Egalitarian claim 9.1: NOBODY FORBIDS JEWELRY OR BRAIDS: Complementarians are inconsistent, because they don’t prohibit women from wearing jewelry or braided hair, but that prohibition is found in the very same paragraph in the Bible as the command about women not teaching or having authority over men (1 Tim. 2:9). We should realize that the whole section was binding only for that situation and culture. (330)
Answer 9.1a: This passage does not prohibit jewelry or braided hair; it prohibits ostentation or excessive emphasis on jewelry or braided hair as a woman’s source of beauty. Christian women should still obey that understanding of this passage today. (331)
Answer 9.1b: This egalitarian claim again comes dangerously close to denying the authority of Scripture. (331)

Egalitarian claim 9.2: HEAD COVERINGS: Just as the church has now learned that women do not have to wear head coverings as commanded in 1 Corinthians 11, so it needs to learn that women do not have to submit to their husbands or to give up leadership roles in the church to men. All of these were simply traditions Paul was following in that culture. (332)
Answer 9.2a: Paul is concerned about head covering because it is an outward symbol of something else. But the meaning of such a symbol will vary according to how people in a given culture understand it. It would be wrong to require the same symbol today if it carried a completely different meaning. (333)
Answer 9.2b: The most likely meaning of a woman wearing a head covering in first-century Corinth was to indicate that she was married. But no such meaning would be understood from a woman’s head covering today. (334)
Answer 9.2c: Today we obey the head covering commands for women in 1 Corinthians 11 by encouraging married women to wear whatever symbolizes being married in their own cultures. (336)
Answer 9.2d: The situation is far different with male headship in marriage and the church. These are not just outward symbols that can vary from culture to culture, but they are the reality itself. (337)
Answer 9.2e: Christians who believe that 1 Corinthians 11 requires women for all times to have head coverings in church should obey this passage and not disregard it. (338)
Answer 9.2f: A woman’s head covering in 1 Corinthians 11:10 is not a symbol of her authority to prophesy, but is a symbol of her husband’s authority over her. (338)

Egalitarian claim 9.3: SLAVERY: Just as the church finally recognized that slavery was wrong, so it should now recognize that male headship in marriage and the church is wrong. (339)
Answer 9.3a: Slavery is very different from marriage and from the church. Marriage was part of God’s original Creation, but slavery was not. The church is a wonderful creation of God, but slavery was not. (340)
Answer 9.3b: The New Testament never commanded slavery, but gave principles that regulated it and ultimately led to its abolition. (340)
Answer 9.3c: The fact that some Christians used the Bible to defend slavery in the past does not mean the Bible supports slavery. (341)
Answer 9.3d: The horrible abuses of human beings that occurred in American slavery made it an institution that was different in character from the first century institution of being a “slave” or “bondservant” (Greek doulos). (342)
Answer 9.3e: Defenders of slavery and modern day egalitarians are similar in one significant way. (344)

Egalitarian claim 9.4: TRAJECTORY: Paul and other New Testament authors were moving in a trajectory toward full inclusion of women in leadership, but they didn’t quite reach that goal by the time the New Testament was completed. Today we can see the direction they were heading and affirm the egalitarian conclusions they were heading toward. (345)
Answer 9.4a: This trajectory argument invalidates the Bible as our final authority. (346)
Answer 9.4b: This trajectory argument denies the doctrine of Scripture and the principle of sola Scriptura as they have been believed in the major confessions of faith. (346)
Answer 9.4c: This trajectory argument fails to understand the uniqueness of the New Testament in distinction from the Old Testament. (347)
Answer 9.4d: This trajectory argument is far different from later doctrinal formulations that were based on Scripture alone. (348)
Answer 9.4e: This trajectory argument would lead the church to ethical chaos where no one could tell which view is right. (348)
Answer 9.4f: This trajectory argument is similar to the view of the Roman Catholic Church, which bases doctrine not only on the Bible but also on the authoritative teachings of the church that have come after the Bible was written. (349)

Egalitarian claim 9.5: REDEMPTIVE-MOVEMENT HERMENEUTIC: William Webb’s redemptive-movement hermeneutic shows that the submission texts and the male church leadership texts in the New Testament were culturally relative. (350)
Answer 9.5a: Webb’s trajectory hermeneutic nullifies in principle the moral authority of the New Testament. (351)
Answer 9.5b: Webb’s authority is not the teaching of the New Testament but the goal he thinks the New Testament was moving toward. (353)
Answer 9.5c: Webb wrongly claims that the New Testament itself endorses slavery. (354)
Answer 9.5d: Webb’s trajectory argument denies the doctrine of Scripture and the principle of sola Scriptura as it has been believed in the major confessions of faith. (355)
Answer 9.5e: Webb’s trajectory argument fails to understand the uniqueness of the New Testament in distinction from the Old Testament. (355)
Answer 9.5f: Webb’s “trajectory argument” is far different from later doctrinal formulations that were based on Scripture alone. (355)
Answer 9.5g: Webb’s “trajectory argument” is similar to the view of the Roman Catholic Church, which bases doctrine not only on the Bible but also on the authoritative teachings of the church that have come after the Bible was written. (356)
Answer 9.5h: Determining right and wrong in Webb’s system is a subjective and indeterminate process that will lead to ethical chaos among Christians. (356)

Egalitarian claim 9.6: DON’T MIMIC THE FIRST CENTURY: The New Testament contains many elements of first-century culture that are descriptive rather than prescriptive. We should not try to “play first century” in our modern church setting. (358)
Answer 9.6a: It is true that several elements of the New Testament are descriptive and we do not have to imitate them today, but these elements are usually reports of individual historical events and not moral commands given to whole churches. (359)
Answer 9.6b: There are a few commands given to whole churches that we do not obey in exactly the same form today (such as head coverings and holy kisses), but we do still follow the principle of interpersonal relationships represented in even those commands. (360)
Answer 9.6c: The New Testament commands about male leadership in the family and the church are not minor, incidental statements that might be culturally variable. They are grounded in fundamental truths about the nature of God, the nature of Christ’s relationship to the church, and the nature of manhood and womanhood as God created it. (361)

Egalitarian claim 9.7: CLEAR VERSES TRUMP UNCLEAR VERSES: We should follow the main teachings of Scripture when they appear to conflict with the incidental teachings. On this issue, we must interpret the few isolated, obscure passages of Scripture that appear to restrict women’s ministry in the light of the many clear passages that open all ministry roles to both men and women. (361)
Answer 9.7a: The Bible has to say something only once for it to be true and God’s word for us. (362)
Answer 9.7b: The passages that prohibit women from being elders and from teaching or having authority over men in the assembled church are not isolated passages. They occur in the heart of the main New Testament teachings about church office and about conduct in public worship. (362)
Answer 9.7c: The restriction of some church leadership functions to men is not based on just one or two passages but on a consistent pattern of God’s approval of male leadership throughout the Bible. (363)
Answer 9.7d: The passages that restrict some church leadership functions to men have not been thought to be obscure or difficult to understand by the vast majority of the church throughout its history. Obscurity in this case is not in the text of Scripture but in the eye of the beholder. (363)
Answer 9.7e: By contrast, egalitarian claims that all church leadership roles should be open to women are based not on any direct teaching of Scripture but on doubtful inferences from passages where this topic is not even under discussion. (365)

Egalitarian claim 9.8: NO ORDINATION IN NEW TESTAMENT: Debates over the ordination of women are pointless, since the New Testament never speaks about ordination of pastors. (366)
Answer 9.8a: The idea of ordination is in the New Testament, even if the word is not. (366)

Egalitarian claim 9.9: IT DEPENDS ON WHICH VERSES YOU EMPHASIZE: It all depends on which texts from the Bible you decide to take as normative. Egalitarians take equality texts as normative and that leads to an egalitarian conclusion. Complementarians take subordination texts as normative and that leads to complementarian conclusions. Both approaches are valid, both depend on the Bible, and both should be allowed within evangelicalism. (367)
Answer 9.9a: It is not true that the argument just depends on which texts we choose to take as “normative.” All the texts in the Bible are God’s words, and we cannot dismiss or choose to disregard any of them. (368)
Answer 9.9b: The complementarian position understands the “equality texts” in a way consistent with their own wording and context, not in a way that contradicts subordination in roles. (369)
Answer 9.9c: It is not a question of choosing what kind of texts will “limit” and “expand” in application. Rather, it is a question of being faithful to the applications originally intended by the authors of the texts themselves. (370)
Answer 9.9d: This egalitarian claim dangerously hints at a new kind of liberalism in which people are free to “limit the application” of texts they dislike by appealing to vague principles such as equality, fairness, and justice. (370)

Egalitarian claim 9.10: IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT SCRIPTURE TEACHES: Nobody can conclusively figure out what the Bible teaches about women in the church. It is a disputed issue that scholars will argue about forever, something like different views of the end times. We should therefore avoid the disputed verses and make a decision on other grounds. (371)
Answer 9.10a: Avoiding a decision on disputed passages effectively silences Scripture on this issue. (372)
Answer 9.10b: Avoiding disputed passages would never have kept false doctrine out of the church in the past, and it cannot keep it out today. (372)
Answer 9.10c: Much of the confusion about the meaning of these disputed verses is caused by misinformation. (373)
Answer 9.10d: Avoiding a decision on disputed passages essentially results in letting the egalitarian position win. (374)
Answer 9.10e: Do we really think that God does not want us to know what is right on this issue? (375)
Answer 9.10f: The entire Christian church for nineteen hundred years did not think these passages were difficult or unclear. (376)

Egalitarian claim 9.11: STOP FIGHTING ABOUT A MINOR ISSUE: This is not a core issue, and it is not a major doctrine. We should stop fighting about this, allow different views and practices to exist in the church, and get on with more important ministries to a needy, hurting, lost world. (376)
Answer 9.11a: The basic question underlying this controversy is obedience to the Bible. That is a major doctrine and it is a core issue. (377)
Answer 9.11b: The teaching of Scripture on men and women is not a minor or trivial issue, but has a massive effect on how we live our lives. (378)
Answer 9.11c: If we allow different views and practices on this issue to exist in the church, we are essentially admitting that both views are right. But that is all egalitarians want—at least until they attain majority control, and then the complementarian view is not allowed. (379)
Answer 9.11d: When people say we should “stop fighting,” it implies that complementarians are doing something wrong when we criticize egalitarians. But people who promote false doctrine will always say, “Let’s stop fighting about this topic,” because they want to stop the criticism. (381)

Egalitarian claim 9.12: OK IF UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF PASTOR AND ELDERS: If a woman is teaching “under the authority of the pastor or elders,” she may teach the Scriptures to the assembled congregation. (381)
Answer 9.12a: Pastors and elders cannot give someone permission to disobey the Bible. (382)
Answer 9.12b: Paul does not say, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man unless she is under the authority of the elders.” (383)
Answer 9.12c: To add, “unless you are under the authority of your elders” to any of Paul’s directions to churches would empty Paul’s commands of their divine authority and reduce them to the level of advice that Paul hoped people would follow most of the time. (383)
Answer 9.12d: This answer actually results in no differences between men and women regarding teaching the Bible to men. (383)

Egalitarian claim 9.13: WE ARE NOT A CHURCH: Because we are not a church, but rather a parachurch organization, New Testament restrictions against women teaching or having authority over men do not apply to us. (384)
Answer 9.13a: The argument, “We are not a church,” has some truth in it, but it is not the whole truth. (384)
Answer 9.13b: The argument, “We are not a church,” is a valid reason why parachurch organizations do not have to obey all the directions the New Testament gives to churches. (386)
Answer 9.13c: But in other areas the argument, “We are not a church,” does not allow parachurch organizations to avoid obeying New Testament commands to churches. (387)
Answer 9.13d: Parachurch organizations should follow New Testament commands written to churches when they are doing the same activities that the command is talking about. (388)
Answer 9.13e: Organizations will need to seek God’s wisdom to make the right decisions regarding the roles women fulfill within their organizations. (388)
Answer 9.13f: Bible teaching to assembled groups of Christian men and women outside the church is so similar to Bible teaching inside the church that it should be reserved for men. (389)
Answer 9.13g: Serving as a military chaplain is so similar to serving as the pastor of a church that it should be restricted to men. (389)
Answer 9.13h: Serving on the governing board of a parachurch organization is often quite different from serving as an elder in a church, and therefore qualified men and women should both be encouraged to do this. (389)
Answer 9.13i: But serving as a direct supervisor over employees in a ministry role is similar enough to the role of a pastor or elder that the responsibility should be restricted to men. (390)
Answer 9.13j: The commands in the New Testament do not say that Christians should follow them “only in church settings.” (391)
Answer 9.13k: Right decisions about male leadership in parachurch situations will only be made by people who agree with and approve of the New Testament teachings about male leadership in the home and the church. (391)

Egalitarian claim 9:14: MALE HEADSHIP MUST APPLY EVERYWHERE OR NOWHERE: It is inconsistent for complementarians to apply the principles of male headship only to the home and the church. (392)
Answer 9.14a: Our standard must be what the Bible teaches, not some arbitrary idea of consistency. (392)

Egalitarian claim 9.15: INSECURE MEN FEEL THREATENED BY GIFTED WOMEN: This controversy is not really about the interpretation of the Bible, but deep down it is ultimately a matter of feelings and emotions. Complementarians are really insecure men who feel threatened by strong, gifted women, and that is why they continue to make this issue a matter of controversy. (393)
Answer 9.15a: This is an ad hominem argument. (396)

Additional note to Chapter 9: How can we determine which moral commands of Scripture are culturally relative? (397)