more perfectly: Bible Teaching about the Role of Women in the Ecclesia by Christie Johnson

Introduction

What we are covering:
The public role of women in the community of faith, with reference to:

Eden
The Old Testament
Jesus
The Acts of the Apostles
The teaching of Paul

What we are not covering:

The role of women in the family
The necessity (or otherwise) of head coverings

The Gospel Test

This topic can be emotive for some brothers and sisters. It is helpful to remember that this topic does not pass the “Gospel Test” (as defined by Brother George Booker in “What are the First Principles?”) i.e. it is never mentioned in any teaching given by the apostles as a prelude to baptism. Nor it is mentioned in our Statement of Faith. So we can feel comfortable discussing the topic, and even making changes, knowing that we are not in danger of questioning our understanding of the Gospel.

Definition of Equality

Equal value or importance
Equal opportunities

These terms are NOT identical/interchangeable.

Principles of sound Bible interpretation (based on Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard, but compare Appendix 1):

Never base a whole doctrine on a single passage.
Never base a doctrine on a passage with interpretive difficulties.
Always give greatest weight to clearer teaching.

ADAM AND EVE

Both created in the image of God (Gen 1:27)
Both given dominion over the rest of creation i.e. co-rulers (Gen 1:28)
Woman created as an “‘êzer” (Gen 2:18), usually translated “helper” but implies more of a “rescuer” than an “assistant”. When “‘êzer” is used elsewhere in the Bible it is almost always used to describe God providing help to his people (e.g. Ex 18:4; Deut 33: 7, 26, 29; Ps 20:2, 33:20, 70:5, 89:19, 115:9-11, 121:1-2, 124:8, 146:5; Hos 13:9), and occasionally powerful human military allies (Is 30:5). It implies strength coming to help weakness.
There appears to be complete equality in the garden. This is recognised even by ardent traditionalists: “...if she had remained obedient... [the woman] would have brought forth children without pain and would have had fewer of them; nor would she have been deprived of that equality she enjoyed in the garden, and consequently she would have escaped that degradation she has experienced in all the countries of the world” (John Thomas, Elpis Israel).
The concept of men ruling over women - patriarchy - does not appear until Gen 3:16.
It is part of the “curse”, not God’s ideal.
It is a prophecy of what WILL happen as a result of the effect of sin on relationships, not a description of what SHOULD happen.
It is not going against the will of God to try to mitigate the effects of this curse - unless it is equally sinful to use a tractor or work a job that does not require sweating, or to use painkillers in childbirth, or to take medicine to delay death.

OLD TESTAMENT

We see the fulfillment of the curse in Gen 3:16 - patriarchy is all-pervasive. Yet God raises up women in every major role (except priest, see below)
Political Leader: Miriam (Mic 6:4), Deborah (Judges 4:4-5)
Judge/Spiritual Leader: Deborah (Judges 4:4-5)
Prophet: Miriam (Ex 15:20), Huldah (2 Kings 22, 2 Chron 34), Isaiah’s wife (Is 8:3)
King (Queen): Athaliah (2 Kings 11, 2 Chron 22, compare Dan 4:17)
Wise counsel: King Lemuel’s mother (Prov 31), the Wise Woman (2 Sam 20), Abigail (1 Sam 25)
The teaching (Prov 31), prayer (1 Sam 2) and praise (Judges 5) of women are included as part of the Holy Scripture.
The only position from which women are excluded is the priesthood
So are Gentiles (Num 8:5-26), anyone younger than 20 or older than 50 (Num 8:24-25), without perfect eyesight (Lev 21:20), with a limp or other deformity (Lev 21:18-19), too short (Lev 21:20), or with any disease or recent proximity to anything “unclean” - i.e. anyone not physically “perfect”. These prohibitions are not carried over into the life of the ecclesia.
Women may have been considered “imperfect” simply because they were less valued in a patriarchal society, but more likely they were disqualified because most women of the right age (20-50yrs) menstruate, and thus were regularly ritually “unclean”.
The requirement for perfect (male) priest points to the most perfect high priest of them all - our Lord Jesus. Through his sacrifice, all believers (men and women) are now “made perfect” (Heb 10:14), and qualified to be a “royal priesthood” (1 Pet 2:9) and “priests to serve our God” (Rev 5:10).

JESUS

Scandalously disregarded the patriarchal rules of “the world”.
He spoke to women in public, which initially shocked even his disciples (John 4:27)
More than that, he touched women (Matt 8:15, Luke 13:13, Luke 8:43-48, Luke 7:38). Even today, some Orthodox Jews will not even shake hands with a woman.
More shocking again, he travelled in company with women (Luke 8:1-3, Mark 15:41).
In a world where Jewish men took pride in their status as “sons of Abraham” (John 8:33-39), Jesus gave the same title to a woman (Luke 13:16), putting her on an equal footing with the men.
In a world where some Rabbis taught that it was better to burn the Torah than teach it to a woman, Jesus taught them freely, and accepted them as disciples:
He allowed Mary to sit at his feet - the position given to a rabbi’s prize student (Luke 10:39, compare Acts 22:3)
He discussed theology with a woman (John 4:1-42)
He clearly calls women “disciples”, a technical rabbinic term (Matt 12:49)
He allowed women to minister to him (Luke 1:3, Mark 15:41 - the same word elsewhere translated “deacon”) - usually the responsibility of a rabbi’s students
In a world where women were not allowed to testify in court, Jesus entrusted the news of his resurrection - and his subsequent instructions - to women (Matt 28:8-10)
By the 2nd century (and probably earlier) Mary Magdalene was revered as the “apostle to the apostles”.
Likewise, some of the earliest people to spread the good news about Jesus were women e.g. Anna the prophet (Luke 28:38), and the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:28-42)
In a world where a woman’s testimony was considered inherently unreliable, Jesus rebuked the disciples for not listening to the women’s testimony about him (Mark 16:14).
In a world where women were considered spiritually inferior, Jesus held up many women as examples of faith (Luke 4:24-26, Luke 11:31, Matt 25:1-13, Luke 18:1-8, Mark 12:41-44).
In a world where the authorities treated women more harshly than men (John 8:3), Jesus protected women’s rights (Matt 19:3-9).
Note that while Jesus did not choose any women among the Twelve (although there is an early church tradition that Junia (Rom 16:7) was among the Seventy), he obviously valued women and kept them with him throughout his ministry (Mark 15:41) as part of his inner-circle (with the kind of relationship that allowed embraces, Matt 28:9, John 20:17).
In addition, he also chose no Gentiles (or slaves) in the Twelve and the rest of the New Testament makes it clear this was no barrier to the full participation of Gentiles (and slaves) in the life of the ecclesia (Acts 10:15, 15:8-9, Gal 5:6).

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

Women were part of the core group of the early ecclesia, along with the Eleven, and Jesus’ brothers (Acts 1:14)
As such they would have been among the group who received the Holy Spirit (and the ability to speak in tongues) at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4).
Peter makes it clear that the events of Pentecost were the fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32, which explicitly states that the Spirit will be poured out on “both men and women” (Acts 2:18).
This is the most obvious indication that the New Covenant ushers in an era where the old distinctions no longer apply - the Spirit is poured out on all - old, young, slave, free, male, female, Jews and (later, in Acts 10) Gentiles.
It is clear that women received “vocal” gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as tongues (Acts 2), and prophecy (Acts 21:9, 1 Cor 11:5)
It is specifically noted that Saul arrested and killed both men and women (Acts 9:2, 22:4). Women in revolutionary movements were usually not targeted because they posed little threat (perhaps why the women were able to stay near Jesus after his arrest, while the men fled). Saul’s attitude indicates that he saw the early Christian women as a threat - suggesting they were playing an active and visible role.
Women are seen hosting house churches, a position of prominence (and probably leadership). In Acts we see Mary the mother of John Mark (12:12), and Lydia (16:14-15, 40) in this position. Later we discover churches meeting in the homes of Priscilla (1 Cor 16:19, Rom 16:3-5), Nympha (Col 4:15), Chloe (1 Cor 1:11) and the “Chosen Lady” (2 John 1).
Priscilla is a prominent character in the early ecclesia. Of the 6 times she is mentioned, she is listed ahead of her husband 4 times - highly unusual in those days - suggesting her ministry was more prominent. (Acts 18:2-3, 19, 26, Rom 16:3-5, 1 Cor 16:19, 2 Tim 4:19)
She is shown with her husband, teaching theology to Apollos - a brother already himself a Christian teacher (Acts 18:24-26), and later called an apostle (1 Cor 4:6, 9). (The verb “explain” is plural, and her name is mentioned first, suggesting she took the lead role.)

THE WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLE PAUL

Paul highly valued the contribution of women. Romans 16 contains a long list of greetings, but only 10 of the individuals mentioned are commended for their ministry. Of these, 7 are women - Phoebe, Prisca, Junia, Mary, Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis (the men are Aquila, Andronicus and Urbanus).
Paul entrusted his letter to the Romans to Phoebe (Rom 16:1). Couriers in the first century were not just responsible for delivering letters, but also for adding extra information or explanation (compare Eph 6:21, Col 4:7-9), and sometimes reading the letters aloud.
Phoebe is also identified as a “deacon of the ecclesia in Cenchreae” and a benefactor or patron of many, including Paul. The word translated “deacon” is generally used to describe those in active ministry in the early church, as differentiated from the general members of the ecclesia (Phil 1:1, see also 1 Cor 3:5, 2 Cor 3:6, Eph 6:21, Col 1:23).
Paul commends Junia, as “outstanding among the apostles” (Rom 16:7). This was so shocking that in the middle ages scribes changed the text to “Junias” to try to hide the fact that there was a female apostle.
Paul’s theology also had many egalitarian (and highly counter-cultural) elements. For example:

All are welcome in the family of faith, without distinction based on gender (or anything else - Gal 3:28);
Physical circumcision (male-specific) is replaced with circumcision of the heart and baptism (gender-neutral) see Col 2:11-12;
All believers (including women) are adopted as “sons” - with the full rights, status, and inheritance that would have implied in the first century (Rom 8:15, Gal 4:5, Eph 1:5);
Those considered “weaker” and “less honourable” by the world (i.e. women in the first century) are specially chosen by God and given positions of honour in the Body of Christ (1 Cor 1:27, 12:23-24);
Gender distinctions are blurred, with sisters encouraged (alongside brothers) to be soldiers (Eph 6:10-17, 1 Thess 5:8), athletes (1 Cor 9:24, Phil 4:2-3), and courageous (literally “manly” 1 Cor 16:13). Likewise “feminine” metaphors are applied to men (Eph 5:25-30, 2 Cor 11:2, 1 Thess 2:6-7, 5:3, 1 Cor 3:1-2, Gal 4:19).
Contributions to the ecclesia are based purely on the calling and gifting provided by Christ, through the Holy Spirit, not any external qualifications (1 Cor 12, Eph 4:7-13, Rom 12:3-8).

1 CORINTHIANS 14:34-35

Only passage in the whole Bible where women are instructed to be silent.
Appears to be in conflict with other clear Biblical teaching:

In the very same chapter Paul writes that “When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation” (1 Cor 14:26). There is no indication he is only addressing brothers;
Straight after this passage, Paul says that all believers should be “eager to prophesy”(1 Cor 14:39). The context is communal worship, and earlier in the chapter he makes it clear that, while tongues are for private use, the purpose of prophecy is to edify the ecclesia (1 Cor 14:2-4);
Likewise, just a few pages earlier (1 Cor 11:5) Paul has spoken approvingly of women “praying and prophesying” (with appropriate headwear). Again, this must refer to public activities, as prophecy cannot edify the ecclesia if it is private.
All believers are to “teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts.” (Col 3:16). Hard to do if you have to be silent.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is not a clear teaching:

What are the women to be in submission to? Their husbands? The ecclesia? The words of the prophets? Paul? God?
What is the “law” Paul is referring to? He usually uses that phrase to refer to the Old Testament, but there is no explicit command there for women to be silent or in submission. He is unlikely to be appealing to secular law.
Why is it disgraceful for a woman to speak in church?
Why does the placement of the passage vary between manuscripts? See Mark Seagoe's article for a suggested answer.

The passage fails all three tests for use as an absolute rule:

It is the only place in scripture where women are commanded to be silent;
It contradicts clearer teaching;
It is not clear exactly what these verses mean.

It must, therefore, be constrained by clearer teaching. Based on the passages above:

It can’t refer to singing
It can’t refer to praying
It can’t refer to prophesying - which includes strengthening, exhorting, comforting, instructing and encouraging (1 Cor 14:3, 31)
It can’t refer to bringing a word of instruction/teaching (1 Cor 14:26)

Note that women are not the only ones instructed to be silent in this chapter.

The same word is applied to tongue-speakers (where there is no interpreter - v28) and prophets (when another receives a revelation - v30).
Both of these are not blanket prohibitions, but simply a temporary silence in order to maintain order in worship.
Based on other Bible teaching, it seems the same must be said of the women’s instruction to be silent.

Possible explanations of the passage, that do not contradict other Bible teaching:

Verses 34-35 are a quote from the letter the Corinthians sent Paul (as is the case at least seven times elsewhere in 1 Cor, see 6:12, 13, 7:1, 8:1, 4, 10:23, 15:12). Paul then refutes their position in v36-39. This explains why Paul appears to contradict himself, and is plausible as the original Greek contains no punctuation.
The services were being conducted in Greek, which the men would have known because it was the language of commerce, but the women might have spoken local dialects and been interrupting to ask for translation/clarification.
Women were “chattering” or engaging in conversation when they should be listening - possibly because they didn’t understand the service, or because they were preoccupied with coming in and out of the kitchen serving food and drink (compare 1 Cor 11:33). Note that, according to Strong’s concordance, the word translated “speak” in v35 is generally used in classical Greek to mean “chatter” or “prattle” (or “chirp”, like locusts), or simply “talk/converse”.
Women generally had no formal schooling, so may not have understood that the proper posture of a student (male or female) was to be silent when a teacher (or prophet) was speaking.
Women misunderstood the function of a Christian prophet, and thought he or she was like a Greek oracle, to which one would bring questions.
Women were asking questions in an inappropriate way, either trying to show their superiority (compare Matt 22:15-22, Job 40:6-7ff), or because they were trying to act like advanced students.
Men and women were segregated during the service so to ask a question of their husband a woman would have to call across the room.
The “law” that Paul speaks of is Hab 2:20: “The Lord is in his holy temple; let all the earth be silent before him.” All believers should be silent and submit to the word of God, as spoken by the prophets Paul has just referred to.
Some combination of the above.

1 TIMOTHY 2:8-15

Note “quiet” means “calm” or “peaceful” not “silent” (compare v2)
Only passage in the Bible that forbids women from teaching (or having authority).

Contradicts other clear Bible teaching/examples:

“When you come together, each of you has… a word of instruction…” (1 Cor 14:26)
“Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom...” (Col 3:16)
“We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is ... teaching, then teach” (Rom 12:6-7)
“And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers…” (1 Cor 12:28).
“And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.” (2 Tim 2:24)
“Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good.” (Titus 2:3)
“In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again.” (Heb 5:12)
The perfect wife “speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue” (Prov 31:26)
Priscilla taught Apollos (Acts 18:24-26)
Deborah taught the Israelites (Judges 4:5)
Huldah taught the King and the High Priest (2 Kings 22, 2 Chron 34)

This is not a clear teaching:

The word usually translated “assume authority” or similar (v12) is not found anywhere else in the Bible, or in earlier Greek manuscripts, so nobody is completely sure what it means. It is not the word Paul usually uses for “authority”, so he is obviously trying to imply something different here. Later Greek writings always apply it to people in a negative way - meaning something like “domineer”, “control” or “bully”.
Verse 14 appears to suggest that Adam did not become a sinner, which clearly contradicts Gen 3 as well as Rom 5:12-14.
Verse 15 appears to suggest women will be saved through having children, which clearly contradicts the many other passages that show we are saved through faith in Jesus (Acts 2:21, 16:30-31, John 10:9, Rom 10:9-13, Eph 2:8).
At least some of the instructions appear to be culturally bound (e.g. “lifting up holy hands” v8, “elaborate hairstyles” v9) and not applicable in their most literal form to all times and places.

Once again fails all three tests for use as an absolute rule. It must therefore be constrained by clearer teaching. It seems clear that women can teach when:

They are gifted by God to do so (Deborah, Huldah, Rom 12:6-7, 1 Cor 12:28)
They have been properly taught (Titus 2:3, Heb 5:12)
They have the message of Christ (Col 3:16)

Note that Timothy had been ministering with Paul for more than 20 years by the time this letter was written. If forbidding women to teach was Paul’s standard practice, Timothy would have known it very well. The fact that Paul feels the need to mention it suggests that it is special advice for Timothy’s specific situation.

Also note that there is no prohibition on women teaching in any of Paul’s other letters, including those to ecclesias he had never visited (e.g. Romans) where he would not have had the chance to pass on this instruction verbally. 1 Timothy is a later letter, so Paul could not have assumed its contents were well known when he wrote his other letters.

The phrase “I do not permit” sounds like Paul giving his own advice, rather than a command from God (compare 1 Cor 7:12).
“In quietness and full submission” is the proper posture for a student of any gender.

Note that prohibitions to one group doesn’t give license to another group:

Men are prohibited from praying with anger or disputing - does not imply women should be angry or quarrelsome.
Women are prohibited from dressing immodestly - does not imply men are free to do so.
Women are prohibited from “assuming authority” (domineering/bullying) - does not imply men are free to do so.

In the ecclesia there should be no authority except Jesus, who said: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you.” (Matt 20:25) and “you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers...Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah.” (Matt 23:8, 10).

The passage is not forbidding women from usurping the authority over men that properly belongs to other men, but the authority that belongs to Jesus.

Possible alternate explanations of the passage, that do not contradict other Biblical teaching/examples:

The Ephesian women had not yet been properly taught, making them susceptible to false teachers (see 1 Tim 1:3) - just as Eve hadn’t been properly taught by Adam and was deceived by the serpent. They must learn first (v11).
The false teachers were teaching an early Gnostic heresy (6:20), and the women were circulating this “nonsense” (5:13). Second-century Gnostic texts taught that Eve was created first (see 2:13), and encouraged sexual abstinence (4:3). Paul was directly refuting this heresy in v13-15.
The Ephesian women were worried about the very real prospect of death during childbirth without the “protection” provided by Artemis, the goddess of childbirth. They were either trying to worship Christ while still holding onto their links to Artemis, or listening to the false teachers who counselled sexual abstinence (to avoid getting pregnant). Either option was not sound teaching and needed to be forbidden.
The Artemis religion in Ephesus featured only women as priests/prophets/keepers of the sacred flame/etc. The noble women Paul is referring to in v9 (who could afford expensive clothes and jewellery) might have expected to play a similarly dominant role in the ecclesia.
Paul’s statement that women should learn (v11) was so revolutionary that he had to guard against women interpreting it as license to try to take over/dominate the ecclesia, especially in a city used to female spiritual leaders.
Some combination of the above.

SUMMARY

God’s original plan in Eden was full equality between men and women as co-rulers and co-image bearers.
Patriarchy is a product of the curse - a prophecy about the effect of sin, not a law expressing God’s desire.
In the Old Testament, we see patriarchy is the norm, but God still raises up women in every leadership role (except priest). These exceptions prove male leadership is not an absolute rule.
Jesus always treated women as equal to men - in ways that shocked his patriarchal society. He interacted with them freely, accepted them as disciples and friends, and chose them to be the first witnesses and evangelists of his resurrection.
The New Testament bears witness to many women in vocal ministry and leadership roles in the early ecclesia, including apostles, prophets, teachers, deacons and home-church leaders.

Signs that gender divisions are erased under the New Covenant:

The Holy Spirit is poured out on men and women equally, in fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.
The sign of the covenant is changed from physical circumcision (males only) to “circumcision of the heart” followed by baptism (available to both genders).
Both men and women are adopted as “sons” (Gal 4:5, Eph 1:5) and “heirs” (Rom 8:17, Gal 3:29, 1 Pet 3:7) and made part of a “royal priesthood” (1 Pet 2:9), with equal rights and privileges.

There is only one passage commanding women to be silenced, and this must be understood in the light of the weight of clear Biblical teaching and examples that show women in vocal ministry. The “silence” called for is thereby constrained and appears to be a temporary measure to promote orderly worship.

Likewise, there is only one passage forbidding women from teaching or having authority, and this must also be understood in the light of clear examples to the contrary (and a proper understanding of the role of authority in the ecclesia).

Study of the context of the letter helps to explain why Paul offered this advice for Timothy’s specific situation, and why it (like the foregoing verses) is not applicable in its most literal form today.

HISTORICAL RATIONALES FOR LIMITING THE ROLE OF WOMEN

Women were created rationally and morally inferior, and are therefore more easily deceived. History, science and our own experience shows this is false.
Eve tempted Adam, and is largely to blame for the fall. It is, therefore, an appropriate punishment that she and all women are subjected to men indefinitely. This is in conflict with both Gen 3 and Paul’s theology, which always places the blame for sin squarely on Adam’s shoulders (Rom 5:14)
God was instituting a new law in Gen 3, which reflected His desire for how His people should act. This logic would mean we would have to ban tractors, and painkillers during childbirth, and insist all brethren leave white-collar jobs so they can sweat for their bread. Taking medicine to delay death would also be sinful, as it would be interfering with God’s will that we all return to dust. More importantly, this theory forgets that Jesus came to provide the antidote to the curse (Gal 3:13, 1 Cor 15:22, Rom 6:23). While that process will not be completed until the Kingdom (Rev 22:3) we should be living in that direction - not trying to reinstate the effects of a curse that he died to overcome.
Ecclesial arrangements are an object lesson where men represent Jesus and women represent the church, therefore all men should have authority over all women as Christ is Lord over the church. This is a misapplication of Eph 5:23-32, where marriage is used as a picture of the relationship between Christ and the church. This analogy is never applied by Biblical writers to any relationships outside marriage, or to roles in the church. Even within this passage the whole ecclesia - men and women - is cast in the role of the bride (compare 2 Cor 11:2).
Women are physically unsuited to the rigors of public speaking, and it is an unfeminine pursuit. This was the view of John Thomas, and reflects Victorian attitudes and scientific understanding, now proven false by modern science and experience.
A rationale is not required - we don’t need to understand, just to obey. A laudable but dangerous theology. Attempting to apply isolated verses literally without an understanding of their context or place in the larger story of Scripture has led to all sorts of wrong doctrine and practice over the last two millennia, much of which we Christadelphians pride ourselves on avoiding.

OTHER THOUGHTS

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) provides an example of how to tackle contentious issues. In this case those who wished to limit the role of Gentiles in the life of the church had the weight of tradition and Old Testament teaching on their sides. When James gave his decision in favour of those who argued for change (albeit with some temporary compromises to ease the transition), he cited three compelling reasons:

The Holy Spirit was poured out on them equally (v14, compare v8)
It was in fulfillment of prophecy (v15)
It was important not to make it difficult for them to turn to God (v19)

The parallels with the current debate are obvious.

The ecclesia is a foretaste of the Kingdom (Heb 12:22-23, Rom 14:17, Col 1:13, Rev 1:6, 5:10) and Jesus taught that in the Kingdom gender differences will be erased/unimportant - there will be no marriage and we will all be like the angels (Matt 22:30, Mark 12:25).
Some brothers and sisters are scared to embrace a more egalitarian approach to ecclesial arrangements because they are afraid they are being corrupted by the philosophy of The World, which the apostles warned against (Rom 12:2, Col 2:8, James 4:4, 1 Jn 2:15-17). This forgets that when those verses were written patriarchy and the subordination of women was, in fact, the philosophy of The World.
Jesus said, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.” (Luke 10:2). Are we, therefore, working against the prayers of our Lord and his apostles when we limit the number of workers in certain roles in the ecclesia?
Throughout its history, Christianity has always been more popular among women (one 2nd century Greek derided it as a “religion of women and slaves”). God must have foreseen this - why would He design a system where the minority of brothers were overworked, and the talents of the majority were underutilized?
Christadelphians pride ourselves on studying the context of Biblical passages, which has helped us gain a better understanding of New Testament teaching about demons, hell, etc. Why do we feel unable to consider the cultural background of teaching about ecclesial roles?
While all Scripture is inspired and useful for us, we are not the primary audience of any of the texts. We must understand that when we read Paul’s letters he is not writing a systematic theology for all time, but giving pastoral advice to specific situations (which may not apply directly to us, although we can benefit from understanding the general principles).
There is significant historical evidence of women being very active in the early church:

A late first-century text, the Didache, speaks of Christian prophets (some of whom we know were women) presiding over the Lord’s supper.
Second-century texts portray Mary Magdalene teaching the Twelve after Jesus’ ascension.
In the early second-century, the Roman Governor Pliny wrote of how he had tortured two female deacons.
Christian writings from the first few centuries AD show women presiding over the Lord’s Supper and performing baptisms.
Early Christian carvings show women performing priestly duties.
Montanist Christians ordained women as bishops.
The role of women was reduced after the conversion of Constantine, when the Church was restructured in a secular hierarchical pattern. However, women were ordained as priests even as late as the 5th century in Italy.

Women in active ministry is not a product of the modern feminist movement. Apart from the examples from the early church (see above):

The Anabaptist movement (of The Protestors fame) had prominent female leaders in its early years who preached and taught.
The Salvation Army has had women serving in all capacities for over 150 years.

It can be noted that while there is explicit mention of female deacons in 1 Tim 3, there is no mention of female “overseers”. This is sometimes taken as evidence for restricting the role of sisters, as the “overseer” role apparently involved teaching (v2). However, this is an argument from silence, and proves nothing more than that there happened to be no female overseers in the Ephesian church at the time Paul was writing to Timothy (possibly because the sisters were insufficiently educated, see above).
In addition, if one had to be an “overseer” in order to teach in the early church (thereby excluding women, if they did not fill this office), then why do we not restrict teaching duties to men in leadership positions in the ecclesia today? And how does this fit with the picture in 1 Cor 14:26, where every member contributes something to the worship service?

The role of women in the family is a separate topic, and has been avoided in the interest of not complicating the issue. Suffice to say that both women (John 13:34) and men (Eph 5:25) are called to love their spouses, and likewise both women (Eph 5:22) and men (Eph 5:21) are called to submit to their spouses.

APPENDIX 1: Principles of Biblical Interpretation

by Brother James Foreman, and published in 1859 by Brother John Thomas in The Herald of the Kingdom and Age to Come

RULES OF INTERPRETATION AND DIRECTIONS FOR INVESTIGATING THE SCRIPTURES.

First. Let the Bible define and explain its own terms, figures and symbols.
Second. Give every passage a literal construction, unless its own connection and phraseology render such a course absurd, by bringing it into collision with truths elsewhere established by positive language.
Third. The proper connection of any given passage is not always that with which it stands immediately connected, but those bearing on the same subject found recorded anywhere in the Scriptures. Select all these texts from where they stand, put them together and you will have all the truth revealed on that subject.
Fourth. All passages belonging to any particular subject must contain one or more of the peculiar features of that subject, by which it may be identified as belonging to that subject.
Fifth. The truth in relation to any doctrine must be established by those passages which speak of it in positive and unequivocal language and those texts belonging to the same subject but which only admit of inferential testimony, no inference should be drawn from them at variance with the truths already established by positive texts.
Sixth. No doctrine should be predicated upon mere inference, neither upon one isolated text of Scripture. Any true doctrine will be found interspersed throughout the whole Bible.

RULES FOR STUDYING THE SCRIPTURES

First. In any doctrine taught by types or shadows, the anti-type must always correspond with the type, and the shadow with the substance.
Second. In studying the Scriptures, consider that the New Testament is a commentary on the Old.
Third. Never be afraid of results to which you may be driven by your investigations, as this will inevitably bias your mind and disqualify you to arrive at ultimate truth.
Fourth. Investigate everything you believe: if it is the truth, it cannot be injured thereby; if error, the sooner it is corrected the better.
Fifth. Pursue this course with as much independence as if you were the only one concerned.
Sixth. Rely on no authority less than divine in so momentous an undertaking. PROVE ALL THINGS: HOLD FAST THAT WHICH IS GOOD.’