Ten Overlooked Biblical Considerations Regarding Women’s Participation in the Ministry of the Church
by Kyle Wells
In my previous article, I offered an annotated resource list to help pastors and sessions think more carefully about women’s participation in the ministry of the church. What follows gathers ten biblical considerations that are often overlooked when discussion narrows too quickly to a small set of disputed texts.
These observations invite us to read familiar passages alongside the broader scriptural witness, including places where women are named, authorized, instructed, and sent. If Scripture is our authority, then faithfulness requires not only careful attention to where Scripture restricts (and why!), but equal attentiveness to where it affirms (and why!).
The considerations that follow are offered to encourage that kind of reading, so that faithful order and genuine flourishing may be held together with clarity, patience, and theological honesty.
1. Women Served Alongside Male Priests in the Temple
From Genesis 2 forward, Scripture presents a male priesthood with female partnership. Adam’s charge to “work and keep” the garden-temple (Gen 2:15) uses priestly language (Num 3:7–8), and Eve’s title ʿēzer (“helper”) frames her as assisting him in that vocation, not as a priest, but as a temple-assistant (cf. Exod 18:4; Ps 33:20). Later, women “served at the entrance of the tent of meeting” (Exod 38:8; cf. 1 Sam 2:22), indicating a pattern of female assistance in sacred space.
2. Women Exercised Prophetic and Judicial Authority Without Holding the Priesthood
Throughout the Old Testament, women are portrayed exercising real, Spirit-authorized authority as prophets and leaders without being incorporated into the male priesthood. Miriam is named a prophet alongside Moses and Aaron (Exod 15:20; Mic 6:4). Huldah authoritatively interprets the Book of the Law for priests, scribes, and the king’s court (2 Kgs 22:14–20). Deborah functions as both prophet and judge, rendering binding decisions for Israel (Judg 4:4–5). These ministries are presented not as disruptions of Israel’s order, but as recognized forms of leadership operating alongside a priesthood that remains intact. The pattern reinforces a key biblical distinction: women exercise genuine authority and instruction under God’s call without occupying the priestly office.
3. Jesus Gathered and Recognized a Distinct Group of Women Alongside the Twelve
Luke consistently presents Jesus’ ministry as involving two identified groups: “the Twelve” and “the women” (Luke 8:1–3; Acts 1:14). This pairing is deliberate. The women named by Luke traveled with Jesus, supported his mission, and were present throughout his public ministry, death, burial, and resurrection.
Crucially, Luke indicates that these women were among those entrusted with Jesus’ restricted messianic teaching—the instruction Jesus gave privately to his disciples and not to the crowds (Luke 24:6–8; cf. Luke 8:10). After the resurrection, Luke again places “the women” alongside “the apostles” in the upper room as the church awaits the Spirit (Acts 1:14). Luke does not collapse distinctions of office, but neither does he portray these women as peripheral; they are depicted as disciples entrusted with Jesus’ most central teaching and integrated into the apostolic circle at the church’s birth.
4. Women Prayed and Instructed in the Assembly
Paul assumes that women “pray and prophesy” in gathered worship (1 Cor 11:5), and later defines prophecy as instruction, edification, and exhortation to the gathered body (1 Cor 14:3–4, 12; cf. Acts 21:9). According to Paul’s own categories, women were exercising a Spirit-governed, public, instructional ministry.
5. Women Served as Co-Laborers to whom Submission is Commanded
Paul names women among his synergoi (“co-workers”: Rom 16:3, 6, 12; Phil 4:2–3): the exact same term he uses for male ministry partners (Apollos, 1 Cor 3:9; Timothy, Rom 16:21; Titus, 2 Cor 8:23; Urbanus, Rom 16:9; Epaphroditus, Phil 2:25). In 1 Corinthians 16:16 he commands the whole church: “Be subject to such people and to every synergounti (‘co-worker’).” Thus, Paul explicitly includes women among those whose ministry the church is called to honor with ordered, voluntary submission.
6. Phoebe Exercised Recognized Authority
In Romans 16:1–2 Paul commends Phoebe as “a diakonos of the church in Cenchreae” and his prostatis—a patron/benefactor/advocate/leader. As her apostle, Phoebe was beholden to Paul. But an ancient reader would have recognized that as his prostatis, Paul himself stood in obligation to Phoebe—an example of the kind of mutual submission Paul elsewhere commends (Eph 5:21). Paul directs the Roman church to “assist her in whatever matter she has need,” signaling that her role carries a form of ordered authority appropriate to her recognized ministry. Far from incidental, Phoebe is presented as an emissary whose work the church is obligated to support.
7. Paul’s Prohibition in 1 Timothy 2:12 Is Theological, but not Absolute
Paul writes, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man” (1 Tim 2:12). His reasoning is theological, rooted in creation, not culture (vv. 13–14). Yet elsewhere he assumes that women pray and prophesy in the assembly (1 Cor 11:5) and commands all believers to teach and admonish one another (Col 3:16). Likewise, women exercise real spiritual and practical authority in his congregations: Phoebe as a prostatis (Rom 16:2), and multiple women as synergoi—co-laborers—whose ministry the church is commanded to honor (Rom 16:3, 6, 12; Phil 4:2–3; cf. 1 Cor 16:16).
Thus Paul’s prohibition in 1 Timothy 2:12 must be read in light of his wider teaching and practice. The “teaching” he restricts refers to the office-bearing task of guarding and defining apostolic doctrine (cf. 1 Tim 2:12; 3:2; 5:17), not all forms of public or spiritual instruction. Likewise, the “authority” he restricts is the binding, adjudicative oversight that belongs to pastors/elders (1 Tim 3:1–7; cf. 1 Tim 1:3–5; 5:17, 19–20; 2 Tim 1:13–14; Tit 1:9; 2:15), not the wide range of leadership, influence, and ministry exercised by spirit-gifted persons throughout the New Testament.
8. The New Testament Recognizes Structured Forms of Women’s Service
In Romans 16:1–2, Paul refers to Phoebe as diakonos tēs ekklēsias tēs en Kegchreais (“a deacon/servant of the church in Cenchreae”). Grammatically, the phrase combines a role designation (diakonos) with an institutional genitive (tēs ekklēsias), further specified by a locative modifier (tēs en Kegchreais). Within the New Testament, this way of identifying a role in relation to a concrete, local body is well attested. For example, Revelation addresses “the angel of the church that is in Laodicea” (tō angelō tēs en Laodikeia ekklēsias, Rev 3:14), where the angel clearly functions in a specific, recognized role relative to a particular congregation. Similarly, Acts 18:12 identifies Gallio as “proconsul of Achaia” (anthypatou ontos tēs Achaïas), pairing an office with a defined jurisdiction. In light of these parallels, Paul’s language in Romans 16:1 is best read as a precise identification of Phoebe’s role in relation to a specific local church, rather than as a vague description of general service.1
A similar grammatical signal appears in 1 Timothy 3:11, where “women likewise” (gunaikas hōsautōs) parallels the instruction to deacons in verse 8. Paul could have specified “their wives,” but does not, and no comparable instruction is given for elders’ wives. The text therefore points to an identifiable group within the church’s ordered ministry, even as the precise scope of that role remains a matter of interpretation.
9. Masculine Language Does Not Mean Male-Only
In the patriarchal linguistic world of the New Testament, masculine forms regularly include women. Examples include:
“brothers” (adelphoi) referring to congregations that include women (Rom 12:1; Phil 4:1–2)
universal statements like “if anyone” (tis anthrōpos) (Jas 1:26)
“let a man examine himself” (1 Cor 11:28)
We instinctively understand this same convention when reading the Westminster Shorter Catechism (“What is the chief end of man?”). Likewise, “husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2, 12) functions as a moral qualification expressed in culturally standard masculine phrasing. The restriction of office to qualified men must come from elsewhere (1 Tim 2:12–3:7), not from the phrase’s grammar. To treat every masculine form as gender-exclusive would erase women from most commands, promises, and exhortations in the New Testament.
10. The Public and Personal Recognition of Women’s Ministry in the Pauline Churches
In Romans 16, Paul writes to a region of churches he has never visited. Of the individuals he names and commends, roughly one-third are women—a striking proportion. The women he names—Phoebe, Prisca, Mary, Junia, Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis, and others—must therefore have been known by reputation. Their ministry was sufficiently public and established that Paul could greet them by name before congregations already familiar with their work.
This pattern extends beyond Romans 16. Across his letters, Paul most often names and commends individual co-workers—men and women alike. In contrast to much modern church practice, he does not frame gospel labor primarily in terms of married pairs or households (e.g., Phil 4:2–3; Col 4:10–17; 1 Cor 16:10–18). There are exceptions, most notably Prisca and Aquila, who are frequently named together and with Prisca often listed first (Rom 16:3; Acts 18:18, 26). Yet the exception highlights the norm: Paul’s dominant practice is personal recognition rather than couple-based identification.
Taken together, these greetings and commendations show that women were neither marginal nor incidental in the mission of the early church. Their work was visible, trusted, and publicly acknowledged within the apostolic network. That pattern invites reflection on how churches today recognize and steward women’s gifts—especially those whose ministry does not derive from marital proximity to an officer, and those whose singleness or differing callings place them outside familiar categories. If women’s service was publicly identifiable across an entire region of first-century churches, it is worth asking whether the same visibility and recognition mark our own.
Kyle hails from Memphis, TN—the birthplace of Rock and Roll, home of the Blues, where Elvis is King, Jesus is Lord, and Barbecue is spicy. This upbringing has deeply influenced this love of food, music, and Jesus. He is author of Grace and Agency in Paul and Second Temple Judaism (Brill, 2015), for which he was awarded the 2016 Manfred Lautenschlaeger Award for Theological Promise. His most shining accomplishment, however, is getting his wife Pam to say “yes”. They have one daughter, Niamh (pronounced Neeve), whose looks and personality bear an uncanny resemblance to her father, which makes him as scared as it does proud.
FN: Earlier versions of this article mis-cited epigraphic parallels for the precise syntactic formulation discussed here. While similar constructions are widely attested in Greek, the present argument rests on New Testament grammatical usage.
Love this. You laid these ideas out so succinctly! Have you read Bauckham’s “Gospel Women”? He agrees and provides fascinating details to bring these women to life.
I’d just point out that Aaron was not a prophet (like Moses and Miriam). A friend recently pointed out that this is why Miriam is struck with leprosy in Numbers after both siblings challenge Moses—because she was the real threat, as a prophet, whereas Aaron’s office was just a priest.
Also if Phoebe were a mere servant the term would be conjugated feminine 🙃 the masculine “diakonos” also points to a title rather than adjective.
I find it telling that Colossians 4:15 mentions “Nymphus and the church in his house”, according to the KJV and the NKJV.
Subsequent translators, checking the earliest copies, found that the reading should be, “Nympha, and the church that is in her house.”
I cannot imagine having the stones to change the original wording to fit the translator’s religious worldview.
And, if you argue that the church may have been in her house m, but she is not the pastor of the church, you may be right. But then you must explain why Paul would greet her and not the pastor by name. That is unlikely.