ inner circle of disciples. It is a FACT that women, not men, attested to be the first witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection (Lk. 24:1-11; Jn. 20:18). Did you know that John begins & ends with the testimony of a woman to the Christ? (Jn. 4:29; 20:18).
Received Christ:
Baptized in the Spirit
Yep! Women were among the “saved” & Spirit-baptized, (see Acts 2:17; 5:14; 8:12; 16:15). There also were disciples of charity (Acts 9:36) as well as female prisoners (Acts 8:3; 9:1-2). They, the women, were among those who were scattered, battered, & tattered (Acts 8:4). Women were hunted & hounded by Saul, as were the men (Acts 9:2). They were among those Christians who were “ministers” (see Rom. 16:1-7: read the list of women). They were allowed to teach/preach (that is the true godly women, not like the Jezebel et al.) 1 Cor. 11 records women that were allowed to prophesy (vs.5). Acts 21:8,9 records that Philip had 4 virgin daughters who prophesied. Wow! Could we find such “virgins” today?
All these I have written about. The “thou shalt not” texts that supposedly forbid women must be studied (see my studies on those troubling texts). Paul dealt with evil women, judaizers, & gnostics of his day – all involved with the woman issue. As I have pointed out, some women fell into the pit of gnostic teachings (see 1 Tim. 2:11-15 for example): “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man…” (vs.12). Paul was not forbiding godly women but ungodly women.
If one researches rabbinic interpretations of the Scriptures (e.g. 1 Tim. 2:11-15; 2 Tim. 3:6-9; Tit. 2:1-10, one will understand those text better in light of religious freedom Jesus gave to women).
It is pointed out time & time again that patriarchal pattern of marriage resserted themselves (see 1 Pet. 3:1-6; Col. 3:18 et al.). Gk. scholars say these were often tempered by a high view of marriage & of the mutual subjection of both wife & husband. (see Eph. 5:21-33). It should be noted that political power struggles for CONTROL of ecclesiastical districts (see 3 John) led to the formation of a MALE hierarchy in the Ekklesia that often continues to this very day. There are large denominations that deny women. They can’t preach or teach (certainly prophecy is out forever!), only do lesser functions. Opposite this we have these liberal /woke /LGBTQ Churches where women (or trans women) dominate. These are the women Paul forbid to teach/preach.
What am I saying? I’m saying that godly women have equal right to do the work of the ministry. I am saying some women do not! because they are vile, unclean & out-of-order!!
Mary J.W. Leith has written about Queen & Queen Mother – several Hebrew words are translated “queen”, they denote different statuses or types of royal women. The 2 primary terms are malkâ & gebîrâ. So, the Bible speaks of women holding high & holy positions, not just men. The queen of Sheba being one most people think of. Bathsheba being another. Queen Jezebel is the ruthless one we think of as being evil! Leith says, in its attitude toward the historical queens of Israel & Judah, the Bible is either neutral, suspiciously laconic, or decidedly negative (towards Maacah, Jezebel, Athaliah). Esther is viewed unequivocally favorable. Although Sarah was no queen, she is viewed the same – she was to bear the son of the promise, not Hagar. Then we come to the end of the O.T. dispensation, Mary appears – the mother of Jesus the Christ. (the Roman Catholic Church has exalted her to the position of “heavenly queen,” however, derives not from the Bible but from imperial Roman political vocabulary.
Negative Views
While men get most of the attention, women do receive some respect, as just stated. From the “male” view, women are not equal nor will ever be. This is in both Christian & pagan thought/writings. Women in Islam are viewed as evil (read my articles, posted). Both Christianity (the part that rejects women as equal) & Islam view women as seductive/persuasiveness. Rightly so, the Bible is not partial – it says things that are harsh, unloving, & hateful/hurtful, but TRUE nevertheless. (see Dt. 7:1-4 = forbidden marriage with Gentile women; 23:17,18 = harlots of the daughters of Israel; Num. 25:1 = Israel fornicating with Moab women; 1 Kgs. 11:1-6 = King Solomon loving (forbidden) foreign women; Ez. 8:14-15 = women weeping for Tammuz (a Sumerian fertility god similar to the Gk. god Adonis); Ezra 9:2-10:44 = Israel taking pagan wives, which was a trespass in the sight of God; Neh. 13:23-27 = Jews that had married women of Ashdod, Ammon, & Moab – all forbidden marriages; The Bible condemns Jezebel (Phoenician, see 1 Kgs. 16:31-33; 21). The Bible does not condemn the Canaanite woman, Rahab (see Josh. 2:9-11), nor Ruth (Moabite).
Both men & women of Israel were led astray by pagans. Israel itself is personified as a ADULTEROUS wife (Has. 1-3; Ez. 16 et al.). The true O.T. prophets of God denounced/judged vain & sinful women (see Isa. 3:16-23; Amos 4:1 et al. The book of Proverbs denounces/scorns contentious women (Prov. 21:19; 27:15; 11:22 et al.) Proverbs uses the phrase “strange women.” While the Bible points out the virtue of women, it also points out the adulteress, cult-prostitute, the goddess of seduction, et al. “Lady Wisdom” is referred to in the Bible as someone you can trust in.
Lest we forget females like Potiphar’s wife (Gen. 39:6-21 = trying to seduce Joseph), Deliah (Judg. 16:4-21 = seduces Samson.
What we find missing in the Bible is woman being the cause of the human (fallen) condition (although Judaism does say this – see my articles). Although the Sirach (aka Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Ben Sira) does say this: “From a woman sin had its beginning, & because of her we all die. Allow no outlet to water, & no boldness of speech to an EVIL wife,” 25:24,25. According to some, chronologically speaking, the woman (Eve) in Eden sinned first. But this is not entirely true: God gave the man (Adam) the command not to partake of the tree/first, not the woman (note: I cover this in my “women” articles – posted).
Scholars (not the liberal/woman-hating ones) make a point that Sirach’s (early 2nd cent. B.C.) doctrine, is like related ones of original sin & Satan, that developed during the 2nd Temple Period (ca.500 B.C. – 70 A.D.), to be taken up in turn by some early Christians (see 1 Tim. 2:12-14; Rom. 5:12).
Paul writes: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, & death through sin, & thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” – Rom. 5:12, NKJV.
Did Paul mean “man” as “male”/ “Adam” or “man” as “humankind” i.e. both Adam & Eve together?
Most scholars believe, Adam, in virtue of the fact that he was the first man, was not only the symbol of the race, but also its effective representative. It needs to be said also, both, male/female, were punished. II Baruch 17:3 says: “Therefore the long time that he lived did not profit him, but brought death, & cut off the years of those to be born after him”; II Esdras 7:118 tells us: “O thou Adam, what hast thou done? For though it was thou that sinned, the evil is not fallen on thee alone but upon all of us that come of thee.”
Rom. 5:12 uses “man” & “men” (NKJV) as well as the KJV.
Man/Gk. anthrōpos, from anēr, a prim. word = “a man (prop. as an individual male): – fellow, husband, man, sir.” It can, in a secondary sense, mean “a human being”, but mostly it means “a certain man”. So, we know Rom. 5:12 was referring to the man/husband, Adam, not Eve. While some blame the woman/Eve for “sin”, this is not Biblically correct. Adam, the man /male /husband, the federal head of the human race, was also the seminal head. (seminal=seed), hence, all existed in seed form within him, & that he was the head (orgin) of the human race.
How did all sin? Scholars say we were all in the body of Adam when he sinned, just as Levi was in the body of Abraham when he met Melchizedek (Heb. 7:10). With that said & in that sense, “every soul of the human race played a part in the FALL of man,” according to one theologian. He goes on to state, “when Adam sinned, we were actually sinning with him.” How else can Rom. 5:12 be explained? While Adam’s disobedience resulted in the human race being plunged into SIN, the obedience of Christ Jesus (the 2nd Adam – 1 Cor. 15:45-49) gave the believers the power to overcome SIN in their lives. (note: the study of “imputed righteousness”, vs.13, needs to be done: impute = “to ascribe” or “reckon”, hence, the imputations of SIN occurred originally when the sin of Adam was charged to the account of every person.).
Some argue that the idea of the transmission of the penalty to the entire race does not appear explicitly in the entire O.T. But how else can this be explained, since ALL men are born sinners in need of a Savior? Some say that the conception is not clearly stated till a century or so before Paul’s own time in some of the (so-called) apocryphal & pseudepigraphical books (e.g. wisd. Sol. 2:24; Ecclus. 25:24 [“From woman is the beginning of sin, & through her all die”]. The woman is the cause, not the man, as already stated. Paul writes: “For as one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous,” Rom. 5:19. Some believe a more accurate translation would use the words, “constituted sinners”/ “constituted righteous”. (vs.17 has “death”, & “life”.).
However
However one explains this “SIN” transmission, all the human race is contaminated with it. This debate will go on and on I think.
Consider Ps. 58:3: “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.” The wicked? Who is wicked & who is righteous at birth, seeing neither sin at birth. Ps. 58:3 implies that some are born wicked (wicked nature at conception) & some are not, refuting “original sin”? I agree that some are born and grow up more wicked than others. But who is born pure & sinless? Even good people sin!
Consider Ps. 51:5: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; & in sin did my mother conceive me.” What does the Heb. word conceive mean? How did David’s mother sin? When the word “sin” appears in the singular, it usually denotes the sin nature, i.e. “original sin”, of humanity. The “sin nature”, which every soul possesses, influences us to sin & is the source of lust et al sins. It negatively affects people’s minds (Rom. 1:28 et al.). The “sin nature” is partially responsible for blinding people’s thoughts & understanding, so that they cannot perceive spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). Although our “sin” continues to operate within us, it was judged when Christ died (Rom 6:6,7). I can’t help but believe what David refers to in vs.5 is “original sin”, aka “inbred sin”; the propensity to evil which every soul brings into the world with him/her, & which is the fruitful source whence all transgression proceeds. The Heb. word “cholalti”, which we translate “sharpen”, means more properly, “I was brought forth from the womb”; & “yechemathni” rather signifies “made me warm”, alluding to the whole process of the formation of the fetus in utero, the formative heat which is necessary to develop the parts of all embryo animals; to incubate the ova in the female, after having been impregnated; to bring the whole into such a state of maturity & perfection & growing up by aliment received from without – hence – “As my parts were developed in the womb, the sinful principle diffused itself through the whole, so that body & mind grew up in a state of corruption & moral imperfection.” This is the way some theologians/scholars read it.
Pt.2 –
Sidnie Ann White has written on women of the Second Temple, women in Postexilic Biblical Literature, women in the Apocrypha, women in the Pseudepigrapha, & women in the Classical Sorces – covering alot of territory. She writes about their religious & daily lives. Her conclusion is, earlier literature, stemming from a period when gender roles were more egalitarian & both men & women had essential economic/social roles, allows women greater freedom of action & a louder voice (e.g. Esther, Ruth, Song of Solomon). She points out that the latter literature, influenced by Hellenistic culture with its more restrictive view of women’s roles, allows women to act only in relation to men, or in situations of crisis (Asenath, Judith). She ends up with literature written by men on whom the influence of Greek thought is clear, women are more thoroughly denigrated & swept from the stage of an all-male world (Josephus, Philo).
Another contribution to The Oxford Companion to the Bible is Calerie Abrahamsen, who wrote on Early Christianity, The Greco-Roman/Jewish Heritage, Women in the Early Christian Movement, Retrenchment & Later Trends, etc. She covers those texts that “male only” twist & misinterpret. Despite these men (and deceived women who follow their false teachings), the Word of God does not deny all women from leadership positions – just some of them (which I cover in my “Women in the Ministry” series).
Paul’s epistles tell us alot about who/why (see Phil. 4:2-3 speaks of “women who labored with me in the gospel”). Rom. 16 should be studied. Paul mentions “Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the Church in Cenchrea,” Rom. 16:1. Vs.3 mentions Priscilla & Aquila, “fellow workers in Christ Jesus.” Vs.6 mentions “Mary, who labored much for us.” Go down the list of female helpers/workers/ministers in ch.16. There were female prophetesses & missionaries as well as prayer warriors. Mark 15:40-41 mentions women followers/helpers of Jesus. Matt. 27:55; Lk. 8:1-3 also. Women were treated equal to men -Jn. 4:9,27; Lk. 10:38-42. As already mentioned, Philip’s 4 virgin daughters prophesied. Lydia from Thyatira, a merchant & the head of her household. There were house-church leaders, men & women.
Take time to read the entire N.T. See if you find any anti-women texts, except those whom were not right in the sight of God. Euodia & Syntyche from Philippi (4:2,3) were a couple, leaders. Junia served the Church in Rome; Aquila & Priscilla worked together, not apart. (1 Cor. 16:19; Rom. 16:3,4; Acts 18 should be read). Tryphena, Tryphosa, & Persis labored (kopian) labored for Jesus. Paul used the same term – kopian – in reference to his labors. Millions of women, single/married have gone into all the world to teach/preach the gospel. It is a sad day today that we have allowed unconverted women into teaching/preaching positions.
I personally do not believe all women should hold positions. Today’s liberal/PC/Woke Church might allow this but God’s Word is straight forward on the sin issue. A practicing LGBTQ+ or heterosexual pervert is barred from the ministry. If repentance /comformity to God & His Word /standard is in operation, the door is open to minister. The door to salvation is always open though.
Jezebel
Jezebel of Rev. 2:20-23 is a case-in-point: This self-proclaimed prophetess at Thyatira was teaching not sound doctrine but teaching the people to commit fornication… These Jezebels today do the same. How can a practicing LGBTQ “Christian” teach holy things, seeing that Scripture condemns them & their sins? The same goes for these “dazzling darlings” who strut their (heterosexual) stuff like Queens? You’ve seen them. You know them. They are on T.V./on stage.
False doctrine & sexual immorality is NOT acceptable to God. Now we’ve got trans-men as women/women as men behind pulpits. Give me ONE N.T. or O.T. Scripture where God condones this? I’ve debated these people (I refuted their teachings in writing). I’ve asked for them to give me Scripture in favor of their “Pink Perversions”. NO response! (see my Gay Way series – 12 booklets plus many DVDs).
We pray for women to be active in the Lord & for the Lord. The same goes for men. Let us all labor for the ONE who deserves our BEST!