What About Deborah?

Part 8: 1 Timothy 3:1-13; Judges 4-5 ~ Women in Leadership

When speaking about women and submission and gender roles in the church, the familiar controversy always arises. Does the Bible teach that a woman cannot be a pastor or a deacon? Obviously, we are drawing the conclusion that whatever their role, it must always be subordinate to the male roles, to be the helper. But what does that mean specifically? And what about cases like Deborah in the book of Judges?

Read 1 Timothy 3:1-13

1. List the qualifications for pastors and deacons in these verses.

2. What qualifications are specifically laid out for the deacons’ wives?

Egalitarians and Feminists view this passage as pointing to the possibility of women being in official leadership positions in the church since a woman’s qualifications in verse 11 are listed along with the deacons. Indeed, they point to any positive reference to a woman in the Bible, saying these elevated and complimentary mentions must mean that women can be pastors or deacons!

This kind of reasoning would be ridiculous if exercised in any other context. If a military general praises and encourages the colonels along with their subordinates in the same speech, it would be a huge assumption to think that the captains held the same privileges as the colonels. Yet, in the feminist world, any type of ordering or hierarchy, must necessarily mean subjugation and negative connotations. Positive mentions of subordinates short-circuits the feminist mindset.

Many non-Baptist complementarian commentators would say the possibility exists that there is a separate office of Deaconess but the women’s roles still are subordinate to the men’s. However, the Baptist interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:11 is that these really are the wives of the deacons, or at least women who were acting as helpers to the deacons and pastor. It does not refer to an official leadership position in the church for these reasons:

A. The whole context of verses 8-13 is about deacons, so the original audience would have understood easily that “gunaikas” were the deacons’ wives.

B. Though “likewise” certainly indicates a group other than bishops or deacons, it does not necessarily mean deaconesses, but simply deacon’s wives. Women are different than men, so are wives different than husbands!

B. Obviously, the moral standards and behavior of both deacons and their wives are equally important to Paul. A wife of low moral character disqualifies a man from the office of deacon. In that culture, it was unthinkable for a man to carry out this ministry by himself among women—a wife was essential in his ministry. Thus Paul needed to outline qualifications for deacons’ wives.

C. The reason Paul sets for qualities for deacons’ wives and not for bishops’ wives may be that as God forbids a woman to teach and have authority over a man (1 Tim. 2:12), a bishop’s wife may not partner with her husband in preaching, teaching, and ruling over the congregation. However, deacons’ wives may partner with their husbands in their serving ministries—not as officiates, but simply as wives. Simply put, deacons were servants, and their wives were their fellow servants.

D. The apostolic churches did not have women deacons. The office of deaconesses developed gradually and did not become an official order until about the middle of the third century.

E. Paul did not use the female version of the word diakonos, which he could have done if he intended to do so. Rather he used the word gunaikas (women). Later on, Christians made up the word for deaconess in post-biblical Greek. Therefore, the obvious reason why the word deacon does not have a feminine form in the Bible is because the office of female deacons did not exist in the apostolic church. Paul is speaking about deacons’ wives!

F. There is immense common sense here not only as to the nature of marriage in which two become one, but in the strength that a godly couple will bring to a deacon’s ministry. The character qualifications of deacons in verse 8 and the parallel qualifications for their wives in verse 11 insure that they will not only be mutually respectable but will have the same heart for ministry. After this three-fold description of the deacons’ wives, Paul moves naturally into the next verse to say that the deacon must have only one wife, and that his children must be well behaved (v. 12). It’s all in the family!¹

In decades gone by, many Baptist churches had deaconesses that performed ministry appropriate to women in the local church. Deaconesses, in these cases, were not considered a third office or an office equal to that of deacon; they were more of an “order” or subset of deacons. And, there seems to be evidence that there were deaconesses or at least women who served in such a capacity in the early church. They were sort of an adjunct of the deacons for those matters that are much better handled, or of necessity should be handled, by godly women in the church. In Baptist churches that do not have deaconesses, these chores are usually assigned to the deacons’ wives or other ladies in the church. (More on this in the next lesson.)

What About Deborah?

Deborah is one of the most famous of the Old Testament women, for she is the only woman among several men in the book of Judges. She comes on the scene as did all the judges when the nation of Israel was backslidden and under oppression. In Judges 4:4, we learn that Deborah was a wife, a judge, and a prophetess. The argument from egalitarians and Christian feminists (so-called) is that since these women seemed like leaders in spiritual matters, then why is there an objection to women pastors? Does the case of Deborah in Judges, point to egalitarianism? Some observations about Deborah's ministry may help with this question.

Her mode of ministry

Often I have heard Deborah's case explained in this way: (1) The men wouldn't take the lead. (2) So a woman had to do it. (3) Therefore, the men are at fault. That explanation never sat well with me because it would still be a woman usurping authority over a man. God never said that women were to be submissive only when the men were leading correctly. So what other reason could there be for God including these events?

Deborah (and Miriam and Huldah and other prophetesses) did not proclaim their message in the streets or in any public place. Rather, the leaders came to her to inquire of the Lord or to receive the Word of God. Deborah exercised "judgment" over the matters that were brought to her because God used her as a vessel for His Word, but she didn't rule over the nation. Also, she only sent for Barak in the first place because the revelation she had received from God was specifically for him.

Today, we do not have direct revelation from God through dreams or visions or prophets. God speaks to us through His completed Word. So in one sense, the status as prophetess is not applicable to us today. Pastors, for instance, do not have to go to another individual to inquire of the Lord because they have the Word of God as every believer does.

On the other hand, we can draw some conclusions from the way God used women to convey his message in the Old Testament. It is true that women have just as much a capacity as men to understand and convey God's truth. That is not the issue in a woman being in leadership over men. The reason I do not believe God calls women to be pastors or preachers has nothing to do with whether a woman is capable of doing the task. Women in Scripture and throughout church history, not to mention many ladies I know personally, are incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable of the Bible. The story of Deborah reinforces this truth.

Deborah simply conveyed God's truth to the nation. She did it in such a way as to promote Barak's leadership and in such a way as to not violate any other established leadership position.

Her sphere of authority

While we do observe women prophetesses and teachers in Scripture, we do not see women in the priesthood or in the pastorate. There is an inherent authority in those positions, and we do not see women in these roles in the Bible. It is significant to note that even though the priesthood was not functioning correctly as the mediator between God and Israel, God did not put Deborah as a new priestess. Rather, God gives new revelation through her as a prophetess, and she begins her work of communicating God's Word within her sphere of influence. Prophets and Prophetesses did not necessarily have any formal leadership position. Their authority rested in the Word of the Lord that they spoke. Think of Elijah or Jeremiah or Nathan. The kings often would inquire of the prophet, but they had no real power over the nation. A wise king would listen and heed, but not because the prophet had authority. It was because God's Word had authority.

In Deborah's interaction with Barak, she tells him that he will have victory. When he insists on her participation, his consequence for his reluctance is that a woman will receive the victory instead of him, a great embarrassment.

Also, Deborah was not a "deliverer". Interestingly, the account of Deborah and Barak does not include the familiar declaration that "God raised up a deliverer". One commentary notes,

If the author looked upon Deborah as one of the deliverers of Israel:
1. Why is she not introduced as one whom Yahweh had raised up?
2. Why is there no reference to her inspiration and empowerment by Yahweh’s Spirit (rûaḥ yhwh)?
3. Why does she need Barak to accomplish the deliverance?
4. Why is the verb yāšaʿ, “to save,” never applied to her?
5. Why does she say, “The LORD will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman” instead of “into my hands”?
6. Why does the author observe that “she went up with Barak” (4:10) but avoids placing her at the head of the troops?
7. Why does Deborah announce to Barak, “This day the LORD has given Sisera into your hands” rather than “my hands” (4:14)?
8. Why is she absent from the description of the actual battle (4:15–17), and why does she never meet Jabin or Sisera?
9. Why did the poet prefer the title “mother in Israel” over “savior of Israel” (5:7)?
10. Why does the poet avoid the root qûm, “to rise,” let alone referring to Yahweh as the causative subject, when he speaks of Deborah’s rise?
11. What is this woman doing in what everyone acknowledges traditionally as a man’s world—leading soldiers into battle?
12. Perhaps most intriguing, why does the narrator portray her character so different qualitatively from most of the other deliverers? ...

When “the sons of Israel” come to Deborah for “the judgment,” they are not asking her to solve their legal disputes but to give them the divine answer to their cries, which is described in the following verses. The fact that the Israelites come to her instead of the priest reflects the failure of the established priestly institution to maintain contact with God, a spiritual tragedy explicitly described in the early chapters of 1 Samuel.²

I encourage you to read the account of Deborah again (Judges 4-5). If we take the view that a prophetess is not a formal leadership role, but rather she is simply a conduit of God's revelation to mankind, then the account reads very much as a woman who sees clearly the path that God wants the nation to take (because she was a prophetess). She then encourages Barak to lead, not taking the lead herself. She reminds Barak that he already knew what to do (Judges 4:6-7). It was only then that Barak reluctantly called out the tribes to come fight. It was Barak who leads the troops in battle. Then in Deborah's and Barak's song, they extol God for helping the leaders take the lead (Judges 5:2). Deborah rejoices that the commanders, not herself, finally offered themselves to be used of the Lord (Judges 5:9).

This sounds very much like the many times in our day that the leadership simply will not follow the Lord in whatever area. A woman may absolutely be correct in her view of what must be done, but she ought not to take the lead because the men won't! Encouragement may be in order, and polite appeals on the basis of God's Word may be in order, but deposing the leadership and taking the authority is never observed by godly women or men in the Bible. Nor do we see a fundamental change in the hierarchy to allow for women to have leadership over men. Deborah is never seen usurping authority. Rather, she encourages and appeals to Barak's leadership. Then when Barak finally takes the lead and God blesses in the end, Deborah is relieved and rejoices in God.

Deborah is called "A Mother in Israel", and this reminds us of that special relationship between a mother and an adult son. The mother's authority over her son is not present, but she may encourage and appeal to his knowledge of the truth that she taught him. He ought to honor her by listening and applying himself to the task. This is what Deborah did for the nation of Israel and her leaders. That was her sphere of influence.

John Piper and Wayne Grudem see Deborah's circumstances in this way:

God has no antipathy toward revealing His will to women, Nor does He pronounce them unreliable messengers. The differentiation of roles for men and women in ministry is rooted not in women's incompetence to receive or transmit truth, but in the primary responsibility of men in God's order to lead and teach. The instances of women who prophesied and led do not call this order into question. Rather, there are pointers in each case that the women followed their unusual paths in a way that endorsed and honored the usual leadership of men, or indicted their failures to lead....Deborah, a prophetess, judge, and mother in Israel, along with Jael, was a living indictment of the weakness of Barak and other men in Israel who should have been more courageous leaders. The period of the judges is an especially precarious foundation for building a vision of God's ideal for leadership. In those days, God was not averse to bringing about states of affairs that did not conform to His revealed will in order to achieve some wise purpose.

We must also keep in mind that God' granting power or revelation to a person is no sure sign that this person is an ideal model for us to follow in every respect. This is evident, for example, from the fact that some of those God blessed in the Old Testament were polygamists. Not even the gift of prophecy is proof of a person's obedience and endorsement by God. As strange as this sounds, Matthew 7:22, 1 Cor. 13:2, and 1 Sam. 19:23-24 show that this is so. Moreover, in the case of each woman referred to above we have an instance of a charismatic emergence on the scene, not an installation to the ordinary Old Testament office of priest, which was the responsibility of men.³

Her Circumstances

Apparently Deborah had a husband (Judges 4:4) and her unique role as a channel of God's revelation did not interfere with her duties as a wife and mother. It would be unusual for God to send a message of revelation to a rebellious or insubordinate woman, although not unheard of. We might even assume that she didn't have any children or that they were already grown since the Bible gives no reference to her children. Perhaps she rejoices in being a "Mother in Israel" because she had no children of her own. We just don't know. I tend to assume that Deborah acted the same way to her husband as she did to Barak. Perhaps her own husband did a better job at leading and under his leadership, she rose to her occasion just as Mordecai encouraged Esther to do.

When God gives the Word, we must obey. Under Grace, there is no mediator between God and man. Each individual has soul liberty before God. A woman does not need to ask permission from her husband, to refrain from sin, or to obey God's commands (although priorities come into play here and following her leadership in good things). When the Word of God came to Deborah, being a prophetess, she would have had no choice but to convey the message. Deborah's husband must have recognized this and led her to fulfill God's plan for her. At the very least, he cleared the way for her to do this. We don't see her husband objecting or not being mentioned at all. In fact, the introduction to Deborah first describes her as the wife of Lappidoth. Perhaps he's even right there with her. We don't know! My point of view in this point is an argument from silence, but so is the opposing view. So I will take my liberty here.

Conclusion

So in the case of Deborah or other prophetesses, it is helpful to remember that men and women have equal ability to relate to God Himself. The New Testament makes it clear that there is no mediator between God and any man or any woman (1 Timothy 2:5). So truth can be spoken and relayed by women just as much as by men.

This truth is not incompatible with the complementarian view of gender roles. No person needs to have authority or prominence to convey God's truth. And when someone finds themselves being the only one speaking the desperately needed truth, she will stand out, just as Deborah did.

1. Hartog, John II (2008). Pastor and Deacons: Biblical Qualifications, Scriptural Roles, and Right Relationships (p. 114-118). Victoria, B.C. Canada: Trafford Publishing.

2. McCune, R. (2010). A Systematic Theology of Biblical Christianity: The Doctrines of Salvation, the Church, and Last Things (Vol. 3, p. 267). Allen Park, MI: Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.

3. Piper, John and Wayne Grudem (2006). An Overview of Central Concerns: Questions and Answers in Wayne Grudem, ed. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (Kindle Locations 1590-1591). Crossway. Kindle Edition.