An Evangelical Tradition Web

An Evangelical Tradition
Featuring
Biblical Egalitarianism and the
Inerrancy of Scripture
by Roger Nicole
Egalitarians: A New Path to

Liberalism? Or Integral to
Evangelical DNA?
by Mimi Haddad
Assessing Hierarchist Logic:

Is Egalitarianism Really on a
Slippery Slope?
by David C. Cramer
...and more
A special edition journal of
Christians for Biblical Equality

cbeinternational.org
An Evangelical Tradition is a special edition journal
published by Christians for Biblical Equality and distributed
Contents
at the expense of Christians for Biblical Equality to the
mailing list of the Evangelical Theological Society, © 2013.
122 West Franklin Avenue, Suite 218, Minneapolis, MN

55404-2451, phone: 612-872-6898; fax: 612-872-6891; or
email: [email protected]. CBE is on the web at
www.cbeinternational.org. We welcome comments, article 3 Editor’s Reflections
submissions, and advertisements. Tim Krueger
Editors  Tim Krueger and William D. Spencer 4 Biblical Egalitarianism and the Inerrancy of Scripture
Associate Editor  Deb Beatty Mel Roger Nicole
Editorial Consultant  Aída Besançon Spencer
President / Publisher  Mimi Haddad 10 Egalitarians: A New Path to Liberalism? Or Integral to
Evangelical DNA?
Board of Reference: Miriam Adeney, Carl E. Armerding, Mimi Haddad
Myron S. Augsburger, Raymond J. Bakke, Anthony Campolo,
Lois McKinney Douglas, Gordon D. Fee, Richard Foster,
19 Equating “Feminisms”
John R. Franke, W. Ward Gasque, J. Lee Grady, Vernon
Allison Quient
Grounds†, David Joel Hamilton, Roberta Hestenes, Gretchen
Gaebelein Hull, Donald Joy, Robbie Joy, Craig S. Keener, John
25 Assessing Hierarchist Logic: Are Egalitarians Really on
R. Kohlenberger III, David Mains, Kari Torjesen Malcolm,
a Slippery Slope?
Brenda Salter McNeil, Alvera Mickelsen, Roger Nicole, Virgil
Olson, LaDonna Osborn, T. L. Osborn, John E. Phelan, Kay F. David C. Cramer
Rader, Paul A. Rader, Ronald J. Sider, Aída Besançon Spencer,
William David Spencer, Ruth A. Tucker, Mary Stewart Van
Leeuwen, Timothy Weber, Jeanette S. G. Yep
To order additional copies of this journal, visit cbebookstore.org.
DISCLAIMER: Final selection of all material published by CBE in An Evangelical Tradition is entirely up to the discretion of the editors,
consulting theologians and CBE’s executive. Please know that each author is solely legally responsible for the content and the accuracy
of facts, citations, references, and quotations rendered and properly attributed in the article appearing under his or her name. Neither
Christians for Biblical Equality, nor the editor, nor the editorial team is responsible or legally liable for any content or any statements made
by any author, but the legal responsibility is solely that author’s once an article appears in print in An Evangelical Tradition.
On the Cover: A.J. Gordon (1836–1895) Roger Nicole (1915–2010)
Baptist preacher and egalitarian World-renowned egalitarian

A few of the many prominent egalitarian scholar. Founder of Gordon theologian and proponent of
evangelical leaders spanning the history College and Gordon-Conwell biblical inerrancy. Founding
of the evangelical movement. Theological Seminary. member of both ETS and
Christians for Biblical Equality.
William Booth (1829–1912) Catherine Booth (1829–1890) Theodore Weld (1803–1895)
Egalitarian advocate for the Preacher, egalitarian activist, Influential American

poor. Best known as the and cofounder of the Salvation abolitionist, author, and
cofounder—along with his Army with husband William advocate of women’s education.
wife, Catherine Booth—of Booth. Often called the “Mother Husband of egalitarian activist
the Salvation Army. of the Salvation Army.” Angelina Grimké.
2  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Editor’s Reflections �
My first grade teacher was one of the few missionaries in our women who served the poor and impoverished, who fought to
little corner of the Philippines who remembered what it was end child labor, and who championed prohibition as a means
like fifty or sixty years ago. She told me that the rice and sugar to rescue society from domestic abuse. Evangelicals have long
cane fields that now stretch to the distant mountains had once recognized the urgency of God’s call to share the gospel with
been fields of tall grass, with blades sharp enough to cut skin. the world in word and in deed—and have long acknowledged
The narrow strip of jungle along the river was the remnant of that the task requires the full engagement of the gifts God gives
a massive rainforest that had been home to hundreds of now- all people, regardless of gender.
endangered tropical birds. All I’d ever seen were sparrows and Historically, evangelicals have affirmed the participation of
the occasional kingfisher. I realized that my view of the world women in all positions of service, not in spite of, but because
was severely limited without the input of previous generations. of Scripture. The Quakers who combatted slavery realized the
There were a few others who had been around as long as connection between the perverted theological justifications
her. All were elderly, and most were single women. At the time, for slavery and the oppression of women and girls. Others
I just thought of these women as old, intimidating, and unduly recognized that the urgency of the Great Commission required
bothered by little boys trampling their gardens and destroying both men and women to pour out their lives for Christ. But it was
their carefully-tended orchids. But as I grew older, I began to not just social workers and missionaries. Evangelical scholars
realize that these women were the pillars of our community. like A.J. Gordon stood with them in affirming an egalitarian
They had been there, dutifully understanding of Scripture—a tradition
serving God since the time my parents passed down to respected ETS leaders
were children. Why did so many in the Historically, evangelicals have like Dr. Roger Nicole and Dr. Walter
neighboring towns know and love God? Kaiser, Jr. For evangelical abolitionists,
Who had waged war against the spirits
affirmed the participation social workers, missionaries, and
that held entire villages in bondage for of women in all positions of scholars alike, the Bible taught the
generations? How had minority people service, not in spite of, but full equality and mutuality of men
groups all across the island learned to because of Scripture. and women in all things; the Great
read and write, and why had they built Commission demanded the gifts of all
churches and seminaries and come to people, regardless of gender; and the
Jesus in droves? God accomplished these things through the love of God compelled women and men to serve the people of
work of these women, who had devoted their lives to Jesus long the world side by side.
before I was born. Just as I never knew a world of wild grasses, endless jungles,
Families like mine came and went. Children grew up, and exotic birds, we as evangelicals often lack the perspective of
moved back “home,” and eventually the parents followed. Very those who came before us. Many are now skeptical of egalitarian
few single men seemed to become missionaries, and those that ideas, supposing them to be an attempt to reinterpret Scripture
did tended to get married and follow the same pattern as other to accommodate secular values that place our own desires and
families. Sometimes we tell women that the biblical ideal for experience above the authority of God’s Word. The articles that
them is to marry, bear children, and raise those children up to follow explore this claim and find that quite the contrary is
follow God. These are admirable goals, to be sure, but is this true. So-called “evangelical feminism” exists precisely because
always the best for the global family of believers? Countless evangelicals held the Bible as authoritative and sought to
people around the world would have been born and died apply it to every aspect of life. As we look back at evangelical
without knowing Jesus if women like my teacher had quietly history, we find that egalitarian values are not only consistent
pursued marriage, rather than traveling alone to the other with traditional evangelical teachings, but are also historically
side of the world. But they answered God’s call, using their inseparable from the evangelical movement as a whole.
leadership, resourcefulness, devotion, and initiative to bring
thousands to Christ. Tim Krueger is the editor of Mutuality magazine and is
For centuries now, evangelical women have answered the publications coordinator at Christians for Biblical Equality.
call to every conceivable kind of service. The single women He was raised in the Philippines and studied history and
I knew as a child are part of this proud tradition. So are the Bible at Bethel University (MN). He and his wife, Naomi,
women who fought against slavery in the United States, the live in Saint Paul, MN.
Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  3

Biblical Egalitarianism and the
Inerrancy of Scripture
By Roger Nicole
Since biblical egalitarianism is still viewed by many as inconsistent In Genesis 2, we have fuller details about the chronology in the
with biblical inerrancy, it is desirable to state in a very brief manner creation of humans. Adam was created first (2:7), presumably with
my position on this subject. sexual organs that were provided in anticipation of the appearance
The matter of the place of women in the home, in society, and of Eve. God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden and made an
in the church is not an issue that can be conclusively determined appeal to his mental capacity in distinguishing and naming the
by a few apparently restrictive passages that are often advanced species of animals (2:19–20). This exercise would show animals
by those who think that subordination represents God’s will in pairs, while he, Adam, was solitary (2:20). God responded to
for women. Adam’s yearning by the supernatural creation of Eve (2:18, 21–22),
The starting point must be at the creation of humanity, as our and Adam responded to this divine provision by an enthusiastic
Lord himself exemplified by quoting Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 in cry of joy (2:23). The word “suitable” (2:18) emphasizes equality,
response to a question by the Pharisees (Matt. 19:4–5, Mark 10:6–7). for it means “face to face.” At this point, the book of Genesis
The climactic point must be at the consummation of the redemptive provides the fundamental principle of marriage, which is stated
plan in the wedding supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9, 21–22), as St. by the Creator (Matt. 19:4) and to which both Jesus (Matt. 19:5)
Paul notes in discussing marriage in Ephesians 5:22–33. These and Paul (Eph. 5:31) appeal:
two moments are the only ones in which sin has not damaged the
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be
institution. Thus, the line that connects creation and the eschaton of
united with his wife, and they will become one flesh (Gen. 2:24).
redemption represents the relationship of males and females in its
unadulterated form. What comes in between may include factors This passage constitutes the definition of marriage as the union of
due to human “hardness of heart” (Matt. 19:8). one man and one woman as exclusive and permanent as long as
both shall live. Only death and adultery can dissolve this relationship
Equality at Creation (Matt. 5:31–32, 19:3–9; 1 Cor. 6:16).
The first two chapters of Genesis provide the fundamental God has placed marriage as the authentic means of the
statement of God’s purpose in the creation of humanity. Both man propagation of humanity and provision for the care of the young
and woman were created in God’s image and likeness (1:26– 27, under the responsibility of a father and a mother, in the great
5:1–2), called human (Gen. 1:26, 5:2), were blessed alike (1:28, 5:2), majority of cases.
jointly were given rule over the animal realm (1:26, 28), and were There is no mention of subordination until the end of Genesis 3:16,
entrusted with the propagation of the species (1:28). Both sexes where God outlines the woman’s punishment for her disobedience:
are here placed on precisely the same footing. “He [your husband] will rule over you.”

In that context, only relations within the home are in view, not The solemnity of the burial of women also reflects their
those in society or the church. This passage is not a commandment, importance in early Israel; see the burials of Sarah (Gen. 23), the
but a prophecy that has been fulfilled extensively over the centuries nurse Deborah (Gen. 35:8), Rebekah (Gen. 49:31), Leah (Gen. 49:31),
in all the earth. Whatever we may do to alleviate God’s curse is and Rachel (Gen. 35:19).
legitimate in the matter of subordination, no less than in providing Additionally, God’s mercy is manifested in a special way in
some relief from the pains of the delivery of children (3:16) and the legislation regarding widows (Exod. 22:22; Deut. 14:29; 16:11, 24; 24:17,
sweat in cultivating the ground and earning a living (3:17–19). 19–21; 26:12–13; 27:19). The rights of a woman even in slavery must be
The seriousness of any tampering with the institution of marriage protected (Exod. 21:7–11, 22–24, 22:16, 22; Lev. 19:20–22, 29).
is demonstrated when polygamy is seen first in the home of a veritable Three offices in the Old Testament were so important as to
scoundrel, Lamech, descendant of Cain (Gen. 4:19–24), while warrant a special anointing from God: kingship, priesthood,
monogamy is reasserted on Noah’s ark (Gen. 7:1–2, 1 Pet. 3:20). While and prophecy (1 Kings 19:15–16, Lev. 8:30). The position of
Genesis 6:1–4 remains rather mysterious, it would appear that the queen is often acknowledged in other nations than Israel and
terrifying human wickedness that precipitated the flood (Gen. 6:5, 7, particularly in the case of Esther. Athaliah “ruled the land” of Judah
11–13) was at least in part due to certain wrong marriages (Gen. 3:2, 4). (2 Kings 10:3, 2 Chron. 22:12) between Ahaziah and Joash, but she
In this way, Satan himself bears witness to the centrality of marriage was an interloper on the throne of David and is not actually called
by directing his attack on the center rather than the periphery of “queen” in Scripture. Clearly, the wife of a king exercised authority
human life. over the king’s servants, male and female. In the home, the slaves,
male and female, were subordinate to the mistress. In the eschaton,
The Treatment of Women in Scripture women and men share kingly authority (Exod. 19:6, Rom. 5:17, 1 Pet.
The oppression of women as “the weaker sex” has been over the ages 2:9, Rev. 20:4, 6).
a notable feature of human history, thus fulfilling and amplifying the While the Aaronic priesthood was strictly limited to male
divine prophecy of Genesis 3:16. In special revelation, however, God descendants of Aaron, in the New Testament women also are priests,
has shown by contrast a remarkable care and protection of women. as stated in 1 Peter 2:5, 9 and Revelation 20:6, and as anticipated in
God rebuked Abraham and Isaac for their stratagem to protect their Exodus 19:6 and Isaiah 61:6.
own lives by endangering their wives (Gen. 12:10–20, 20:1–18, 26:1–11). Miriam the prophetess, sister of Moses, wrote a song recorded
The first theophany on record was granted to Hagar, a humble slave in Scripture (Exod. 15:21). She was followed by Deborah (Judg. 4:4),
who had been wronged (Gen. 16:7–16). God showed concern for Hulda (2 Kings 22:14, 2 Chron. 34:22), Isaiah’s wife (Isa. 8:3), and
Leah the unloved (Gen. 29:31–35); for Rebekah, Rachel, and Hannah, Anna (Luke 2:36), all of whom also were called prophetesses, while
the barren (Gen. 25:21, 30:22; 1 Sam. 1:11); for Tamar the victimized Noadiah (Neh. 6:14) and Jezebel (Rev. 2:20) wrongly claimed that
(Gen. 38); for Rahab the believing prostitute (Josh. 6:22–23); and for same title. The climax of the Old Testament on this issue is surely
Ruth the foreigner (Ruth 4:14). The two main cases of resurrection in the great prophecy of Joel 2:28–29: “I will pour out my Spirit on
the Old Testament were occasioned by the plight of mothers (1 Kings all people. Your sons and your daughters will prophesy . . . on my
17:22–23, 2 Kings 4:36). A third case (2 Kings 13:21) appears to be a servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those
desultory event. days.” The repeated emphasis on “both men and women” reflects the
God’s concern for women is potently expressed in the Mosaic divine breadth of spiritual blessing.
legislation. In the Decalogue, Sabbath rest is provided and enjoined Not only this, but the most sacred function ever to be
for females as well as for males; the honor due to one’s mother is the performed by a human being, to be the agent through whom the
same as that due to one’s father; the murder of a woman is forbidden Logos entered into the human race, was entrusted to a woman,
as severely as that of a man, because both are created in the image of Mary the mother of our Lord (Luke 1:42, Gal. 4:4). Perhaps
God (Gen. 9:5–6); adultery, that sin that destroys the marital union, 1 Timothy 2:15 is a reference to this fact.
is forbidden to males as well as to females, as Jesus has shown in his In the course of history, the Jewish nation was far from reflecting
interpretation (Matt. 5:32, 19:9); and the most serious covetousness God’s gracious concern for women. Because of the existence of the
that is forbidden is that of another man’s wife. Thus, five of the Ten Old Testament Scriptures, the condition of women was somewhat
Commandments are specifically related to women, and all of them better in Judaism than in surrounding cultures. Yet, there were lapses
are enjoined to both sexes. even with Abraham and Isaac, as well as more serious failures by
God’s approach to the family is made manifest by at least fifty- Laban and Lot (Gen. 19:8), Judah (Gen. 38), and others, culminating
six passages in the Old Testament wherein mothers and fathers in the atrocity of Judges 19. Polygamy, particularly among the rich
are juxtaposed, followed by twenty-six such passages in the New and powerful, reached the scandalous excess of Solomon’s 700
Testament with the same feature. In Proverbs, father and mother wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). Nevertheless, the prophets
appear twelve times in parallel passages. Twenty-eight times the Old protested vehemently about the oppression of the weak, using the
Testament provides the mother’s name for significant persons. One word “daughter” nearly 150 times to describe the plight and destiny
also finds numerous expressions such as “his mother’s law” (Prov. 1:8, of the Jewish people.
6:20), “the mother’s house” (Gen. 24:28; Ruth 1:8; Song 3:4, 8:2), and In the period between Malachi and the New Testament, we
“his mother got him a wife” (Gen. 21:21). observe some very chauvinistic elements in Ecclesiasticus (25–26,

42). Seven chapters (44–50) are devoted to praising twenty-four men, women and children.” In Acts 5:14, Luke specifies, “men and women
without mention of any woman, whereas Hebrews 11, in one chapter, believed in the Lord and were added to their number.” We are not
names three women, and speaks of Moses’ “parents,” along with the surprised, therefore, to find in Acts 8:12 that “they were baptized,
faith of “women who received back their dead through resurrection” both men and women,” and in Acts 16:15, “[Lydia] . . . was baptized.”
(Heb. 11:35). Jewish leaders often averred that it is not worthwhile to In the Old Testament, circumcision as the sign of the covenant
teach women and that, sometimes, one should avoid talking to them. was anatomically perforce limited to males. In the New Testament,
as baptism, the sign of the covenant is available to women as well. In
Jesus’ Treatment of Women the Old Testament, a woman’s relation to the covenant was through a
By contrast, the attitude of Jesus was revolutionary. In the Lu- father, a husband, or perhaps a brother or a son; in the New Testament,
kan story of the nativity, Elizabeth and Mary outshine Zecha- it is direct: grace, not race or gender, is what counts. St. Paul expresses
riah and Joseph, and Anna the prophetess matches Simeon. Jesus this in the triumphant cry, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor
was willing to give private instruction to the Samaritan woman free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).
(John 4) and to Mary, sister of Lazarus (Luke 10:39, 42). He ac- Salvation is individually applied and received.
cepted the companionship and even the support of women (Luke
8:2–3). He entertained a special friendship with Martha, Mary, and Women in Christian Service
Lazarus (John 11:5). He validated the homage and repentance of a sinful In terms of Christian service, St. Paul lists a number of activities that are
woman (Luke 7:36–50), as well as the similar devotion of Mary (Matt. particularly fitting for elder widows. In 1 Corinthians 11:5, he indicates
26:6–13, Mark 14:3–9, John 12:3–8). Four parables center on the expe- that a woman may pray or prophesy in the church with her head
rience and life of women: covered. In 1 Corinthians 12 and 14, he discusses various gifts of the
the yeast (Matt. 13:33, Luke Spirit “for the common good,” without specifying whether men and/
In the Old Testament, a 13:21), the lost coin (Luke or women are recipients. He emphasizes the gift of prophecy as having
15:8–10), the importu- a greater value for the church than the gift of tongues (1 Cor. 14:1–25),
woman’s relation to the
nate widow (Luke 18:1–8), saying specifically, “One who speaks in tongues edifies oneself, one
covenant was through a and the ten virgins (Matt. who prophesies edifies the church” (1 Cor. 14:14). Philip the evangelist
father, a husband, or perhaps 25:1–13). Jesus performed had “four unmarried daughters who prophesied” (Acts 21:9). Whether
healing on women (Matt. this was a private activity or one performed in the church meetings is
a brother or a son; in the 8:14–15, 9:22; Luke 13:11–16; not specified, but it is mentioned together with the ministry of Agabus,
New Testament, it is direct: Mark 7:24–30), and the who did speak in public (Acts 21:10–12, cf. Acts 11:28). It is a precarious
three resurrections that position to assert that prophecy by a woman was deemed illegitimate
grace, not race or gender, is
he performed were for the in the early church. Whatever 1 Corinthians 14:34 and 1 Timothy 2:12
what counts. benefit of women (Matt. forbid, it cannot be the exercise of a woman’s gift of prophecy.
9:23–25, Luke 7:12–15, John It is very instructive to consider what we may know about the
11:43–44). After his own resurrection, Jesus appeared first to the women women who are mentioned in connection with St. Paul’s ministry.
(Matt. 28:9) and specifically to Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:10–20). There are eighty-nine individuals listed, some of them by name, in
He commissioned women to be apostles to the apostles (Matt. 28:7, 10; Acts and St. Paul’s thirteen epistles, as his companions. Out of these
Mark 16:7; Luke 24:9, 23; John 20:17). eighty-nine, twenty are women! In Romans 16:1–15, there is a mention
In the first chapter of the book of Acts, Mary the mother of of Phoebe, and salutation to twenty-eight persons, not counting
Jesus and the women are listed among those who joined in prayer mentions of church, household, brothers, and saints with others. Out
with the eleven apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:14). In chapter of twenty-eight individuals, eight are assuredly women: Prisca, Mary,
2, we have the fundamental account of Pentecost and the gift of Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus’ mother (who was also a mother
the Holy Spirit, initiating the Spirit’s new relationship to God’s to Paul), Nereus’ sister, and Julia. The name of Junia must be added
people made possible by Christ’s ascension (John 16:7, Acts 1:3–4). to these. Furthermore, some women must be assumed to be included
A universal reference is anticipated by the use of many human in “the church that meets in Prisca and Aquila’s house” (v. 5), the
languages rather than just the Hebrew tongue (Acts 1:4–12). This “household of Aristobulus” (v. 10), of Narcissus (v. 11), and “all the
event indicated also a new economy for women: the first Scripture saints with Nereus and Olympus” (v. 15). The names of Patroba[s],
that Peter quoted in his inspired address was the great prophecy of Herma[s] and Olympa[s], with their accusative form, –an, could
Joel 2:28–32, emphasizing that “sons and daughters” will prophesy. possibly be those of women, although being masculine is not ruled
Peter actually adds to the text a second “they will prophesy” out. We know nothing whatsoever about these except that St. Paul
(Acts 2:18) to emphasize the participation by women in the gift greeted them. Apart from those three, there are sixteen masculine
of prophecy. names, and, of these, only Urbanus is identified as a coworker of Paul.
Luke concludes this narrative by saying that those who accepted In contrast to this, out of ten women referred to in this chapter,
the message were baptized and that about 3,000 souls were added to seven are described as participating in ministry. Phoebe is called a
their number (Acts 2:41). Compare this with Acts 4:3 that lists “5,000 “deacon” (note the masculine form related to an office rather than the
men,” or again Matthew 14:21 that mentions “5,000 men, besides gender of the person who holds it) of the church in Cenchreae, “who

has been a benefactor (from proistemi, “to rule, to help”) of many and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they
people,” including St. Paul (vv. 1–2). Prisca, to whom Luke refers as will prophesy.”
Priscilla (Acts 18:2, 18, 26), is named ahead of her husband Aquila.
(cf. Acts 2:17–18)
They undertook to explain God’s way more accurately to Apollos,
an adult man (Acts 18:26), and are called here St. Paul’s “coworkers 2. They will be priests, a function that was restricted to the male
in Christ Jesus,” a term used additionally only of Urbanus (v. 9) and descendants of Aaron in the Old Testament:
Timothy (v. 21) in Romans 16.
Junia’s name is listed with that of Andronicus, presumably her 1 Peter 2:4–5, 9, “As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected
husband (v. 7), and they are called St. Paul’s fellow Jews who came by men but chosen by God and precious to him—you also,
to faith before him. They are characterized as “outstanding among like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be
the apostles,” which led Chrysostom to exclaim: “How great is the a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to
devotion of this woman, that she would be even counted worthy of God through Jesus Christ . . . you are a chosen people, a royal
the appellation of apostle.”1 This appeared so incredible to Aegidius priesthood . . .” (cf. Exod. 19:6; Isa. 61:6; Rev. 1:6, 5:10, 20:6).
de Columna (1245?–1316) that, by a remarkable sex-change operation, The ultimate priesthood is coextensive with the divine election.
he posited that the name should be a masculine Junias rather than
feminine, as had been understood for more than a thousand years. 3. They will be kings:
Unfortunately for Aegidius, there is no evidence elsewhere for this Exodus 19:6, “You will be for me a kingdom of priests”
name, while Lampe records more than 250 examples of Junia, mostly
in Latin, as noted by J. D. G. Dunn in his commentary on Romans.2 1 Peter 2:9, “You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood”
The feminine has been restored in most recent learned commentaries
Revelation 1:6, “He has made us to be a kingdom and priests”
on Romans, including those by Lagrange, Bruce, Cranfield, Fitzmyer,
Dunn, Moo, and Schreiner. Revelation 5:10, “You have made them to be a kingdom and
Mary (v. 6), Tryphena and Tryphosa, and Persis (v. 12) are priests to serve our God and they will reign over the earth”
described as “women who worked hard” or “very hard” in the
Revelation 20:6, “They will be priests of God and of Christ and
Lord. This is the language used by Jesus for Christian workers
will reign with him”
(John 4:38), by St. Paul for his own apostolic ministry (Gal. 4:11,
Phil. 2:16, Col. 1:29), and for that of his coworkers (1 Cor. 16:16, Ultimately, the whole body of the redeemed will be assimilated to the
1 Thess. 5:12, 1 Tim. 4:10, 5:17). glorious Bride of Christ as indicated in Ephesians 5:27 and Revelation
Surely St. Paul would not, in 1 Timothy 2:8–15, condemn 19:7–8, 21:9–10. This will not be a demotion to a subordinate sex; it
on the basis of Genesis 1–3 what he had so freely commended will be the supreme promotion for God’s people, women and men, to
in Romans 16. Some claim that the solution is to posit that a union with Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy is not authentically written by Paul, a desperate expedient In 1 Corinthians 7, where St. Paul discusses marriage in its
that is wholly unacceptable to evangelicals and that would raise relationship to the Christian outlook, the reciprocity of husband and
serious questions about Timothy’s place in the canon and even as to wife is spelled out in a way that is in sharp contrast to the Greek as
its inspiration. well as the Judaic custom:
The alternative appears to be that we are not at liberty to imagine
that St. Paul condemned in Timothy what he had sanctioned in 7:2 each man . . . each woman
Romans. Then, in interpreting Timothy, our exegesis of St. Paul’s 7:3 husband . . . wife
prohibition would have to remain at all times conscious of what
he has permitted. The unity of the divinely inspired Word of God 7:4 wife’s body . . . husband’s body
demands no less and permits no less. 7:5 mutual consent
The Roles of Prophet, Priest, and King 7:10 wife must not separate . . . 7:11 husband must not divorce
What confirms this view is that the total course of Scripture, and 7:12 wife . . . 7:13 husband
of God’s purpose for men and women, is oriented in a way that is
impressively gracious toward women. This is manifested in that in the 7:14 unbelieving husband . . . unbelieving wife
New Testament, and supremely in the eschaton, sexual differentiation
7:15 man or woman
vanishes, and women have access to the three main human functions
marked by God with a special unction. Here the New Testament 7:16 wife . . . husband
reasserts what was only anticipated in the Old Testament:
7:28 you marry . . . a virgin married
1. They will be prophets, as articulated at Pentecost:
7:33 please his wife . . . 7:34 please her husband
Joel 2:28–29, “I will pour my Spirit on all people. Your sons
(cf. 1 Cor. 10:11–12)
and daughters will prophesy . . . On my servants, both men

Major Arguments by Heirarchicalists
Argument Response
1. Subordination of women is taught in Genesis 1 and 2. 1. This is flatly denied. The first time subordination is used is
Genesis 3:16.
2. In Genesis 3:16, God commanded subordination. 2. This was not a commandment at all, but a prophecy that surely
came to pass. Any alleviation of the curse of sin may be sought.
3. Equality of essence is quite compatible with subordination. It is 3. We need to distinguish subordination in function from subordina-
true in the Trinity when the Son is equal to the Father but tion in essence. Subordination in function is occasional and transi-
subordinate to Him. tory. Egalitarians have no difficulty in recognizing such in the rela-
tionship of CEO to employee, parent to child, colonel to sergeant,
etc. Hierarchicalists actually permit this to be reversed, as in the
case of a colonel who is the wife of a sergeant.
All of these are equal in essence: the human essence. To assert a

subordination of essence in the Trinity, however, is a most dangerous
move in the direction of Arianism. This is precisely what the word
homoousios (of the same essence) was intended to deny. Passages
like John 14:28, 10:18, etc., relate to the state of humiliation in the
incarnation of the Logos. Subordination in essence violates John 1:1,
10:29, etc. No subordination, any more than
anteriority, is implied in the names Father and Son in the Trinity (see
Kevin Giles, Trinity and Subordinationism, InterVarsity Press, 2002).
4. Jesus chose twelve male disciples. Perhaps the seventy-two disciples 4. And so no women betrayed him, denied him, or partook of dispute
were also all men (Luke 10:1). about who was the greatest (Luke 9:46)! Jesus included women
among those who were following him (Luke 8:2–3). Perhaps the
seventy-two disciples were not all men (Luke 24:28). The choice of
the twelve may have been made in recognition of who was likely to
get a hearing at that point in time and place.
5. God endorsed and blessed a patriarchal society in the Old 5. God projected his revelation against a hierarchical background
Testament and through much of the Christian era. and included many elements that were to help women who were
victimized. Some people imagine that God blessed the Crusades,
which were a major blunder of the Christian church.
6. Paul enjoins silence to women in the church (1 Cor. 14:34). 6. Since he permits women to pray and prophesy (1 Cor. 11:5, 13), it is
clear that this is not a blanket prohibition against making any sound.
He forbids women to disturb the worship by questions that could
be answered at home. In Corinth, apparently some women were the
culprits, but men and children are not free either to disturb the wor-
ship. In 1 Corinthians 12–14, Paul does not say one word to suggest
that women should not speak in tongues in the church.
7. In 1 Timothy 2:8–15, Paul expressly forbids women to teach or 7. This passage contains a significant number of exegetical difficul-
take authority over a man. His argument is based on the order of ties. Surely, the propriety of teaching is not a function of age. Jesus
creation and on the fact that Eve permitted herself to be deceived taught many people who were born before him, including Joseph
by Satan. and Mary (Luke 2:49, John 2:4). If gullibility is a disabling factor
against teaching, it is incomprehensible that women could teach
other women (Tit. 2:3) or children (Prov. 1:3, 6:20; 2 Tim. 1:5).
These, rather than adult males, are the ones who could most easily
be led astray by gullible teachers.
Because of the many difficulties in this whole passage, I follow the

principle “Do not doubt in darkness what you have seen in the light.”

This is revolutionary! Thus, we see that only the glorious marriage which called for correction of the wrongful tendency toward
of unsullied Adam and Eve could be an appropriate antetype to the domination by the Ephesian women.4
supreme prototype of the union of the Redeemer, God Incarnate, Finally, we must maintain the emphasis on canonical
with his elect people: interpretation, where a position is repeatedly presented in varied
parts of Scripture, and fragmentary interpretation, where a
“A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his
passage is lifted out of its biblical context and thought to teach
wife, and the two will become one flesh” (See Gen. 2:24, Matt.
something that is out of harmony with other biblical teaching. A
19:5, Eph. 5:31).
good example would be to absolutize 1 Corinthians 14:34 when
“This is a profound mystery, yet I am talking of Christ and 1 Corinthians 11:5 expressly teaches that a woman may pray or
the church” (Eph. 5:32). prophesy in the church with covering on her head.
These hermeneutical principles lead me to believe that my
In the fullest sense, St. Paul was right: “There is neither Jew nor view of egalitarianism is biblical. Proper humility demands of me
Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ that I not be too hasty in condemning people who do not see it
Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). This is biblical egalitarianism. that way. Therefore, I can get along rather well with people who
Hermeneutical Approach do not share in that position. But, at the same time, I think I can
help them to make provision in their own frame of reference for a
In an article entitled “Hermeneutics and the Gender Issue,”3 I much more gracious and biblical approach to women, something
show that hermeneutics has first of all to recognize the difference which many people have achieved even better than I have.
between the literal and metaphorical. Clearly, there are some
things in Scripture that are metaphorical, as when God says, “I Conclusion
will come down.” God teaches us in terms of the kind of world in Inasmuch as the view outlined here has not achieved an
which we live, and so we need to understand the representation almost universal recognition among evangelicals, as the
that is made, without necessarily going to a literal application that inappropriateness of slavery has achieved since the nineteenth
God has eyes and ears and feet that can step down, and so on. century, it is paramount that all evangelicals should strive to
Then, we must distinguish between what is prescriptive and provide, particularly in the church, opportunities for our sisters to
what is descriptive. We may have a presentation in the Bible that exercise the gifts of the Spirit that they have received, even where
is not meant to be an exemplary situation that we ought to follow, it is not thought permissible by Scripture for them to exercise the
but is instead a presentation of things as they are or as they were. office of pastor or teacher. Thus, the church would not lose the
A sound hermeneutic is able to distinguish between what merely benefits that God’s gifts were intended to provide, nor would our
happened and what God actually requires of us. sisters be compelled to hide their light under a bowl (Matt. 5:15).
Even in the prescriptive, we need to distinguish between
what is general or universal and what is personal or limited to a Notes
particular group. A good example of this is when Jesus told the 1. John Chrysostom in Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
man to go and wash in the pool of Siloam. This is not a permanent I, eds. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Peabody, Mass.: Hendricksen,
instruction for all blind people, but it is for one particular case. 1994), vol. 11, 555.
Similarly, the commandment of God to annihilate the Canaanite 2. James G. Dunn, Romans (Dallas, Tex.: Word Books, 1998).
3. Roger Nicole, “Hermeneutics and the Gender Issue,” in Discovering
nations was a commandment for one group of people for one
Biblical Equality, eds. R. W. Pierce and R. M. Groothuis (Westmont, Ill.:
time, and it is not a permanent commandment or lasting policy InterVarsity, 2005), 355–63.
for the establishment of international law. 4. See Linda Belleville, “Teaching and Usurping Authority,” in
A distinction must also be made between what is central in Discovering Biblical Equality, 203–23.
the Christian faith and what is peripheral. In this respect, I should
think that God’s gifts to the church through women are more “Biblical Egalitarianism and the Inerrancy of Scripture” was
central than constant debates over whether they may talk in originally published in Priscilla Papers, volume 20, number 2
church or teach and oversee males. (Spring 2006).
We must also discern between elements of conduct that are
essential and perennial and those that are occasional, situational, The late Roger Nicole taught theology at Gordon-
and provisional. The latter should certainly be true of the Conwell Theological Seminary (1945–1986) and Reformed
ceremonial laws of the Old Testament that became obsolete Theological Seminary (1989–2000). His publications
in the New Testament (sacrifices, circumcision, distinctions include Standing Faith (2002). He was a founding member
between foods, etc.). While it is extreme to make a sweeping and former president of ETS, and a founding member of
assertion that 1 Timothy 2:8–15 is related merely to the cultural Christians for Biblical Equality. A biography of Dr. Nicole, entitled Speaking
situation in Ephesus, a good case can be made that there were the Truth in Love: The Life and Legacy of Roger Nicole, by Dr. David Bailey,
certain difficulties in Ephesus, such as its worship of Artemis, was published in 2006.

Egalitarians
A New Path to Liberalism?
Roger Nicole (1915–2010)
Distinguished theologian and founder
Or Integral to Evangelical DNA?
of the Evangelical Theological Society
By Mimi Haddad
“Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerim.”
“To be ignorant of what occurred before you, is to remain always a child.”
Cicero (106-43 B.C.)
I selected the title, “Egalitarians: A New Path to Liberalism? Or Integral to Evangelicals DNA?” in
Catherine Booth (1829–1890) order to examine the claim often made that Christians who advance the shared leadership, authority,
Co-founder of the Salvation Army
and ministry of men and women in the church and home do so only by circumventing the authority
of Scripture. Because of this claim, egalitarians are accused of theological liberalism.
I was inspired to write this paper after a member of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS)
confessed candidly to me that though he was trained in a tradition that viewed egalitarian theology
as pernicious, through a series of circumstances including a positive encounter with an egalitarian
leader, he determined to study egalitarian thought more thoroughly. Cicero reminds us that a fair
hearing of any position will always include a full grasp of the historical context. This paper will briefly
consider historical material often overlooked in assessing the theological orthodoxy of egalitarians.
Defining Terms
Egalitarianism: Egalitarians are Christians who affirm that when Scripture is interpreted consistently,
it teaches the fundamental equality of men and women, both in being and service, so that gender is
not a criterion by which to exclude women from public service in church, society, or the home. As
early as the late 17th century, Christians began publishing interpretations of Scripture that supported
women’s public preaching and teaching, so that by 1930, more than fifty scriptural treatises were
circulated, from many different branches of the evangelical church.1 Egalitarians today share the
same exegetical methods of these early egalitarians, concluding that women may serve in any
position, including senior pastor; elder; deacon; board member; professor of any field; or president
A.J. Gordon (1836–1895) of a Christian college, seminary denomination, or country. The criteria for service are holiness,
Baptist preacher and scholar. Founder of giftedness, and calling—not gender.
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.
www.cbeinternational.org
Evangelicalism: Defining evangelicalism is a difficult endeavor to Scripture to shape culture, egalitarians are accused of giving secular
be sure. Yet, the following examples offer significant theological culture greater authority than the Bible when the two are at odds. The
qualifications in defining the theological identity of evangelicals: charge of “liberal” typically means that the teachings of Scripture have
• The Nicene Creed2 been ignored in the wake of self-interest and cultural pressure. The
following are some examples of how some understand egalitarianism
• The ETS Doctrinal Basis (written in 1949—a very interesting through the lens of liberalism:
year to take note of for the purposes of this discussion).3
• Sarah Sumner, formerly a professor of theology and ministry
• Bebbington’s quadrilateral, which offers a definition of at the Graduate School of Theology at Azusa Pacific University,
evangelicalism by two noted historians, Mark Noll and David in the June 2008 issue of Christianity Today, said the following:
Bebbington. In an effort to capture the depth and scope of “ . . . I believe that many egalitarians tended to appeal more to
evangelical history, Bebbington and Noll assessed the earliest political liberal thought than to Scripture.”7
usage of the term “evangelical” as it embodied both theological
ideals and also evangelical praxis.4 • Wayne Grudem, in his book Evangelical Feminism: A New Path
to Liberalism, in explaining why he writes this book, suggests
Noll and Bebbington not only considered what evangelicals that he has a deep concern “about the widespread undermining
affirmed theologically. They also considered how evangelicals lived out of the authority of Scripture in the arguments that are frequently
their theological ideals in daily life—in their churches, denominations, used to support evangelical feminism.”8
and organizations. Their analysis of the evangelical movement gave
way to Bebbington’s quadrilateral: four theological ideals that capture • A headline from the August 25, 2008 Dallas Morning News
the DNA or fundamental theological focus of evangelicals which, (to reads: “Woman’s turn in pulpit at Irving Bible Church brings
quote Noll) “drove its adherents in their lives as Christians.”5 These buzz, beefs.”9After eighteen months of study, an all-male board
include: of elders decided to give a woman access to the pulpit, for the
first time in its forty years history, a decision that raised cries
• Conversionism: The belief that sin has corrupted every life. Thus of concern among many Baptists. Chief among these was
everyone needs redemption from sin. that of the Rev. Tom Nelson of Denton Bible Church. Nelson
• Activism: The expression of the Gospel through effort. Activism believed that his friends in Irving were on “dangerous” ground.
generally takes two forms—evangelism and social action, two “If the Bible is not true and authoritative on the roles of men
elements that work together symbiotically. and women, then maybe the Bible will not be finally true on
premarital sex, the homosexual issue, adultery or any other
• Biblicism: A particular regard for the Bible. . . . that all spiritual
moral issue,” he said. “I believe this issue is the carrier of a virus
truth is to be found on its pages.
by which liberalism will enter the evangelical church.”
• Crucicentrism: A stress on Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.6
Is there a necessary connection between egalitarianism and
These four qualities comprise the focus of evangelical theology and liberalism, as Sumner, Grudem, and Nelson suggest? To answer this
enterprise, which fueled the modern missionary movement, and also question, consider the observations made by three evangelical women,
led to sweeping social reform. Evangelical missionaries had a difficult in their eighties. All three were raised in evangelical homes. All three
time separating the good news of the gospel from efforts to make life attended evangelical churches from childhood, and all were members
better for the poor and the abused. Evangelicals challenged injustice of Baptist General Conference churches. All three attended Wheaton
because they were biblicists of the highest order, and the teachings of College and each remembers hearing the female evangelist team
Jesus, such as “treat your neighbor as you would want to be treated” Stockton and Gould preach in evangelical churches and institutions
drove their social reform. They believed that Scripture was supremely throughout the greater Chicago area. Alvera Mickelsen, one of these
authoritative, and a consistent reading of the Bible and living out women, said with a chuckle, “You, know, it wasn’t until 1950 that
its teachings brought moral, theological, and social wholeness to women preachers were considered liberal. Before that, no one thought
communities influenced by evangelicals, especially the evangelical twice about women preaching.”
revivals. It was to Scripture that evangelicals turned when resolving the
challenges of each age, such as suffrage, slavery, and whether women Alvera’s Hypothesis
preach and teach or hold positions of authority beside men. If Alvera’s observation is correct, we would expect to see fewer
Bebbington’s quadrilateral offers us, I believe, the most complete women preaching and teaching in conservative Christian institutions
definition of an evangelical, particularly in understanding why many after 1950, which indeed we do. Contrary to the claim that today’s
evangelicals gave women and also slaves positions of leadership, a egalitarians capitulate to secular feminist ideology, history offers
freedom that was unknown to them in the culture in which they lived. another perspective. There are numerous examples of Christians whose
Liberalism: Finally, let us consider liberalism. The term “liberal” is egalitarian views are the result of a consistent reading of Scripture,
used to suggest that egalitarians place their so-called feminist ideals— particularly with the rise of the modern missionary movement.
their demand for social equality with men in any sphere—ahead of Even as early as the 1660s, a focus on the egalitarian teachings
a commitment to the authority of Scripture. Rather than allowing and practices of the New Testament church became popular among

evangelicals, as seen in the writings and teachings of Margaret Fell their moral superiors—males. The Bible, the Koran, and the teachings
Fox, an English Quaker and leading evangelical.10 What started with of Hinduism have been consistently interpreted to make this case. For
Fell Fox gained momentum in what is called the “Golden Era of Bushnell, the devaluation of females was the root idea that subjugated
Missions,” a movement in which new centers of Christianity flourished females and also drove the sex industry.
in the Americas, Africa, and Asia, leading to an unprecedented shift Bushnell and her colleagues perceived that religion provides
of Christian faith in the Global South.11 This movement was led by the most exalted, convincing, and irreproachable devaluation of
evangelical women, who outnumbered men two to one. What is more, individuals, whereby their subjugation is justified. Because religious
these women became founders and often the sole financial providers ideas have consequences, Bushnell believed any effort to dismantle
of missionary and humanitarian organizations, holding all positions of the sex industry, though necessary, would inevitably fail without
service and leadership. Significantly, the success of women and slaves addressing the spiritual or philosophical presuppositions that fueled
serving in the most challenging circumstances globally gave the church the industry. Of course, there is a great irony here: while religious
ample reason to examine gender and ethnic bias biblically.12 World- commentators portray women as morally and intellectually
renowned scholars joined this conversation, including Dr. Adoniram feeble, God uses those who are considered weak to shame human
Judson Gordon (1836–95), perhaps the most prominent evangelical pride. It was women’s acumen that exposed the flawed reasoning
pastor of his day. For Gordon, Pentecost was the “Magna Charta of and shallow theology that devalued individuals because of their
the Christian church,” in which those who were considered inferior materiality. And, their example seems to suggest that effective social
by birth inherited a new spiritual status through the power of the reform is nearly always inseparable from a robust philosophical
Holy Spirit. God’s gifting no longer rests on a “favored few, but upon and theological deliberation. Again, biblicism and activism work in
the many, without regard to race, or age, or sex.”13 As with Pentecost, tandem to advance the gospel. Few accomplished this with greater
so today, all people regardless of class, ethnicity, or gender are one in elegance than Katharine Bushnell.
Christ, with equal (ontological) value and therefore equal (teleological) To expose the interpretive errors that led directly to the suffering
spheres of service. and subjugated females, she writes:
Gordon was joined by leading evangelicals like Catherine Booth,
. . . until [we]—come to understand that a woman is of as much
cofounder of the Salvation Army. Like Gordon, Catherine Booth
value as a man; and [people] will not believe this until they see it
also engaged the whole of Scripture, insisting that the biblical texts be
plainly taught in the Bible. Just so long as [Christians] imagine
understood in their historic and cultural context. She wrote:
that a system of caste is taught in the Word of God, and that [men]
If commentators had dealt with the Bible on other subjects as belong to the upper caste while women are of the lower caste;
they have dealt with it on this [gender], taking isolated passages, and just so long as [we] believe that mere flesh—fate—[birth,
separated from their explanatory connections, and insisting on materiality] determines the caste to which one belongs; and just so
the literal interpretation of the words . . . [oh] what errors and long as [we] believe that the “he will rule over you” of Genesis 3:16
contractions would have been forced upon the Church, and what is [prescriptive—that is—part of the moral teachings of the Bible,
terrible results would have accrued to the world. 14 rather than descriptive—describing life in a fallen world] . . . the
destruction of young women into a prostitute class will continue. 16
But, perhaps the most systematic biblical assessment of gender was
put forward by Katharine Bushnell (1856–1946), the youngest graduate Bushnell was among the first to reason that male rule is not a
of Chicago Women’s Medical College. After completing her medical biblical ideal. Rather, it is part of the chaos and domination resulting
training, Bushnell worked briefly as a medical missionary in China, but from sin, which Christians must dismantle and oppose. Male authority,
returned home to eventually lead the “Social Purity Department” with privilege, and patriarchy are consequences of sin. They are therefore
the Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU)—an organization at odds with justice and the moral precepts of Scripture, as Bushnell
that typifies the four theological priorities of Bebbington’s quadrilateral. reasoned throughout her writings, which represent the first systematic
Within the WCTU, Bushnell served as an evangelist and activist of the biblical approach to gender justice.
highest order,15 saving girls from forced prostitution in the US and Beginning in Genesis, Bushnell observes that because both Adam
India. After two decades of rescuing girls from brothels, Bushnell and Eve are created in God’s image,17 both were given dominion in
believed that God was asking her to turn her attention from addressing Eden.18 Scripture does not fault Eve as the source of sin, and God does
the symptoms—trafficking—in order to discern and dismantle the not curse females because of Eve.19 It was Satan, not God, who inspires
roots of gender-based abuse. This was the beginning of her theological the domination of men over women.20 God extends leadership to
reflection, which constitutes the pinnacle of her reforming work. those who do what is right in God’s sight, regardless of their gender,
Bushnell observed that most religious traditions, including birth order, ethnicity, or class.21
Christianity, create a gender-caste system that declares females innately In assessing Paul, Bushnell shows that the apostle did not oppose
depraved. It is not their character, giftedness, education, or devotion to the authority and leadership of women unless their leadership
God that renders them corrupt. It is their materiality, their gender— was domineering (1 Tim. 2:12), when they failed to teach the gospel
which is fixed and unchangeable. In such a system, virtue is believed consistently (1 Tim. 2 :11–12, Acts 18:26, Rom. 16:1–5, 7, 12–13, 15),
to be the result of gender, through which the character of females is or when their clothing or chatter were disruptive (1 Cor. 11:5, 14:34).
deemed incorrigible, irredeemable, and therefore perpetually in need of Fundamentally, Bushnell locates women’s ontological status not in Eve’s

disobedience, as so many theologians had, but in Christ’s completed Payne, a noted New Testament scholar and author of Man and
work on Calvary. To be consistent, an assessment of “woman’s spiritual Woman, One in Christ, published by Zondervan, recalls his father’s
and social status”22 should be determined in the same manner as egalitarian commitment in this way:
“man’s spiritual and social status,” [based] on the atonement of Jesus.
My father argued that women were not excluded from any form
To quote Bushnell, “[We] cannot, for women, put the ‘new wine’ of the
of Old Testament ministry with the possible exception of priest.
Gospel into the old wine-skins of ‘condemnation.’”23 Calvary is good
He argued that in that instance, it was the standard association of
news for men and women because it is the means to reconciliation and
priestesses with temple prostitutes combined with the Old Testament
also sanctification for God’s people.
principle that God’s people should avoid the appearance of evil
In addition to providing an egalitarian hermeneutic, the activism
practices that would reflect poorly on God that explains why there
of early evangelicals aimed at institutionalized injustices by working
is no mention of priestesses approved by God in the Old Testament.
toward the abolishment of slavery and by helping women gain the vote.
He saw no solid basis in the account of creation in Genesis for a
Therefore, the egalitarian movement was a deeply biblical movement
second class status for women. Not long before he died climbing Mt.
that began not in the 1970s with secular feminists such as Gloria
Fuji, he gave an annual lecture at Presbyterian Theological Seminary
Steinem or Betty Friedan, but in the 1800s with evangelicals such as A.J.
in [Dehradun, India] in which he argued that women should not be
Gordon, Catherine Booth, and Katharine Bushnell. According to Alvera
excluded from any form of ministry in the church. The editor of
Mickelsen, it was after 1950 that evangelicals retracted their earlier support
the journal in which these annual lectures were always published,
of women’s leadership. Consider the following examples of evangelicals
refused to publish it since there was no advocacy of a contrasting
who supported the leadership of women, biblically, prior to 1950.
opinion, even though they had published George Knight III’s
Frank E. Gaebelein (1899–1983) advocacy of the other
side the previous year.”25
A prominent evangelical theologian, educator, prolific writer,
founder of Stony Brook Christian School, and one of the founders of When the biblical de- Fundamentally, Bushnell
Christianity Today, Frank Gaebelein was also an early member of the fense of women’s equal ser- locates women’s
ETS. Trained at Harvard, Gaebelein believed that faith should impact vice by accepted evangeli-
all of life, including the arts, literature, science, and social action. A
ontological status not in
cals such as J. Barton Payne
strong supporter of civil rights and the equality of women, Gaebelein is censored, it may explain Eve’s disobedience, as so
probably coined the phrase, “All truth is God’s truth.” To grasp the why egalitarians are viewed many theologians had,
breadth of his erudition, review a list of his publications on the Talbot as liberal. Perhaps JETS but in Christ’s completed
School of Theology’s web site.24 should publish Dr. Payne’s
Gaebelein’s daughter, Gretchen Gaebelein Hull, now in her eighties, final address at Presbyte- work on Calvary.
was a founding board member of Christians for Biblical Equality. As rian Theological Seminary.
a child, Gretchen learned that it was her Christian duty to discover
her God-given abilities in order to develop and use these with all of The Prairie Bible School (PBS)
her strength. When considering her childhood, Gretchen recalls no Founded in 1922 in Alberta, Canada, Prairie Bible School (today’s Prairie
encounter with Christian teaching that suggested ministry and work Bible Institute) has for “more than eight decades . . . helped prepare
were limited by gender. It was not until the 1960s that CBE founders thousands of Prairie Bible School (PBS) alumni to become faithful
like Gretchen Gaebelein Hull and Alvera Mickelsen encountered servants of Jesus Christ, reaching out to people in more than 114 countries
sermons and publications from evangelicals that made gender the around the globe.”26
basis of Christian vocation. And it was this very shift in emphasis Prairie Bible Institute’s Doctrinal Statement is compatible with
from “Christian vocation,” centered on God’s gifting and calling, to Bebbington’s quadrilateral, making clear the school’s commitment to
“gender vocation,” rooted in gender, that led evangelicals like Gretchen biblical authority: “We believe the Old and New Testament Scriptures
Gaebelein Hull, Catherine Clark Kroeger, Alvera Mickelsen, Roger as originally given by God are divinely inspired, inerrant, trustworthy,
Nicole (founder and former president of ETS), Gilbert Bilezikian, Stan and constitute the only supreme authority in all matters of doctrine
Gundry (former president of ETS), Alan Johnson (former president and conduct.”27 Prairie’s doctrine clearly differentiates it from liberal
of ETS), and others to inaugurate Christians for Biblical Equality—an or feminist theology. Yet, this supremely evangelical institute gave
organization that promotes the biblical foundations for the shared women strategic positions of leadership on their board of directors;
service and leadership of women and men. The roots of egalitarian as professors of theology and Bible doctrine; as principal of Prairie’s
thought also included other early ETS leaders. high school; and as preachers, not only during their summer
conferences, but also on Sunday mornings in PBS’s auditorium, the
J. Barton Payne (1922–1979) Tabernacle—the largest religious auditorium in Canada.
Former president of the ETS and professor of Old Testament at From the time PBS opened its doors to eight students in 1922,
Princeton, Bob Jones, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Wheaton women’s spiritual leadership was endorsed by Prairie’s first prin-
College, and Covenant Seminary (Creve Coeur/St. Louis), J. Barton cipal, L.E. Maxwell (1895–1984). The school grew to become the
Payne was a vocal advocate of women in ministry. His son, Dr. Philip most prestigious missionary training school for evangelicals in

all of Canada. During Maxwell’s 58-year presidency, his passion board member; and as principal of Prairie’s high school. Both male
for evangelism and his respect for the authority of Scripture drew and female high school teachers reported to her. It was L.E. Maxwell
thousands of evangelicals who first hired Dearing, initially inviting her to teach at Prairie’s high
to Three Hills, Alberta. school. Yet, her administrative abilities were prominent and she was
Maxwell was one of the Maxwell was not only promoted to vice principal, and then principal—a position she held for
most zealous advocates passionate about training 18 years. Holding a degree in religious education from Seattle Pacific
students as missionaries; College (today’s Seattle Pacific University), Dearing was invited by
of missions. He was also
he was equally determined Maxwell to teach introductory Bible to Prairie’s freshman college class.
an outspoken advocate to include women in every She eventually became full time faculty at Prairie Bible College. When
of women preaching aspect of the Great Com- challenged as to the biblical propriety of a woman teaching adult males,
and teaching at all mission, according to Dearing responded:
ETS member Dr. Robert
levels. If you were in Rakestraw, a graduate of
. . . that, based on careful interpretation of certain Bible verses—
favor of missions you “there are only two or three that are used to suggest that women
Prairie Bible School and
should not teach—that they have been misinterpreted in their
had to be egalitarian. a retired professor of the-
absolute ban on women teaching.” If that explanation did not satisfy,
ology at Bethel Seminary
she would refer the student to either Maxwell, or Dr. Ted Rendall,
in Saint Paul, Minnesota.
who later succeeded Maxwell as Principal of the Bible College.29
Rakestraw attended Prairie Bible School from 1963–1967, earning
a diploma in Bible and missions in 1967. According to Rakestraw: In 1928, Ruth Miller joined the Bible faculty of PBS. Like Dearing
and the other members of faculty, Miller was invited to preach from
Maxwell was one of the most zealous advocates of missions.
the pulpit of Prairie’s Tabernacle on Sunday morning. Women were
He was also an outspoken advocate of women preaching and
frequently platform speakers during summer conferences sponsored
teaching at all levels. If you were in favor of missions you had to
by PBS. Conferences included women such as Gladys Aylward and
be egalitarian. I remember Maxwell preaching on Psalm 68:11,
Helen Roseveare, who addressed enormous audiences at events
the great company of women who published the glad tidings.
sponsored by Prairie Bible School.
For L.E. Maxwell, the cause of Christ was shared by both men
Prairie’s female graduates were as pioneering as Dearing and Miller.
and women alike.28
They too courageously ventured off alone, to distant and dangerous
Maxwell claimed to have located over 300 passages that support the places around the world, a fact touted in Prairian yearbooks perhaps as
leadership of women. Together with his long-standing colleague Ruth means of inspiring the service of other students. The 1958 Prairian gave
Dearing, they published a book on this topic in 1987, entitled Women in a realistic view of dangers embraced by female missionaries, perhaps
Ministry. What is more, the 1960 yearbook, the Prairian, was dedicated also aimed at shaming a few men into joining them. The following
to a female graduate who had distinguished herself as a missionary in solicitation was entitled, “Opportunities for Young Women!”
China. Maxwell writes:
There are still some areas where refrigerators and washing machines
It was some forty years ago that I heard Miss Louisa Vaughan of China are scarce, where the food becomes monotonous, where rough
speak on John 14:13–14. She recited her heart-braking experience trekking through mosquito-infested jungles and bridgeless rivers is
with an “impossible” class of 25 ignorant Chinese women. common, where people do not want the Gospel and think they do
Like a flash of light to her dark unbelieving heart came the God a service if they kill you.
words: “Whatsoever ye shall ask in My Name, that will I do . . . If It is still possible to endure loneliness and apparent frustration
you shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.” amid heat, filth and stench. Probably you will not marry, as the
She said, “My burden rolled away as I realized that I had nothing percents of men going to the mission fields is very small.
to do but to ask, and Christ would fulfill His promise, ‘I will do it.’” But, if you have given your life to Jesus and can trust Him to
Through mighty faith and prayer Miss Vaughan saw revival supply your needs (or give you grace to die joyfully), we will be glad
work advanced in China during the following years. She was used of to consider you application as one of the four hundred urgently
the Spirit to bring Ding Le Mei through for God. Never man spake needed on the W.E.C. [World Evangelization Crusade] fields.
like this woman. Ding Le Mei became “the Moody of China.” Miss This is an opportunity to prove the Omnipotent God!
Vaughan conquered wherever she went on her knees—in His Name. If there are still some old-fashioned young men who feel called to
serve the Lord in hard places, with no earthly security, they too
My own father-in-law also attended Prairie Bible School from 1958–
may apply.
1961. After graduation he and his wife worked for thirty-seven years
as missionaries in Brazil. Both Rakestraw and my father-in-law were Prairie Bible School was unabashedly evangelical in its high view of
students of Ruth Dearing, who not only taught Bible at Prairie Bible Scripture; its devotion to evangelism and the gospel; and its commitment
School, but also preached frequently in chapel. to preparing students as missionaries, evangelists, pastors, Bible
Dearing served in leadership for 59 years at Prairie Bible School, expositors, and Christians ready to give their lives for the gospel. Gender
as a member of the faculty of Bible, theology, and doctrine; as a bias was eclipsed by the Great Commission, and it was to this that Prairie,

under the leadership of L.E. Maxwell, devoted itself. Serving in more Christ which we know. . . . The field is thus very large, and when we
than 114 countries, Prairie graduates, both men and women, recognized consider that nearly two thirds of all converted persons in the world
that much of the world was unacquainted with Christ. What did it matter are women . . . the question of woman’s work in evangelization is of
if a woman carried the good news to these souls for whom Christ died? highest importance . . . If there is no prohibition in the Bible of public
Roused by Maxwell’s “Great was the company of women who brought service by women, either in political franchise . . . then we stand face
the glad tidings (Psalm 68:11),” women and men set their sights on to face with the fact that the devil has succeeded in excluding nearly
leading the world to Christ, and gender was no deterrent because the two thirds of the total number of believers—damage to God’s work so
task was great, the harvest was ripe, and the workers were few. great that it can scarcely be described.32
Fredrik Franson (1852–1908) According to Franson, the whole of Scripture endorses women’s
preaching and teaching, beginning with Genesis. Here Franson
There is perhaps no other individual more compatible with the
notes that the “help” or ezer woman offers man is primarily spiritual
evangelical ethos of Prairie Bible School and its founder L.E. Maxwell
“influence.” He then asks, if woman was persuasive in leading Adam to
than Fredrik Franson, founder of the Evangelical Alliance Mission
sin, how much more might her influence be used to “remove sin from
(TEAM). Born in Sweden in 1852, Franson immigrated to the US
the world,”33 in leading men to the gospel?
and came to faith in Nebraska in 1872. After an encounter with D.L.
Similarly, the prophets Deborah and Huldah influenced Israel’s
Moody, Franson was unsurpassed in his zeal for evangelism and
decision-makers—the kings, priests, and other prophets.34 In this way,
missions, driven by the belief that Christ’s return was imminent. A
prophets like Deborah and Huldah led the entire nation of Israel. For
passionate dispensationalist, Franson traveled extensively, training
Franson, the whole of Scripture reveals women as part of a great company
missionaries on four continents, while also publishing popular
(predicted in Psalm 68:22), who declare the glad tidings of God’s victory
biblical treatises and establishing strategic partnerships with other
over sin and death. For this reason, women were prominent at Pentecost
like-minded evangelicals such as A.B. Simpson and Hudson Taylor.
as Joel prophesied (Joel 2:28). And a woman—Anna—was also the first
Ultimately, Franson is credited for founding not only TEAM, but also
to announce the birth of the Christ and was the only prophet active at the
the Danish Mission Confederation, the Swiss Alliance Mission, the
time of Christ’s presentation at the Temple. (Luke 2:36).35
Barmea Alliance Mission, the Finnish Alliance Mission, the Swedish
The Samaritan woman was also part of that great company
Evangelical Mission in Japan, and the Swedish Alliance Mission.
of women. After meeting Christ (John 4:28), that same day she
Franson, like Maxwell, was an ardent supporter of women missionaries.
“persuaded the whole town to seek the Savior.”36 Like the Samaritan
Determined to make known the biblical basis for women’s evangelistic
woman, Mary Magdalene carried the glad tidings of the risen Lord to
service beside men, Franson wrote “Prophesying Daughters” in
the disciples. News that “was preached to the farthest boundary of the
1896. Relying on a whole-Bible approach, “Prophesying Daughters”
earth, was first proclaimed by a woman, and not only to the eleven,”37
is striking for its cohesive, original, and concise survey of Scripture.
but to those who were also with them, the other women (Mark 16:10).
From Genesis through the epistles, Franson celebrates Scripture’s
If Jesus was not ashamed to include a woman in his work, why
consistent support for women’s spiritual leadership. Fundamental to
should we be ashamed to do so? Neither was Paul afraid to work
“Prophesying Daughters” is the goal of confronting gender prejudice
beside women like the teacher Priscilla, Phoebe the deacon, and
in order to free women for evangelism. He “labeled as heretics those
Junia, whom both Chrysostom and Theophilus understood to be
who grounded a doctrine on one or two passages in the Bible, without
a female apostle.
reading the references in their context.”31 “Prophesying Daughters”
If all of Scripture points to Christ, can we afford to overlook the
opposes a selective reading of Scripture, showing that the main biblical
women of Scripture who declared the good news of Jesus? Yet, their
themes that include, rather than exclude, women’s leadership. Franson
voices have been stopped by those who rely upon two passages (1 Tim-
also offers an assessment of the gender teachings not only of the the
othy 2:11–15, 1 Corinthians 14:34) “without reading them in context.”38
early church fathers but also reformation leaders like Martin Luther.
While Franson fails to offer a thorough explanation of 1 Timothy 2:11–
Ultimately Franson perceives no ministry in which women may not
15 or 1 Corinthians 14:34, he argues that all of Scripture stands against
lead. He is no gradual emancipationist, but a full-fledged egalitarian,
any exclusion of women’s teaching and prophetic leadership, particu-
and his biblical scholarship has one focus and goal—to give the God-
larly the teachings and service of Christ and Paul. If female teaching
given gifts of women expansive opportunities on any mission field.31
itself was forbidden, then Franson notes:
Hence, in the introduction to “Prophesying Daughters,” he writes:
. . . the instruction which Prisca gave to Apollos would also be
What the Bible says about the woman’s place in evangelistic work and
against God’s command, and Paul’s order to women to be “good
prophesying is a very important question, especially in our day, when
teachers” (Titus 2:3) would be abrogated, and then women’s work
. . . so many doors are open for missionary work. Many of China’s
in Sunday schools, in public schools, and in the teaching they
400 million inhabitants thirst for the Gospel . . . In Japan reception
convey through books and articles in religious papers would all
of the Gospel is so great that it has been said that [those] who would
be forbidden.39
see [unbelief] in Japan must hurry out there. Thousands of witnesses
are needed . . . In India there are 250 million and in Africa about as “The danger of founding a doctrine on a single text, without
many who have the right to receive from us the glad tidings of Jesus comparing it with hundreds of other texts that speak of the same

theme, cannot be emphasized enough,”40 said Franson. “If a sister can abandoning a rigorous intellectual engagement, not only theologically
more easily bring souls to the Savior . . . then she sins if she does not but in other fields, fundamentalists and no small number of
use those gifts God that has given her.”41 And, the results of this are evangelicals lost their capacity to impact culture through the academy,
disastrous in light of eternity. There is a sense of urgency that comes an observation made by Dr. Charles Malik in his opening address at
with the fact that there are so many “people in the water about to the dedication of Wheaton’s Billy Graham Center in 1980.45 According
drown.”42 Franson writes: to Malik, it will take decades to recover the intellectual ground and
social engagement surrendered by fundamentalists and evangelicals
A few men are trying to save [the drowning], and that is considered
after 1950, a fact Mark Noll expands on in his insightful book, The
well and good. But look, over there a few women have untied a
Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.
boat also to be of help in the rescue, and immediately a few men
A plain reading of Scripture, accompanied by a neglect of history,
cry out . . . ‘No, no, women must not help, rather let the people
culture, and the ancient languages also had devastating consequences
drown.’ What stupidity! And yet this picture is very fitting. Men
on women’s leadership. Some passages pertaining to women’s
have, during all these centuries, shown that they do not have the
leadership pose interpretive challenges that require a thorough
power alone to carry out the work for the salvation of the world:
knowledge of ancient history, culture, and language. One such passage
therefore, they ought to be thankful to get some help.43
is 1 Timothy 2:11–15, with its unusual Greek verb, authentein, and its
Like today’s egalitarians, Franson’s commitment to evangelism suggestion that women are saved through childbearing, to say nothing
and scriptural authority was fundamental to his egalitarian views of its apparent conflict with Paul’s established practice of advancing
and advocacy. What is more, the gospel beside female leaders like Junia, Priscilla, Phoebe, Junia,
his biblical defense of wom- Chloe, Priscilla, Lydia, and so on. The impact of the Fundamentalist-
en’s leadership employs the Modernist Controversy led to a literal and often a shallow reading of
. . . one wonders if the
same methods of interpre- Scripture for many fundamentalists and evangelicals, divorced from
early evangelicals might tation used by egalitarians the academic rigor and social engagement that had characterized an
view our generation as today, even though today’s earlier generation of evangelicals, thus diminishing their influence
liberal for placing the egalitarians are accused of intellectually, spiritually, and socially.
succumbing to liberalism. One needs only to browse the archives of an evangelical college or
priorities of evangelism Perhaps our neglect of histor- university founded prior to 1950 to read journals and correspondence
behind our obsession ic individuals like Franson, from female graduates serving on global mission fields. Their
with gender roles . . . Maxwell, Dearing, and oth- writings are filled with an explicit commitment to biblical authority
ers contributes to this prob- and evangelism—ideals that exemplify an evangelical faith. In
lem. It was only in 2009 that reflecting on their legacy, one wonders if the early evangelicals might
“Prophesying Daughters” was made available on the web. Prior to view our generation as liberal for placing the priorities of evangelism
this, it had been sequestered in the archives of an Evangelical Cov- behind our obsession with gender roles that truncate the leadership
enant publication, The Covenant Quarterly. of women, thereby diminishing the good news of Christ.
Egalitarians do not comprise a new path to liberalism. Rather,
Conclusion egalitarians are devoted to the authority of Scripture, though they
Prior to the 1950s, biblicism and conversionism compelled the differ with complementarians in their interpretation of passages
early evangelicals to welcome women as Bible teachers, preachers, like 1 Timothy 2:11–15 or 1 Corinthians 14:34. Let us recognize that
board members, and as innovators of mission organizations and evangelicals arrive at opposing interpretative conclusions even while
Bible institutes. A high view of Scripture and a commitment to upholding the authority of Scripture. An accusation of theological
evangelism also propelled the Golden Era of Missions, in which liberalism must be balanced against actual facts, beginning with the
women outnumbered men two to one. This posed no challenge to history of evangelicals as a whole. The early evangelicals advanced
biblical authority; it threatened only human bias that circumvented women’s leadership because the Scriptures called them to “Go into
Scripture’s support for women’s equal service and leadership in all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation”
Christian mission. (Mark 15:16) regardless of gender, class, or ethnicity.46
An openness to the gifts of women among evangelicals changed I would like to end with a troubling observation. Over the last
dramatically during the Fundamentalist—Modernist Controversy, fifteen years, I have encountered too many Christian college students
with its concern over higher critical methods and a disregard for the who seem more concerned with “gender roles” than with discerning
authority of Scripture. Bible institutes sought to distance themselves their God-given gifts and calling. A preoccupation with “gender
from an intellectualism that smacked of higher critical methods. differences” (what sociologists call “gender essentialism”) also
The Northwestern Bible Training School (today’s University of appears in popular evangelical literature in which passive beauties
Northwestern–Saint Paul), for example, responded to the threat of await male rescue. This preoccupation exhibits an anemic expression
modernism by eliminating courses on “archaeology, history, and the of Christian faith, apparently unaware of its own feebleness, as Malik
ancient languages.”44 Instead, some evangelicals relied on a literal or predicted. How vastly different were the lives and work of evangelicals
“plain reading of the text” as their principal interpretive method. By like Catherine Booth, A.J. Gordon, Katharine Bushnell, Amanda

Smith, Fredrik Franson, and L.E. Maxwell with their determination 17. Katharine Bushnell, God’s Word to Women: One Hundred Bible Studies
to prove God omnipotent in dire circumstances. I would rather be on Women’s Place in the Divine Economy (Mossville, IL: God’s Word to Women
Publishers, 1999), 10ff.
among that great company of women Franson celebrates and which
18. Ibid., 10ff.
Scripture compels us to emulate with impunity.47 19. Ibid., 39ff.
20. Ibid., 74ff.
Notes 21. Ibid., 68, 74ff.
1. Charles O. Knowles, Let Her Be: Right Relationships and the Southern 22. Ibid., 169.
Baptist Conundrum Over Women’s Role (Columbia, MO: KnoWell Publishing, 23. Ibid.
2002), 85. See also the writings of Margaret Fell Fox at Available online at 24. See www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/protestant/frank_gaebelein.
onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?author=fell%2C+margar 25. Comments sent by email from Dr. Philip Payne, on Thursday,
et&amode=words&title=&tmode=words&c=x, accessed September 28, 2013. October 16, 2008, 4:11 p.m.
2. The Nicene Creed: I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of 26. See page 6, prairie.edu/document.doc?id=58, accessed Sept 30, 2013.
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus 27. Prairie Bible Institute’s Doctrinal Statement reads:
Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; The Scriptures: We believe the Old and New Testament Scriptures as
God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being originally given by God are divinely inspired, inerrant, trustworthy, and
of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for constitute the only supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and
us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by conduct.
the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also
for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He The Godhead: We believe there is one living and true God, eternally
rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on existing in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who are the same
the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the in essence and co-equal in power and glory.
quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end. And I believe in the Jesus Christ: We believe in the full deity and full humanity of our Lord
Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Jesus Christ; we affirm His virgin birth, sinless life, divine miracles, vicari-
Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; ous and atoning death, bodily resurrection, ascension, ongoing mediato-
who spoke by the prophets. And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic rial work, and personal return in power and glory.
Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the
resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. The Holy Spirit: We believe in the Holy Spirit by whose regenerating
3. ETS Doctrinal Basis: “The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is power and ongoing ministry the believer is enabled to live a holy life, to
the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs. God is a witness and work for the Lord Jesus Christ.
Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each an uncreated person, one in essence, Creation: We believe in the direct creative acts of God as recorded in
equal in power and glory.” Available online at etsjets.org/?q=about. Genesis.
4. Mark A. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield,
Satan: We believe in the personality of Satan, a fallen angel, who,
and the Wesleys (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 19ff.
with other angelic beings rebelled against God and was cast out of
5. Mark A. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield,
Heaven. Although he was defeated at the cross and his final destiny
and the Wesleys (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 19.
shall be the lake of fire, he continues to be the archenemy of God,
6. Ibid.
angels and humanity.
7. Sarah Sumner, Christianity Today, vol. 52, no. 5, (June 2008): 41.
8. Wayne Grudem Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism, Humanity and Sin: We believe humanity was created in the image of
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway books, 2006), 11. God. In Adam all humankind fell and incurred eternal separation from
9. Sam Hodges, “Woman’s turn in pulpit at Irving Bible Church brings God. As a consequence, all human beings are declared by God to be
buzz, beefs,” Dallas Morning News, August 2008. inherently depraved in need of salvation.
10. Margaret Fell Fox’s best known egalitarian treatise is entitled, Women’s Salvation: We believe the grace of God provides salvation from sin for
Speaking Justified, Proved and Allowed of by the Scripture, (London, 1666). all humanity only through personal repentance and faith in Jesus Christ
Available online at onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?auth and His atoning work.
or=fell%2C+margaret&amode=words&title=&tmode=words&c=x, accessed
September 28, 2013. The Church: We believe the Church, the Body of Christ, constitutes
11. Dana L. Robert, American Women in Mission: A Social History of Their of all true believers and with Christ as head, the church exists in local
Thought and Practice (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2005), ix. expression to glorify Him, edifying believers, and evangelizing lost hu-
12. Charles O. Knowles, Let Her Be: Right Relationships and the Southern manity everywhere.
Baptist Conundrum Over Women’s Role (Columbia, Mo.: KnoWell Publishing, Christ’s Return: We believe in the literal, physical, imminent return
2002), 85ff. of the Lord Jesus Christ.
13. A.J. Gordon, “The Ministry of Women,” The Missionary Review of the
The statement is also available online at prairie.edu/document.
World 17 (1984): 911.
doc?id=312, accessed September 25, 2013.
14. Catherine Booth, “Female Ministry; or, Women’s Right to Preach
28. Mimi Haddad interviewed Robert Rakestraw in his home in Saint Paul,
the Gospel,” in Terms of Empowerment: Salvation Army Women in Ministry
Minnesota, August 2008.
(London, 1859; reprint, New York: The Salvation Army Supplies Printing and
29. albertasource.ca/aspenland/fr/society/footnotes.html, accessed
Publishing Department, 1975), 19–20.
October 2008.
15. See a timeline of Katharine Bushnell’s life here: http://godswordtowomen.
30. Knowles, Let Her Be, 85.
org/gwtw_bushnell_timeline.pdf
31. Fredrik Franson, “Prophesying Daughters,” The Covenant Quarterly vol.
16. Katharine Bushnell, Dr. Katharine C. Bushnell: A Brief Sketch of
34, no. 4 (November, 1976): 25. Available at cbeinternational.org/files/u1/free-
her Life and Work (Hertford, England: Rose and Sons Salisbury Square,
art/prophesying-daughters.pdf, accessed July 20, 2013.
1930), 14. Available online at godswordtowomen.org/bushnell_brief_
32. Ibid.
sketch.pdf, accessed Oct 5, 2013.

33. Ibid. 46. For a more thorough study of the support evangelicals gave women’s
34. Ibid., 26. leadership, see Janette Hassey, No Time For Silence: Evangelical Women in
35. Ibid., 28. Public Ministry Around the Turn of the Century (Minneapolis, MN: Christians
36. Ibid., 29. for Biblical Equality, 1986).
37. Ibid., 30. 47. “Remember your leaders, those who spoke the word of God to
38. Ibid., 35. you; consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith”
39. Ibid., 36. (Hebrews 13:7).
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid., 39. “Egalitarians: A New Path to Liberalism? Or Integral to Evangelical
42. Ibid., 29. DNA” is adapted from a lecture presented by Mimi Haddad at the 2008
43. Ibid. ETS convention.
44. William Vance Trollinger, Jr., God’s Empire: William Bell Riley and
Midwestern Fundamentalism (Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin
Press, 1990), 94. Riley was also president and founder of the World Christian Mimi Haddad (PhD) is president of Christians for Biblical Equality.
Fundamentals Association. As such, he led fundamentalist momentum toward She has contributed to nine books, has authored more than
one hundred articles and blog posts, and speaks frequently on
the plain reading of the Scriptures as opposed to studying about the Bible.
issues related to faith and gender. She is an adjunct assistant
45. See www2.wheaton.edu/bgc/archives/BGCdedication.htm, accessed professor at Bethel University and an adjunct professor at North
October 1, 2013. Park Theological Seminary and Fuller Theological Seminary.

By Allison Quient
Equating “Feminisms”
“All I ask of our brethren is, that they will take their feet from off our necks, and permit us to stand upright on that
ground which God designed us to occupy.”
—Sarah Grimke1
Throughout history, movements have arisen to challenge the status is a recent phenomenon, a threatening force, liberal in origin, which
quo of society and the institutional church. In the history of the United in the end rejects the authority of Scripture in order to conform to
States and into the present, many have spoken out against the way modern culture. Evangelicals commonly known as biblical egalitarians
women are perceived and treated. These voices have fought to open to are quickly tied to liberal forms of feminism because it is commonly
women spaces and leadership positions in the church and society that supposed that “liberalism and the approval of women’s ordination go
have traditionally been exclusively for men. These movements, known hand in hand,” and inevitably lead the church down the slippery slope
collectively as feminism, have requested—sometimes demanded—a into the abandonment of scriptural authority.2
transformation in the ways evangelicals conceive of women’s roles. This paper seeks to begin to correct the equation of biblical
For evangelicals, the Bible is the ultimate, infallible and inerrant egalitarianism with liberal feminism by considering them on a
authority, which serves as the arbiter of acceptable views, and foundational level—looking at where each locates its authority and
theological liberalism exists as a looming menace to biblical authority. how each understands the Bible’s authority. Given the limited nature
Unfortunately, evangelicals are often confused over who is challenging of this paper, I will focus on two individuals—Sarah Grimké and
their biblical and cultural perceptions. They generally do not understand Elizabeth Cady Stanton—who have been widely considered seeds
the critiques of liberal feminists or of their own evangelical sisters and or prototypes of their respective movements and whose beliefs and
brothers, nor do they recognize that they are dealing with separate approaches to Scripture today correspond to those of egalitarians
movements in important and foundational ways. For many, feminism and liberal feminists, respectively. Finally, I will consider the question

of whether the beliefs of egalitarians logically lead to the acceptance I surrender not our claim to equality. All I ask of our brethren is, that
of a form of liberal feminism and the subsequent abandonment of they will take their feet from off our necks, and permit us to stand
Scripture as the ultimate authority. It is my hope that, as evangelicals, upright on that ground which God designed us to occupy. If he
we will be engaged “in a more earnest search after truth and a more has not given us the rights which have, as I conceive, been wrested
loyal devotion to it once it is found.”3 from us, we shall soon give evidence of our inferiority, and shrink
back into obscurity, which the high souled magnimity of man has
Egalitarianism and Sarah Grimké assigned us as our appropriate sphere . . . He has done all he could
Evangelical egalitarianism is a view committed to what it understands to debase and enslave her mind; and now he looks triumphantly
to be the biblical principle of mutuality. “According to this principle, on the ruin he has wrought, and says, the being he has thus deeply
there can be no moral or theological justification for permanently injured is his inferior.10
granting or denying status, privilege, or prerogative solely on the basis
For Grimké, the problem was not only the mere fact of gender
of a person’s race, class, or gender.”4 In the introduction to Discovering
discrimination, but also that it violated God’s design for women
Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy, the essential
and thus hindered them from their service as “helpers.” Only one
message of egalitarianism is:
who was truly an equal could fulfill her place as the helper of man.11
Gender, in and of itself, neither privileges nor curtails one’s ability to Men usurped God’s authority and molded women into the images
be used to advance the kingdom or to glorify God in any dimension they themselves desired, rather than what God wanted, and this had
of ministry, mission, society or family. The differences between unfortunate implications for the “welfare of the world.”12 Women were
men and women do not justify granting men unique and perpetual meant to occupy a mutual place alongside men and when this does
prerogatives of leadership and authority not shared by women.5 not happen, the benefit that naturally arises from understanding and
submitting to God’s intention does not follow, diminishing even the
While most egalitarians today affirm gender differences and the
woman’s service as wife and mother.13
necessity of hierarchies in some situations, all deny that gender is a
On the surface, Grimké’s egalitarianism could still look suspiciously
key deciding factor in determining gifts and leadership. It is only in
like forms of theologically liberal feminism in that both deny any God-
this sense that men and women are no different. Egalitarians believe
given distinction in the moral duties or “roles” of men and women,
their convictions are taught in Scripture and are grounded in the Bible
both devote significant attention to the problem of the oppression of
as the inerrant word of God.6 Is egalitarianism really an effort to give
women, and both use the rhetoric of “equality.” However, Grimké does
scriptural validation to a recent, feminized, liberal culture?
not base her authority in women’s experience nor does she use female
Evangelical egalitarianism did not originate with the feminist
oppression as her starting point. For her, Scripture, which is inerrant
liberation movements of the 1960s or 1970s, or even with the founding
in the original autographs, is the authority on which all else is judged,
of Christians for Biblical Equality in 1987–1988. Rather, it came out of
including the position of women. She explains, “I will depend solely
the reformations and revivals following the Second Great Awakening
on the Bible to designate the sphere of woman . . . I therefore claim the
and continues on today. More directly, egalitarianism as a movement
original as my standard, believing that to have been inspired” (emphasis
in the United States arose when many women found that the equality
mine).14 Scripture is her final authority and it alone decides the place
principle of the abolitionist movement also applied to them. In their
of women. It is upon this notion that her arguments against female
fight against slavery, they naturally found parallels with their own
oppression and for the equality of women is based. Without it, her
condition. A seed of this egalitarian movement is Sarah Grimké, a
views on the plight of slaves and women do not make sense.
Quaker woman who faced gendered opposition to her preaching and
Continually throughout Letters on the Equality of the Sexes, Grimké
public speaking against the evils of slavery. In response, she wrote one
brings our attention to the fact that nowhere does the Bible teach that
of the first American scriptural defenses of the equality of women
men are to have dominion over women or that women were created
and a justification for their public speaking, titled, Letters on the
to be dependent on men. Many of Grimké’s positive arguments are the
Equality of the Sexes.
same as those made by today’s egalitarians. Some of these are:
In Letters on the Equality of the Sexes, it is evident that Sarah Grimké
believed that, like slaves, women were being denied their God-given 1. Man and woman were both made in the image of God and
positions as equals alongside white men and that the inferior position given dominion over the earth (as opposed to dominion over
women occupied was the product of sinful oppression, not nature as each other).15
God intended it.7 Women were created to be equals. Equality meant 2. The woman’s position as “helper” indicates that she is a
that women were also made in the image of God, and were indeed companion, not merely an instrument of the man’s pleasure.16
moral beings with an immortal nature.8 This notion of equality 3. Galatians 3:28 teaches that we should in a sense forget about
assumed functional equality (most of her opponents were not making gender insofar as our ideas about gender have negatively
a case for ontological equality alongside functional subordination). influenced how we relate to one another socially and
Men were the ones who decided that the position of a female preacher domestically and kept us from benefiting from each other the
and public reformer was “unnatural” and they were the inventers of way God intended.17 She believed that women must be allowed
the idea that there was a “distinction between the duties of men and to “glorify God to the fullest extent that God enables them,
women as moral beings.”9 Grimké writes: and the prerequisite of women’s liberation is an unprejudiced

translation and interpretation of the biblical passages that have While it was not well received and was formally repudiated by the
traditionally been used to keep women in subjection.”18 For National Woman’s Suffrage Association, Elizabeth Stanton, who
Sarah Grimké, the problem was not the Bible or its authority, is considered to be a forerunner of twentieth-century feminism,
but human corruption, a perverted interpretation of Scripture considered it “a step in progress.”26 She reasoned:
and incorrect translations.19 She abhorred the evils of slavery
It still requires courage to question the divine inspiration of the
and sexism rampant in a society claiming to be enlightened by
Hebrew Writings as to the position of woman. Why should the
Christianity and used Scripture to speak prophetically against
myths, fables, and allegories of the Hebrews be held more sacred
such evils. She found in Scripture the keys to the liberation of
than those of the Assyrians and Egyptians?27
slaves and women according to the glory and desire of God and
the benefit of his people. Scripture was the standard by which For Stanton, the key problem was not in how the Bible was
she judged her place as a woman, and it was by this standard— interpreted, and it did not matter a great deal whether the women
not her own experience as a woman—that she judged the evils working on its critique knew the original languages.28 Rather, the
of slavery and sexism in her society. Bible itself and its use for the oppression of women were the primary
problems.
Liberal Feminism and Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Bible historians claim special inspiration for the Old and New
Feminism and liberalism are diverse concepts, so some attention will Testaments containing most contradictory records of the same
be paid to the definitions of each before identifying the basic claim of events, of miracles opposed to all known laws, of customs that
liberal feminism and taking a closer look at the thought of Elizabeth degrade the female sex of all human and animal life, stated in
Stanton. Feminism, although diverse, has been defined as “a social most questionable language that could not be read in promiscuous
vision, rooted in women’s experience of sexually based discrimination assembly, and call all of this “The Word of God.”29
and oppression, a movement seeking the liberation of women from
all forms of sexism, and an academic method of analysis being used Stanton also claims:
in virtually every discipline” (emphasis mine).20 Gary Dorrien defines From the inauguration of the movement for woman’s emancipation
theological liberalism, specifically of a “Christian” variety, as: the Bible has been used to hold her in the ‘divinely ordained sphere,’
A tradition that derives from the late-eighteenth- and early- prescribed in the Old and New Testaments . . . . The canon and civil
nineteenth-century Protestant attempt to reconceptualize the law; church and state; priests and legislators; all political parties and
meaning of traditional Christian teaching in the light of modern religious denominations have alike taught that woman was made
knowledge and modern ethical values . . . Fundamentally it is the after man, of man, and for man, an inferior being, subject to man.30
idea of a genuine Christianity not based on external authority. Elizabeth Stanton, like many liberal feminists today, did not believe
Liberal theology seeks to reinterpret the symbols of traditional all of the Bible was wrong or should be rejected. “There are some
Christianity in a way that creates a progressive religious alternative general principles in the holy books of all religions that teach love,
to . . . theologies based off of external authority.21 charity, liberty, justice and equality for all the human family” and such
In other words, theological liberalism seeks to accommodate notable women such as Deborah, Huldah, and Vashti serve to show
Christian teaching to modernity. Wayne Grudem rightly points out us that the Bible is diverse and cannot be thrown out in its entirety.31
that theological liberalism is a “system of thinking that denies the Within the Bible we find the means for both female oppression and
complete truthfulness of the Bible as the Word of God and denies female liberation.
the unique and absolute authority of the Bible in our lives.”22 Liberal Before proceeding, it must also be noted that not all liberal feminists
feminism maintains this basic foundation, but makes the female share Stanton’s stance on Scripture. While many deny the inerrancy
experience its guide. of all or portions of Scripture, a good number maintain a Christian
Unlike the evangelical egalitarian, who believes error is found commitment to the essentials of the faith and have an ethos that is “not
only in the human interpreter and that the Bible conceptually affirms revolutionary but reformist in spirit and substance.”32 For many of
the mutuality of men and women in ontology and function, the these individuals, the Bible contains a valuable message of equality and
theologically liberal feminist agrees with those who claim the Bible liberation, which is contradicted only by portions of the canon. While
teaches the exclusive subordination of women. Liberal feminism, they believe that the Bible itself is not the Word of God, at least parts
though, rejects these portions of Scripture because they are believed to of Scripture might express true words about God and be influenced by
oppose female experience and liberation. Therefore, liberal feminism real events.
and evangelical egalitarianism differ in their interpretations of Scripture Throughout The Woman’s Bible, whether a given passage adds or
and in their views about the nature of Scripture. detracts from the status of women is the standard Stanton uses to detect
Theologically liberal feminism has its prototype in The Woman’s what should remain and what should be thrown out, reformulated, or
Bible of the late nineteenth-century.23 The Woman’s Bible was the first understood in the light of modernism. This criterion for evaluating
“book-length challenge to male interpretations of the Bible”24 and is Scripture is suspiciously similar to the feminist critical hermeneutic
considered by many to be the “original” feminist attack on Scripture.25 used by more recent feminists such as Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza,
who also understands Elizabeth Stanton as some sort of precursor

to her view.33 The liberal feminist hermeneutic “seeks to assess the ordination of women is supported by those who do not accept the
function of the Bible in terms of women’s liberation and wholeness” Bible’s authority and is opposed by those who do. It should be noted
and “derives this canon, not from the biblical writings, but from the that he also gives examples of individuals or institutions upholding
contemporary struggle of women . . . It places biblical texts under the both women in ministry and the authority of Scripture. Yet, in making
authority of feminist experience.”34 These women transform their his case, he tends to disregard these individuals and institutions.
biblical heritage. Stanton believed this could be accomplished even in There are two basic problems with his approach:
light of the fact that “not only biblical interpretations but the biblical 1. Grudem’s claim is logically invalid.
texts themselves were androcentric.” They could still “serve to recover a
feminist biblical heritage” because female experience could draw from 2. Dr. Chaves’ work, upon which Grudem builds his argument,
those portions of the Bible deemed to be liberating.35 contradicts Grudem’s argument that evangelical feminism is a
path to liberalism.
Similarities and Dissimilarities between Two Movements How is Grudem’s argument logically invalid? The clear aim of
Throughout this study, one thing has been clear: biblical egalitarianism the book (as the title suggests) is to warn evangelicals that accepting
is not to be equated with liberal feminism when considering their what he calls “evangelical feminism” will eventually lead to liberalism
most basic beliefs regarding the authority of Scripture. One believes and ultimately undermine the gospel. He articulates this fear: “I am
Scripture is its ultimate authority with any fault lying exclusively in a concerned that evangelical feminism (also called ‘egalitarianism’)
bad interpretation or translation. has become a new path by which evangelicals are being drawn into
The other believes it is not theological liberalism” (emphasis mine).38 For Grudem, liberalism is
interpretation that is the only or a “direct consequence” of egalitarianism because the “nature” and key
Belief in inerrancy does primary problem, but the Bible “principles” of egalitarianism undermine Scripture.39
not logically predispose itself, which contains errors and Grudem’s reasoning is internally inconsistent. First, he argues that
one away from female contradictory messages. It is the the data shows a seven-step process. The first step is “abandoning
latter group that believes the biblical inerrancy,” which is followed by “endorsing the ordination of
ordination. Instead, female experience dictates what women.” Given his argument that egalitarianism leads to liberalism,
a subculture needing in Scripture is authoritative and we would expect these steps to be reversed, with the ordination of
to define itself against what must be reformulated or women preceding and leading to the abandonment of inerrancy.
conformed to fit modern female This inconsistency is unsurprising, however, when we consider
liberalism does. perceptions. Rebecca Groothuis that Grudem’s data demonstrates only a correlation, not a logical
sums up the implications well. “In consequence—even though he is trying to convince us of a logical
liberal theology, religious symbols connection. He says, “It is unquestionable that theological liberalism
do not stand in a true/false relationship to objective theological realities, leads to the endorsement of women’s ordination. While not all
but serve as elements of a circular, self-enclosed system. Human egalitarians are liberals, all liberals are egalitarians.”40 He appears to
imagination creates religious myths and metaphors—for the purpose be, in a big picture sense, arguing in an “If p then q, q, therefore p”
of evoking the desired response in the imaginations of the religion’s fashion. He notices that liberal denominations are also egalitarian, and
adherents.”36 The enormous difference between egalitarianism and then concludes that if a denomination is egalitarian it must be liberal
liberal feminism lies in the fact that egalitarians go to the Scriptures or become liberal. This is a well-known formal fallacy called affirming
to diagnose the problem and to find the solution whereas liberal the consequent. Instead of establishing a valid logical connection, all he
feminists ultimately must look to themselves. Only superficially are has managed to show is that liberals endorse a form of egalitarianism
the two movements similar, and this is in a shared recognition that or feminism, not the reverse.
exclusive male authority is a problem and that women have something What Grudem is trying to accomplish is an equation of other types
to contribute at the highest levels of authority. of feminism with egalitarianism. If people can start identifying them as
the same in their minds, they will wish to reject egalitarianism in order
The Logic Behind the Equation of Feminisms to avoid the unsubstantiated slippery slope into the liberalism that he
Despite the differences enumerated herein, many evangelicals continue fears. The argument assumes the equation of these two movements as
to equate egalitarianism with liberal feminism. Further, they fear that well as the related assumption that if one endorses biblical inerrancy,
one “feminism” logically entails the other, even though the two differ one will be resistant to women’s ordination. Of course, if Grudem wishes
in their historical development and have radically different views on to label egalitarianism as “liberal” on the grounds that it functionally
the authority of Scripture, resulting in very different diagnoses of and undermines biblical authority by advocating an incorrect biblical
solutions to the problem of female oppression. For example, in his interpretation, then he himself is open to the charge of liberalism by all
Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?, Wayne Grudem who believe his interpretations are incorrect.
attempts to warn evangelicals of the dangers of those he calls “evangelical Unfortunately, the problems with Grudem’s argument do not end
feminists,” claiming that they’re sliding into liberalism. He appeals to here. He uses Mark Chaves’s study, Ordaining Women: Culture and
Mark Chaves’s Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious Conflict in Religious Organizations, to support his idea that liberalism
Organizations in order to draw attention to a recent pattern where the follows from egalitarianism. The great irony of his appeal to Chaves’s

study is that Ordaining Women indicates that the key to the difference with any particular movement . . . but Christians need not buy into
in the practice of ordaining women is not whether a denomination such force-choice logic.”44
affirms inerrancy or is sacramental. Belief in inerrancy does not
logically predispose one away from female ordination. Instead, a Conclusion
subculture needing to define itself against liberalism does. Liberalism is This paper challenges the notion that biblical egalitarianism and liberal
not inherently a logical corollary from egalitarianism; instead we have feminism are equivalent movements. Considering the examples of
made it a symbol of what we are resisting. Chaves writes: Sarah Grimké and Elizabeth Stanton, who are widely considered
either seeds or prototypes of their movements, revealed that the two
Within the religious world itself, biblical inerrancy and
movements have widely divergent views on the authority of Scripture.
sacramentalism are the most significant cultural boundaries when
Further, not only are the two movements dissimilar in what they
it comes to women’s ordination . . . Why are biblical inerrancy and
profess, but the argument that one logically or necessarily leads to the
sacramentalism so deeply and so tightly connected to resistance
other is invalid.
to female clergy? . . . for both of these denominational subcultures,
The church is not infallible in its understanding of God’s will. Only
gender equality has come to symbolize the liberal modern world that
through dialogue with those who differ from us will we begin to see
they define themselves against. (emphasis mine)41
what we may have missed and make changes for the better. Listening
And later, Chaves states: carefully to their critiques should spur us on to look at the Scriptures and
allow God’s eternal and unchanging truths—not uncritical rejection of
These examples are meant to illustrate the basic point that a
anything associated with particular movements—to shed light on our
commitment to biblical inerrancy does not require, either logically or
situation and determine church polity. If egalitarianism is true, more
historically, opposition to women’s ordination . . . If it is not logically
than half the church is being underused, and not only do we contradict
or intellectually difficult to combine inerrantism with full gender
God’s will for men and women, but we also cripple the church and
equality, why has it become so culturally difficult to do so? . . .
undercut the power of the gospel. When we stand on Scripture and
Because gender equality is such a defining core of the modern liberal
fully use the gifts God has given his people, we will release the gospel
agenda, resisting women’s ordination became a way to symbolize
and the body of Christ to transform the world for God’s glory.
antiliberalism within the religious world. (emphasis mine)42
Dr. Chaves’s study describes a situation where evangelicals feel

Notes
threatened by liberalism, so they resist other causes or ideas that liberals 1. Sarah Grimké, Letters on the Equality of the Sexes And the Condition
of Woman (Boston: Isaac Knapp, 1838), 10.
affirm, even when these are not necessarily connected exclusively to
2. Wayne Grudem, Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?
liberalism. Is this a fair assessment by Chaves? Grudem gives us reason (Wheaton, IL: Good News Publishers, 2006), 29.
to believe it is. 3. J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism (Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub, 1923), 17.
Does it seem likely that all of the liberal churches who no longer 4. Rebecca Groothuis, “Sexuality, Spirituality and Feminist Religion,”
believe the Bible have suddenly gotten the interpretation of the Christians for Biblical Equality (1999): cbeinternational.org/?q=content/
Bible regarding men’s and women’s roles exactly right, and that sexuality-spirituality-and-feminist-religion, accessed January, 2013.
the most conservative churches who hold strongly to Biblical 5. Ronald Pierce and Rebecca Groothuis, eds., Discovering Biblical
inerrancy have gotten it exactly wrong? And does it seem Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2004), 13.
likely that as soon as a denomination begins to abandon belief 6. See Philip Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ (Grand Rapids,
in inerrancy it suddenly discovers new skill and accuracy in MI: Zondervan, 2009), 28 and John Piper and Wayne Grudem, Recovering
interpreting the Bible on the roles of men and women so that it Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism
finally arrives at the correct answer?43 (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1991), xiv.
7. Sarah Grimké believes the condition of white women is comparable
Recall Grudem’s earlier grouping of those with a high view of to that of slavery in that the subjugation of slaves and women both
Scripture with those who hold to his view of women in leadership, as break from the equality taught in Scripture and render them inferior or
opposed to those with a low view who accept women in leadership subjugated. However, she strongly believes the plight of black women is
on another level incomparable to the situation of white women due to
(a grouping assumed in the quote above). He is appealing to our
the sheer unique evil of their treatment. Black women are sold in market
newfound sensibility that the two are inseparable. Under this paradigm places and exploited sexually and because of this “the moral purity of the
we should apparently be suspicious of the likelihood of a “liberal”— white woman is deeply contaminated” especially since she benefits from
who rejects the Bible’s authority—correctly interpreting the Bible’s the exploitation and does not speak out against it. Sarah Grimké, Letters
teachings on gender. If liberals believe it, it is likely false and we should on the Equality of the Sexes And the Condition of Woman (Boston: Isaac
resist. However, liberal methodology does not interpret the Bible in the Knapp, 1838), 15, 50–55.
8. Ibid., 23.
same way as biblical egalitarianism does (many liberals believe biblical 9. Ibid., 20.
passages are actually sexist). Moreover, this is a dangerous way to decide 10. Ibid., 10–11.
church polity, as it effectively gives the opposing group, rather than the 11. Ibid., 23.
Bible itself, control over church decisions. It may be that today secular 12. Ibid., 3.
or “sacred” culture tells us to “uncritically reject everything associated 13. Ibid., 48–49.

14. Ibid., 4. 28. Ibid., 467.
15. Ibid., 4, 23. 29. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, The Original Feminist Attack on the Bible:
16. Ibid., 5, 23. The Woman’s Bible (New York: Arno Press, 1974), 12.
17. One will quickly notice that Grimké does not even try to show 30. Ibid., 7.
why ontological equality (part of being made in the image of God) is 31. Ibid., 12–13.
antithetical to the idea that women are ordained by God to be functionally 32. Dorrien, The Making of American Liberal Theology, xxiii, xxv.
subordinate to men. This connection is assumed. The theological 33. Schüssler Fiorenza falls more into the liberation camp of feminism
complementarianism of today simply did not exist as a movement in her than the liberal.
time. The idea that somehow women were equal in essence, but forever 34. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Bread Not Stone: The Challenge of
subordinate in function had not become prominent, so most of her Feminist Biblical Interpretation (Boston: Beacon Press, 1984), 14.
opponents were not asking those questions. 35. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, A Feminist Theological Reconstruction
18. Rebecca Groothuis, Women Caught in the Conflict: The Culture of Christian Origins: In Memory of Her (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 27.
War between Traditionalism and Feminism (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock 36. Groothuis, “Sexuality, Spirituality and Feminist Religion.”
Pub, 1997), 51. 37. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 23–25.
19. Ibid., 3, 16. 38. Ibid., 15.
20. Anne Clifford, Introducing Feminist Theology (Maryknoll, NY: 39. Ibid., 17–18,20–21.
Orbis Books, 2001), 16–17. 40. Ibid., 28–29. Also see note 4 on page 24 where Grudem acknowledges
21. Gary Dorrien, The Making of American Liberal Theology: Imagining there are conservative denominations that were egalitarian without any
Progressive Religion 1805–1900 (London: Westminster John Knox Press, liberal influence.
2001), xxiii. 41. Mark Chaves, Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious
22. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 15. Organizations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 10.
23. Stanton herself is considered a prototype and not a seed because 42. Ibid., 101–102.
her influence on feminism and liberalism was limited for her time even 43. Grudem, 29.
though feminists of a much later era saw in her their own experiences 44. Craig Keener, Paul Women and Wives: Marriage and Women’s
and beliefs. Ministry in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 1992), 6.
24. Clifford, Introducing Feminist Theology, 46.
25. This idea is conveyed in the title of The Woman’s Bible, which is
Allison Quient recently graduated with her MDiv from Trinity
introduced by Barbara Welter.
26. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Eighty Years & More: Reminiscences 1815– Evangelical Divinity School. Besides theology of gender she
1897 (NY: Schocken Books, 1971), 467. is passionate about church history, the biblical canon, and
27. Ibid., 467. apologetics.
Join CBE July 7–9, 2014, in Medellin, Colombia

for our international conference!
Together, we will explore the theme “Male

and Female in Christ: Toward a Biblical View of
Christian Identity, Ministry, and Marriage.”
Hosted in partnership with the Biblical Seminary of Colombia (FUSBC)

SL IPPERY
SL IPPERY
SLOPE
SLOPE
By David C. Cramer
Assessing Hierarchist Logic

Is Egalitarianism Really on a Slippery Slope?
Introduction reasons. First, Jesus explicitly commands us to refuse recourse to such

lex talionis or “eye for eye” reasoning in a command that is just as
Most evangelicals, regardless of our views on gender issues, recognize
relevant in scholarship as it is in other social contexts. Second, such
that within evangelicalism there will always be a diversity of views
a response would probably generate more heat than light and make
on any number of issues regarding faith and practice. Since for
the divide over gender issues even greater. Third, as Christians, we
evangelicals there is no higher authority than Scripture, the inevitable
should always respond to dissent with charity rather than skepticism.
result is that—for better or worse—there will always exist within
That means that, rather than questioning others’ motives, we should
evangelicalism competing interpretations of Scripture. Under the
try to the best of our ability to understand the perspective of those with
evangelical umbrella are Arminians and Calvinists, paedobaptists
whom we disagree and lovingly respond to their concerns. When it
and Anabaptists, premillennialists and postmillennialists, egalitarians
comes to the hierarchists’ arguments, then, we must realize that they
and male hierarchists. While most evangelicals realize that many of
are motivated by very real concerns. They are not (necessarily) the
these positions may be irreconcilable, we also recognize that those
result of a deep-seated hatred toward everything egalitarian; rather,
who come to a different view than ours may be just as honest, well-
they are motivated by a deep concern for evangelicalism. So, whether or
intentioned, and well-informed interpreters of Scripture as we try to
not we agree with the hierarchists’ arguments, we should nevertheless
be.1 And while we do our best to share our views with others—even
sympathize with the motivation behind them, namely, the desire to see
pointing out the weaknesses of competing views—we attempt to do
our sisters and brothers living out the evangel, the gospel, faithfully in
so in an irenic fashion, knowing that one’s evangelical witness is not
every sphere of life. Where we perceive the gospel being compromised
ultimately determined by the position one comes to on any one of
by fellow evangelicals, we should be ready to offer a gentle rebuke. On
these complex issues.2
the other hand, when we perceive a misguided rebuke, we should also
However, within the hierarchical camp, there exists a vocal and
be prepared to offer a gentle response. Such a response is what I intend
influential minority of strongly hierarchist scholars who argue that
to offer in the following.
a commitment to egalitarianism does indeed undermine one’s
evangelical commitment. But, since many of us either are or at least Assessing the logic of Evangelical Feminism
know strongly committed egalitarian evangelicals, this argument
seems strange. It would be easy for evangelical egalitarians simply to Instead of surveying the proliferation of hierarchical literature, my
dismiss these hierarchists’ arguments as disingenuous or to respond goal is much more modest. I want to focus particularly on a more
in kind by excluding hierarchists from their vision of evangelicalism. pointed rebuke of evangelical egalitarianism, namely, the book
However, I would caution against such a reaction for a number of entitled Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?3 As the
title suggests, the author fears that egalitarianism undermines one’s

evangelical commitments and thus could begin “relentlessly leading It is a bit perplexing why, with such ample evidence of evangelical
Christians down the path to liberalism.”4 Since such fears seem egalitarianism, the book nevertheless concludes that there is such a
characteristic of many evangelical hierarchists, we would do well to strong correlation between egalitarianism and liberalism. Perhaps it
assess the arguments. And, since many of the particular exegetical dismisses the counterevidence as insignificant. But this would surely be
and hermeneutical arguments of the book are regularly debated unfair to the many Pentecostals, Baptists, Assemblies of God churches,
among hierarchical and egalitarian scholars,5 I focus my assessment and associations such as Willow Creek, around the world, not to mention
instead on the underlying logic of the argument presented in the numerous other evangelical denominations and groups10—including
book. I argue that the book contains a number of logical missteps not a small number of black churches—that “place a strong emphasis
and that, once these are corrected, the hierarchists’ concern proves on gifting by the Holy Spirit as the primary requirement for ministry.”
to be chimerical. I conclude by arguing what many of us already Indeed, Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE), the group that receives
know: despite our irreconcilable differences, there is room under the harshest criticism in the book, explicitly places “a strong emphasis
the evangelical umbrella for egalitarians and male hierarchists alike. on gifting by the Holy Spirit as the primary requirement for ministry.” As
CBE’s Statement of Faith reads, “We believe that men and women are to
The fallacy of hasty generalization or selective evidence
diligently develop and use their God-given gifts for the good of the home,
The fallacy of hasty generalization occurs when certain evidence church and society.”11 If all such denominations and groups that serve
that supports one’s conclusion is emphasized, and evidence that as exceptions to the supposed correlation were included as evidence,
contradicts one’s conclusion is downplayed or ignored entirely. the apparent correlation would diminish significantly, if not dissipate
In short, a hasty generalization is drawn when a universal claim entirely. Indeed, given the global rise of denominations focusing on the
is based on only partial evidence. In its first section, Evangelical leading and gifting of the Holy Spirit,12 the evidence of liberal churches
Feminism sets out to prove the correlation between egalitarianism in the United States from 1956 onward is almost negligible. Certainly,
and liberalism. It makes much of the supposed historical connection it does not constitute a wide enough sample to justify the claim that
between the two, claiming repeatedly that “egalitarian advocacy of egalitarianism and liberalism “go hand in hand.”
women’s ordination goes hand in hand with theological liberalism.”6 Rather, by ignoring the counterevidence of the many evangelical
It discusses at length a number of undisputed instances where liberal egalitarian denominations and groups, the argument for a correlation
denominations support women’s ordination. Indeed, it argues, “There is reduced at best to the tautology:
is no theologically liberal denomination or seminary in the United
(1) All egalitarian denominations that become liberal are
States today that opposes women’s ordination.”7 Such statements are
liberal,
relatively uncontroversial. But what are we to make of them? Does
and all egalitarian denominations that remain evangelical are
the fact that liberal denominations support women’s ordination
evangelical,
entail that there is a necessary or universal correlation between
egalitarianism and liberalism? Clearly not, for it also mentions in a and at worst to an instance of the formal fallacy of affirming the
footnote some important counterevidence: consequent:
Chaves lists many other denominations, such as some Baptist (2) If a denomination is liberal, then it is egalitarian; therefore,
and Pentecostal denominations, that were ordaining women if a denomination is egalitarian, it is (or will inevitably become)
much earlier and were not affected by theological liberalism. liberal.
Many of these other groups placed a strong emphasis on leading
and calling by the Holy Spirit (such as Pentecostal groups) or Neither (1) nor (2) is reason for concern for evangelical egalitarians
on the autonomy of the local congregation (such as many or their evangelical hierarchical friends who are worried about them,
Baptist groups) and therefore they were not adopting women’s since neither (1) nor (2) actually establishes a correlation between
ordination because of theological liberalism. My point here is egalitarianism and liberalism.
that when liberalism was the dominant theological viewpoint in The fallacy of equating correlation with causation
a denomination, from 1956 onward it became inevitable that the
denomination would endorse women’s ordination.8 If we grant, contrary to fact, the argument for the correlation between
egalitarianism and liberalism discussed above, another problem with
And again at the conclusion of his historical discussion, the author the main argument still persists. For, in order to support the main
concedes, thesis that evangelical egalitarianism leads down the path to liberalism,
more than evidence for mere correlation is required. What is required
I am not arguing that all egalitarians are liberals. Some
is evidence that evangelical egalitarianism causes liberalism. This at
denominations have approved women’s ordination for other
least seems to be the claim implicit in the book title’s wording that
reasons, such as a long historical tradition and a strong emphasis on
evangelical egalitarianism is a “path to liberalism.”
gifting by the Holy Spirit as the primary requirement for ministry
The fallacy of equating correlation with causation is common and
(as in the Assemblies of God), or because of the dominant influence
thus seductive. In the philosophy of mind, for example, many materialist
of an egalitarian leader and a high priority on relating effectively to
philosophers argue that, because neuroscience has demonstrated a
the culture (as in the Willow Creek Association).9
correlation between brain activity and mental activity, the former must

be the cause of the latter. But a number of dualist philosophers (many It seems unlikely that the author would argue for (5), that
of them Christian) have cried foul, pointing out that correlation and evangelical egalitarianism is identical to liberalism, since he
causation are two completely different things.13 There are a number of repeatedly identifies evangelical egalitarians “who have not moved
ways to make sense of such correlation. Perhaps brain activity is indeed one inch toward liberalism in the rest of their doctrinal convictions,
the cause of mental activity,14 but perhaps mental activity is the cause and who still strongly believe and defend the inerrancy of the Bible.”19
of brain activity. Moreover, there is a competing materialist view which Moreover, by his very definitions, evangelicalism and liberalism are
holds that brain activity is simply mental activity, and vice versa.15 So mutually exclusive. Thus, if a form of egalitarianism is evangelical,
clearly arguing that two things “go hand in hand” is quite distinct from then it must not be liberal.
arguing that one is the cause of the other. Rather, there are at least four That leaves us with (6), that evangelical egalitarianism and liberalism
ways that two things could correlate: share a common underlying variable that gives rise to each in different
ways. And, perhaps they do. After all, liberals are not wrong about
(3) A could be the cause of B,
everything. Perhaps evangelical egalitarians and liberals share the same
(4) B could be the cause of A,
convictions about justice and the plight of the oppressed, a variable that
(5) A could be the same thing as B, or
has led them each in their own way to supporting egalitarianism. Or,
(6) A and B could both be caused by another variable C.
perhaps liberals came to this view by affirming the inherent dignity of
Options (3) through (5) were already illustrated by the example each member of the “human family,” while evangelicals came to this
from the philosophy of mind, but (6) can be illustrated by a less view from their reading of Scripture. In such a case, a correlation could
pedantic topic. A study once demonstrated that in New York City exist without any causal relationship one way or the other.
the consumption of ice cream directly correlates to the city’s murder In his defense, the author does suggest a common underlying
rate.16 When ice cream sales go up, so does the murder rate. When variable, namely, that both groups undermine the authority of
ice cream sales go down, the murder rate does too. But, even given Scripture. But if this is really true, then we are back to a case of (5),
these findings, one would be hard pressed to convince anyone that the identity view, since he defines liberalism as “a system of thinking
ice cream consumption is a new path to homicide. Rather, there is that denies the complete truthfulness of the Bible as the Word of
a lurking variable—presumably, the temperature—that serves as an God and denies the unique and absolute authority of the Bible in our
underlying factor for both. In hot summer months, people consume lives.”20 The author could have then spared us from his slippery-slope
more ice cream, but more people are also out of the confines of their argument and simply argued that evangelical egalitarianism is simply
homes and on the city streets, where murders may take place. So, the new liberalism. But this argument would be much harder to credit,
though there is no causal connection between eating ice cream and especially when groups such as Christians for Biblical Equality include
the tendency to murder, there is a strong correlation. as the first point in their Statement of Faith: “We believe the Bible is
While the title Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism the inspired Word of God, is reliable, and is the final authority for faith
clearly suggests the possibility of a causal relationship between and practice.”21 If evangelical egalitarians are simply liberals, then that is
egalitarianism and liberalism, the arguments only suggest a news to them, not to mention that it goes against the explicit statements
correlation. How is this correlation to be understood? Is it an instance of the author himself. So, neither (3), (5), nor (6) has been established,
of (3), namely, that egalitarianism causes liberalism? This certainly though some support has been given for (4). It appears, then, that we
seems to be the book’s thesis. So, for example, in the introduction, have been given no reason to worry that evangelical egalitarianism is
the author asserts that his argument is “of a ‘slippery slope’ from a cause of liberalism. Indeed, in some instances, it may be the other
evangelical feminism to liberalism. . . . Once an evangelical feminist way around. But, if liberals are becoming evangelical egalitarians, this
position is adopted, the development only goes in one direction, should be a cause for rejoicing, not for concern.
again and again.”17 Despite the fact that he has conceded that there
The slippery-slope fallacy
are many exceptions to this supposed trend (see above), many of his
arguments actually point instead to instances of (4), that liberalism If we grant, contrary to fact, the book’s argument for the correlation
causes egalitarianism. So, for example, he discusses the Christian between egalitarianism and liberalism (see above), and, if we further
Reformed Church, which left an official inerrancy position in 1972 grant, contrary to fact, its argument that this correlation is the result of
and approved the ordination of women in 1995.18 How evangelical evangelical egalitarianism causing liberalism (see immediately above),
egalitarianism is the path to liberalism in this instance, when inerrancy then yet another problem with the argument persists. For it is one thing
was rejected more than twenty years before women’s ordination, is to demonstrate that there is a contingent, historical causal relationship
perplexing. Indeed, the author notes that the trend he finds among between two views, but it is quite another thing to show that such a
such denominations is first to abandon biblical inerrancy officially causal relationship is a necessary or inevitable one that will occur in all
and then second to endorse the ordination of women officially. So, in future cases.22 But the book’s thesis would be significantly weakened
his support for (3), the main thesis of his book, he only cites instances if evangelical egalitarianism is only a historical, contingent path to
of (4). It may be an interesting historical fact that liberalism is one liberalism. After all, many positions that are inherently good can be
path to egalitarianism, but why this should concern evangelical used as paths to bad positions. So, for example, as I understand it, the
egalitarians who have come through a different path (evangelicalism) author is himself a committed Calvinist. But, as any historian can tell
is difficult to see. you, six of the eight Ivy League colleges and universities were founded

by committed Calvinists.23 Nevertheless, I doubt that he would be that egalitarianism inevitably leads to undifferentiated androgyny. In
happy with any of these schools’ theological positions today. Should the same way, there is no logical connection between affirming the full
we conclude, then, that Calvinism is an old path to liberalism? Each of equality of men and women in the church and home and the rejection
these schools did, after all, slowly shift from Calvinism to liberalism. of biblical language about God, the church’s acceptance of homosexual
But, of course, noting this contingent, historical trend says nothing practices, or a rejection of biblical authority.30 These connections are
about the intrinsic worth of the Calvinist system itself. There are too purely psychological ones in the mind of the author and likeminded
many variables that cause large institutions to shift theologically over hierarchists. They are supported (when at all) only by circumstantial
time. Trying to isolate one particular variable as the cause for the shift historical evidence, which itself establishes neither a strong correlation,
is a quixotic task. And that, of course, is the problem with slippery- nor much less, that such a correlation is causal. Once the psychological
slope arguments in general. They attempt to show that one position is connections between these views are subjected to logical scrutiny, we
wrong or bad because it possibly leads to another position that is wrong find that the supposed connections are nothing but that—psychological.
or bad. But, unless the causation from the first to the second position We must therefore conclude that, rather than offering a sound argument,
is a logically necessary one, the wrongness or badness of the second the book is instead engaging in emotionally based rhetoric, however
position does not reflect on the value of the first. intuitive and persuasive it may initially appear to some.
The author twice explicitly notes that he is offering a slippery-slope
Conclusion
argument,24 apparently not realizing that the slippery-slope argument
is ordinarily considered the slippery-slope fallacy in any introductory The author can, of course, argue against egalitarian interpretations
logic text.25 Here the author—and, indeed, all of us—would all do well of Scripture, which he does throughout the book. But, even if he were
to recall N. T. Wright’s insightful words on the gender debate: to establish cases of incorrect egalitarian interpretations of Scripture
in certain instances,31 this would be a far cry from establishing that
Part of the problem, particularly in the United States, is that cultures
evangelical egalitarians undermine or deny the authority of Scripture and
become so polarized that if you tick one box many assume you
are thus on the inevitable path to liberalism.32 All it would show is that
must tick a dozen other boxes down the same side of the page—
they have misread a particular passage of Scripture—perhaps because
without realizing that the page itself is highly arbitrary and culture-
of their own biases. We all have biases, and, the sooner we admit it, the
bound. We have to claim the freedom, in Christ and in our various
better interpreters we will be. Indeed, New Testament scholar Gordon
cultures, to name issues one by one with wisdom and clarity,
Fee argues that the author’s own biases are read into a particular biblical
without assuming that a decision on one point commits us to a
passage. And while Fee somewhat polemically states that the author’s
decision on others.26
interpretation of that one particular passage is “a marvelous example
So, despite the author’s impassioned contention that evangelical of a prior hermeneutical agenda’s preceding the reading of texts—so
egalitarianism “inevitably leads” to a whole host of “liberal” positions— much so that the plain reading of [the passage] is subjected to, and thus
such as “the denial of anything uniquely masculine,” the rejection of rejected because of, language that is not biblical at all,”33 this argument
biblical language about God, the church’s acceptance of homosexual is not used as evidence that the author is on the path to liberalism (or
practices, and the “denial of the authority of the Word of God”27—there fundamentalism, or any other kind of ism). Instead, it is a simple instance
is simply no logically necessary relationship between these positions. of iron sharpening iron—of one evangelical Bible scholar who is fully
His contingent, historical examples might provide at best an emotional committed to biblical authority pointing out where another evangelical
or psychological connection between these positions, but that is a far Bible scholar who is fully committed to biblical authority has allowed
cry from establishing a logical connection. presuppositions to cloud the reading of the text. Such critiques should
Indeed, in his discussion of the “trajectory hermeneutic,” he notes be welcomed by both sides of the gender debate, while we all continue
that “the process of determining a ‘trajectory’ is so subjective that to affirm biblical authority and strive to understand Scripture better
the same argument could be used in just the other way.”28 The author together. But, when in addition to biblical arguments, one side begins
might have done better to remember his own words when he began questioning the evangelical credentials of the other, then we may truly be
charting the trajectory in which evangelical egalitarianism is headed. His on a slippery slope to some real problems in the church.34
argument that egalitarianism leads to a “rejection of anything uniquely
Notes
masculine” tells us more about his subjective view of masculinity than
it does about the trajectory of egalitarianism. Apparently, he believes 1. For further discussion of biblical underdetermination and the gender
that, if males and females are not ordered hierarchically, then they debate, see David C. Cramer, “Creating a Culture of Equality as Witness to the
Truth: A Philosophical Response to Gender Difference,” Priscilla Papers 24, no.
cannot be truly differentiated—in the same way that he believes that, 3 (Summer 2010): 18–22.
if the persons of the Trinity are not ordered hierarchically, they cannot 2. For a prime example of such irenic and open debate, see William
be differentiated.29 This is a rather peculiar argument. I can differentiate and Aída Spencer and Steve and Celestia Tracy, Marriage at the Crossroads:
between any number of things that are not hierarchically ordered. I can Couples in Conversation about Discipleship, Gender Roles, Decision Making, and
tell the difference between oak trees and pine trees, owls and cardinals, Intimacy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2009).
3. Wayne Grudem, Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?
white people and black people, Father and Son, and men and women,
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2006). I believe that the logical fallacies identified
all without making a distinction of hierarchy between each pair. Only by in Grudem’s work are shared mutatis mutandis by a number of hierarchist
presupposing a necessary hierarchical structure would one ever suggest scholars, though that claim will have to remain unsubstantiated for now.

4. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 261. Though Grudem prefers the Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).
term “feminism,” it is clear he has in mind what is typically considered 13. See, e.g., John Hick, The New Frontier of Religion and Science: Religious
“egalitarianism.” In what follows, I use these terms interchangeably. Experience, Neuroscience, and the Transcendent (New York, NY: Palgrave
5. See, e.g., Kevin Giles, “Book Review: Evangelical Feminism: A New Macmillan, 2006).
Path to Liberalism?” Priscilla Papers 22, no. 3 (2008): 27–30; cf. Karen 14. A view in philosophy of mind known as epiphenomenalism.
Fulton, Ruth Gouldbourne, and Sharon James; John Wilks, ed., “Biblical 15. A view known as brain/mind identity.
Truth and Biblical Equality: A Review Article on Two Recent Books from 16. I recall reading about this study long ago in an introductory sociology
IVP on Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,” book. See, for example, “Causal Inferences,” University of California at Fresno
Evangelical Quarterly 78 (2006): 65–84. Web site, http://psych.csufresno.edu/psy144/Content/Measurement/causation.
6. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 26, cf. 29. It is initially unclear how to html, accessed 2013.
understand this correlation, though, as will be shown later, the author intends 17. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 12 .
for it to be interpreted as a causal relationship. 18. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 25.
7. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 29. 19. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 20.
8. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 24, n. 4. 20. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 15.
9. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 29. 21. “Statement of Faith,” Christians for Biblical Equality. Italics mine.
10. For example, in her study of the autobiographies of more than thirty 22. Another way of stating this critique is that Grudem is attempting to
Wesleyan-Holiness women ministers, Susie C. Stanley observes: “Many . . . offer deductive arguments, when his historical evidence at best can be used
have assumed, incorrectly, that women preachers were extremely rare outside to support inductive arguments. Deductive arguments are universal and
Pentecostalism and recent mainline Protestantism and have no knowledge of necessary, whereas inductive arguments are probabilistic and contingent.
the long tradition of Wesleyan/Holiness women preachers” (Holy Boldness: Throughout the book, there seems to be a fundamental confusion between
Women Preachers’ Autobiographies and the Sanctified Self [Knoxville, TN: these two types of logical arguments.
University of Tennessee Press, 2002], xxvii). Stanley notes that “a 1976 survey 23. Specifically, as I understand it, Brown was founded by Calvinist Baptists;
reported 1,801 women clergy in [mainline Protestant] denominations while the Harvard, Yale, and Dartmouth by Puritans; Princeton by Presbyterians; and
number reported for Wesleyan/Holiness groups was 4,131” (ibid.). Columbia by Calvinist Anglicans. The University of Pennsylvania and Cornell
11. “Statement of Faith,” Christians for Biblical Equality Website, are the only two exceptions, the former founded by Benjamin Franklin and the
cbeinternational.org/?q=content/statement-faith, accessed 2010. Italics mine. latter founded explicitly as a secular institution.
12. See Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global 24. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 12, 240.

25. See, e.g., Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks, Come, Let Us 32. Moreover, as a number of evangelical scholars are beginning to realize,
Reason: An Introduction to Logical Thinking (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, even the dichotomy between evangelical and liberal is too simplistic; in some
1990), 113–14. As with the other fallacies discussed, the slippery-slope fallacy instances, one may be more evangelical, i.e., able to interpret the Bible more
is informal, meaning that the use of such an argument is guilty until proven faithfully, by being less conservative, i.e., less tied to tradition. For the sake of
innocent. It is not my argument that there are no possible sound uses of such discussion, I will bracket this interesting hypothesis for now. See Roger E. Olson,
arguments, but rather that Grudem’s arguments do not constitute such uses. Reformed and Always Reforming: The Postconservative Approach to Evangelical
26. N. T. Wright, “The Biblical Basis for Women’s Service in the Church,” Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2007); see also my review of Olson’s book
Priscilla Papers 20, no. 4 (Autumn 2006): 5. in Ethics and Medicine: An International Journal of Bioethics 24 (2008): 189–90.
27. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 262, 224, 263. 33. Gordon D. Fee, “The Priority of Spirit Gifting for Church Ministry,”
28. Grudem, Evangelical Feminism, 61. in Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy, ed.
29. See the debate, “Do relations of authority and submission exist Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis (Downers Grove, IL:
eternally among the Persons of the Godhead?” held on 9 October 2008 InterVarsity, 2004), 247.
at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, where Bruce Ware and Wayne 34. This paper was first presented at the Evangelical Philosophical Society
Grudem argue the affirmative answer and Tom McCall and Keith Midwest Regional Meeting, 19 March 2010, St. Paul, Minnesota. Thanks to
Yandell offer the counterargument; outline available at http://www.henry those in attendance for their insightful and charitable dialogue. Special thanks
center.org/blog/?p=36 (accessed 2009). Audio and video of the debate are to Brother Tim Erdel for helpful comments on an earlier draft.
available at http://www.henrycenter.org. Cf. Thomas McCall and Keith E. Yandell,
“On Trinitarian Subordinationism,” Philosophia Christi 11 (2009): 339–58. “Assessing Hierarchist Logic: Is Egalitarianism Really on a Slippery
30. Christians for Biblical Equality sees no contradiction among the Slope” was originally published in Priscilla Papers volume 27,
following Statements of Faith: (1) “We believe the Bible is the Word of God, is
reliable, and is the final authority for faith and practice”; (2) “We believe that
number 2 (Spring 2013).
men and women are to diligently develop and use their God-given gifts for
the good of the home, church, and society”; and, (3) “We believe in the family, David C. Cramer is a doctoral student in religion at Baylor University.
celibate singleness, and faithful heterosexual marriage as God’s design” (see He has published numerous essays on theology and ethics and
www.cbeinternational.org). I, too, see no contradiction here. recently co-edited The Activist Impulse: Essays on the Intersection of
31. My own assessment of Grudem’s arguments is similar to that of
Evangelicalism and Anabaptism (Pickwick, 2012). David lives with
hierarchical New Testament scholar Robert Yarbrough, who states on
his wife, Andrea, and their children, Wesley and Liza, in Waco,
the endorsement page of the book that the “chapters and charges carry
varying weights.” Texas, where they are active members of the Mennonite church, Hope Fellowship.

Christians for Biblical Equality �
Christians for Biblical Equality is an organization of Christian men CBE Membership Application
and women who believe that the Bible, properly interpreted, teaches
the fundamental equality of believers of all ethnic groups, all economic ________________________________________________
classes, and all age groups, based on the teachings of Scripture as reflected name
in Galatians 3:28.
____________________________________________________________
Mission Statement street address
CBE affirms and promotes the biblical truth that all believers—without ____________________________________________________________
city
regard to gender, ethnicity or class—must exercise their God-given gifts with
equal authority and equal responsibility in church, home, and world. ________________________________________ __________________
state / province / country zip / postal code
Core Values
_____________________________ ____________________________
We believe the Bible teaches: phone email address
• Believers are called to mutual submission, love, and service.
• God distributes spiritual gifts without regard to gender, ethnicity, or class. Membership Fees (all fees are in US dollars)
• Believers must develop and exercise their God-given gifts in church,
home, and world. United States Members 1 Year 3 Years
• Believers have equal authority and equal responsibility to exercise their Individual � $49 � $129
gifts without regard to gender, ethnicity, or class and without the limits Household � $69 � $184
of culturally defined roles.
Low Income* � $27 � N/A
• Restricting believers from exercising their gifts—on the basis of their gender,
ethnicity, or class—resists the work of the Spirit of God and is unjust. Subscription Only** � $40 � $115
• Believers must promote righteousness and oppose injustice in all its forms. International Members 1 Year 3 Years
Opposing Injustice Individual � $59 � $154
CBE recognizes that injustice is an abuse of power, taking from others Household � $79 � $204
what God has given them: their dignity, their freedom, their resources, Low Income* � $37 � N/A
and even their very lives. CBE also recognizes that prohibiting individuals Subscription Only** � $49 � $140
from exercising their God-given gifts to further his kingdom constitutes
injustice in a form that impoverishes the body of Christ and its ministry Organizations 1 Year
in the world at large. CBE accepts the call to be part of God’s mission in 1–100 people � $55
opposing injustice as required in Scriptures such as Micah 6:8. 101–500 people � $85
Envisioned Future 501–1,000 people � $110
Christians for Biblical Equality envisions a future where all believers are 1,001–2,000 people � $220
freed to exercise their gifts for God’s glory and purposes, with the full 2,001–5,000 people � $330
support of their Christian communities. 5,001+ people � $440
Statement of Faith Additional Contribution $ _______
• We believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, is reliable, and is the TOTAL $ ________
final authority for faith and practice. * Available to those with an annual household income of less than $23,000.
• We believe in the unity and trinity of God, eternally existing as three ** Does not include membership beneﬁts.
equal persons. CBE is an exempt organization as described in IRC Sec. 501(c)3 and as such
• We believe in the full deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ. donations qualify as charitable contributions where allowed by law.
• We believe in the sinfulness of all persons. One result of sin is shattered
relationships with God, others, and self. Payment Method
• We believe that eternal salvation and restored relationships are possible
through faith in Jesus Christ who died for us, rose from the dead, and is � Check/Money Order (payable to Christians for Biblical Equality)
coming again. This salvation is offered to all people.
� Visa � MasterCard � Discover � American Express
• We believe in the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation, and in the power
and presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of believers. ________________________________________ ___________________
• We believe in the equality and essential dignity of men and women of account number expiration date
all ethnicities, ages, and classes. We recognize that all persons are made _________________
in the image of God and are to reflect that image in the community of verification code (the four digits on the top right corner of American Express
believers, in the home, and in society. cards or ﬁnal three digits found on the back of other cards)
• We believe that men and women are to diligently develop and use their _____________________________________________________________
God-given gifts for the good of the home, church, and society. signature
• We believe in the family, celibate singleness, and faithful heterosexual
Please mail or fax this form to:
marriage as God’s design.
• We believe that, as mandated by the Bible, men and women are to Christians for Biblical Equality
oppose injustice.
122 W Franklin Ave, Suite 218, Minneapolis, MN 55404-2451
CBE Membership Phone: (612) 872-6898 | Fax: (612) 872-6891
CBE membership is available to those who support CBE’s Statement of Email: [email protected]
Faith. Members receive CBE’s quarterly publications, Mutuality magazine
and Priscilla Papers journal, as well as discounts to our bookstore and
conferences. Visit our home page and click “Membership” for details.

CBE Members Save 15% on CBE Bookstore resources and 50% on CBE recordings. Order or become a member today! Visit www.cbebookstore.org or call 612.872.6898.

An Evangelical Tradition Web

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Evangelical Tradition Web

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Evangelical Tradition Web

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the purpose of Christians for Biblical Equality?

What is the purpose of Christians for Biblical Equality?

What is CBE's vision for the future?

What is CBE's vision for the future?

An Evangelical Tradition

Egalitarians: A New Path to

Assessing Hierarchist Logic:

A special edition journal of

Christians for Biblical Equality

122 West Franklin Avenue, Suite 218, Minneapolis, MN

To order additional copies of this journal, visit cbebookstore.org.

On the Cover: A.J. Gordon (1836–1895) Roger Nicole (1915–2010)

Baptist preacher and egalitarian World-renowned egalitarian

William Booth (1829–1912) Catherine Booth (1829–1890) Theodore Weld (1803–1895)

Egalitarian advocate for the Preacher, egalitarian activist, Influential American

2  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  3

4  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  5

6  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  7

All of these are equal in essence: the human essence. To assert a

Because of the many difficulties in this whole passage, I follow the

8  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  9

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  11

12  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  13

14  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  15

16  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  17

18  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  19

20  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  21

22  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Dr. Chaves’s study describes a situation where evangelicals feel

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  23

Join CBE July 7–9, 2014, in Medellin, Colombia

Together, we will explore the theme “Male

Hosted in partnership with the Biblical Seminary of Colombia (FUSBC)

24  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Assessing Hierarchist Logic

Introduction reasons. First, Jesus explicitly commands us to refuse recourse to such

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  25

26  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  27

28  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  29

30  An Evangelical Tradition www.cbeinternational.org

Christians for Biblical Equality An Evangelical Tradition  31

You might also like