The Image of God and the Role of Women in Leadership: Part One—The Old Testament
When my daughter was little, we bought a puppy and named him Wesley (yes, after John Wesley—we are a rather nerdy family!). She was ecstatic and loved playing with him. When she heard the phrase “man’s best friend,” she turned to me and asked with concern, “Since I’m a girl, does that mean Wesley won’t be my best friend, too?” I smiled and explained the expression to her and how it was never meant to exclude women from the love and affection of dogs.
The church has had a long history of debating whether scriptural statements and stories about leadership were meant to exclude women from the highest levels of spiritual authority. Last week in Firebrand, Dale Coulter argued that a Wesleyan approach to forming such doctrine should focus on exploring the whole scope of Scripture, rather than identifying a canon-within-the-canon. In that spirit, then, we will consider the role of women in leadership throughout Scripture, beginning with the creation narrative.
Male and Female Made in the Image of God
Genesis 1 describes humanity as the pinnacle of creation. Prior to this event, God declared creation good (1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). But after the creation of humankind, God looked at creation and declared that it was very good (1:31). This was the result of God making humans in his image, in his likeness (1:26), a statement not made of any other aspect of God’s creation. John Wesley described this image as natural (i.e, having an immortal soul, powers of reason, and affections), political (i.e., having dominion over the earth), and moral (i.e., full of love). On this latter point Wesley declared, “God is full of justice, mercy, and truth; so was man as he came from the hands of his Creator” (“The New Birth,” I.1).
Significantly, God made both male and female in his image (1:27). Although God created distinction between the sexes, God did not create distinction in purpose or calling. Rather, God told humans of both sexes, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth” (1:28). Dominion is a prerogative of women as much as it is of men. Yet this dominion is not a call to exploit or domineer. Rather, “as benevolent rulers, who are the earthly counterpart of the heavenly king, they are to care for and protect the rest of the creation” (Tremper Longman III, Genesis The Story of God Bible Commentary, 2016, p. 37).
In the second creation account, Genesis 2 focuses more fully upon the creation of humans. After God declared that it was not good for Adam to be alone, God made Eve as a “helper” for Adam. The Hebrew term (ezer kenegdo) refers to a suitable partner; outside of the Genesis narrative the term ezer is often used of God, who helps Israel in her distress (e.g., Exod. 18:4, Deut. 33:7, Ps. 70:5). This is not a weak term denoting inferior status. Thus, the creation narratives clearly describe male and female as being made for one another, working together to live out God’s purposes for their lives as they bear God’s image in the world.
The Fall and the Image of God
The harmonious partnership of Adam and Eve falls apart in Genesis 3. Sin entered the world after Eve believed the serpent’s lies and ate of the forbidden fruit. Adam had been with her and had heard the whole conversation (Gen. 3:6); thus, when Eve handed him fruit to eat, he knew exactly from which tree the fruit had been plucked. When God confronted their disobedience and pronounced consequences, he told the woman, “your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (3:16). The subjection of Eve to her husband was a consequence of sin, not part of God’s original design.
To Adam, however, God pronounced the curse after stating, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it’…” (3:17). Was Adam’s sin a matter of failing to exercise spiritual leadership over his wife? Certainly Adam should have urged Eve not to eat the forbidden fruit and should have refused to eat of it himself. The problem, however, is not that Adam failed to exercise “headship,” which as noted above did not exist in God’s original good creation. The problem arose because Adam placed greater weight upon his wife’s words than upon God’s word. This was the same sin committed by Eve, who trusted the words of the serpent more than she trusted God. Their sin also included doubting God’s good provision (they did have fruit from all of the other trees in the garden to sustain them, after all) and pridefully desiring to make their own choices apart from the wisdom of God. Ultimately, Adam and Eve refused to accept that they were finite creatures dependent on an infinite and good God.
As a result, the image of God in humans was marred terribly. John Wesley described humanity as being deprived
“of all virtue, righteousness, and true holiness; and sunk, partly into the image of the devil, -- in pride, malice, and all other diabolical tempers; partly into the image of the brute, being fallen under the dominion of brutal passions and grovelling appetites. Hence also death entered into the world, with all his forerunners and attendants, -- pain, sickness, and a whole train of uneasy, as well as unholy passions and tempers” (“God’s Love to Fallen Man,” 1).
These self-centered desires resulted in the broken relationships between men and women, including the domination of men over women.
Female Leadership in the Old Testament
If Adam’s sin was a matter of giving up his spiritual authority over Eve, then one might expect to find a consistent picture in Scripture regarding the approval of male leadership and the disapproval of female authority. Instead, we find multiple stories where God applauded the leadership of women, despite the contrary wishes of the men who held culturally derived authority over them. Whereas Adam was chided for listening to his wife (because her message was sinful), Abraham was told he should listen to his wife. Sarah told Abraham to cast out Hagar and Ishmael so that Isaac’s inheritance would be protected, which caused Abraham distress (Gen. 21:10). God spoke to Abraham, however, saying, “Do not be distressed because of the boy and because of your slave woman; whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for it is through Isaac that offspring shall be named for you” (21:12). Sarah’s advice was commended by God because her wisdom aligned with God’s will. By the first century the apostle Paul quotes this woman’s advice as a foundation for his own argument (Gal. 4:30). Thus, it is not the sex of the individual who speaks spiritual truths that matters, but whether the content of the message aligns with God’s will.
The daughters of Zelophehad provide another important example. These five women had the chutzpah to appear before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the leaders of Israel, and all the people in order to plead their case (Num. 27:2). Their father Zelophehad had died without bearing any sons, and because the inheritance laws in Israel required that land be passed to a male heir, these women feared that the name of their father would be blotted out from history. To correct this injustice, they asked Moses to give them possession of their father’s land, even though no legal precedent existed for their case. When Moses inquired of God about the matter, God replied, “The daughters of Zelophehad are right in what they are saying…” (27:6). God then gave Moses a new inheritance law for cases such as theirs. Once again, it is not the sex of those who speak spiritual truths that matters, but whether the content of the message aligns with God’s will.
The prophetess Deborah, who served as a judge in Israel, clearly demonstrated spiritual authority over men. In this role, the people came to her for judgment (Judges 4:5). She brought the word of God to Barak, commanding him to lead Israel into battle against Sisera, the commander of King Jabin’s Canaanite army. Because of the superior military strength of Sisera’s iron chariots, Barak refused to go out to battle unless Yahweh was with him—and Deborah was the symbol of Yahweh’s power. He demanded that she accompany his army (4:8), not because he was a coward, but because he wanted to be sure of God’s will before he engaged in this treacherous endeavor. As Carolyn Custis James describes it, “This is not a gender issue, although Barak is well aware that this prophet is a female. The terms he sets focus on her prophetic role. Barak wants confirmation that the prophet is really relating the commands of Yahweh…. Deborah doesn’t blink. She will go. Her answer confirms that the prophet is indeed revealing the word of the Lord” (Malestrom, pp. 105-106). Deborah’s prophetic words were confirmed when Barak’s battle was victorious, although it was the woman Jael who ended Sisera’s life with a tent peg hammered through his temple (4:21).
Just a few chapters later in Judges we find the story of the angelic pronouncement of Samson’s birth. The angel appeared to Manoah’s barren wife and told her she would bear a son; then the angel gave her instructions regarding how to raise the child. After she told Manoah of the message, Manoah asked God to send the angel to him and “and teach us what we are to do concerning the boy who will be born” (Judges 13:8). It seems Manoah did not trust his wife to accurately describe the truths from God. The angel appeared again—to the wife, not Manoah—and she ran and fetched her husband. The angel then repeated the same instructions that he had already given to Manoah’s wife, and told Manoah, “Let the woman give heed to all that I said to her… She is to observe everything that I commanded her” (13:13-14). Clearly, she did not need a “head” to interpret the message. In other words, Manoah, listen to your wife.
Sometimes women in the Old Testament outright defied their husbands, and they were applauded for it. Abigail, the wife of Nabal, heard that her husband (described as “surly and mean” in 1 Sam. 25:3) had refused to provide food for David and his men. Yet these men, on the run from Saul, had spent time in Nabal’s fields and had not taken advantage of his property in any way, but instead had provided a wall of protection (25:15-16). Abigail knew that David would take vengeance upon her family for Nabal’s serious breach of hospitality. She urged her servants to bring a wealth of food, and she rode her donkey out to David and his men to beg for forgiveness for her husband. David responded by praising Abigail for her good sense in keeping him from bloodguilt, because he had planned on slaughtering all the men of Nabal’s family as vengeance (25:33). When Nabal later heard how close he and his household had come to death, he “became like stone” and died about 10 days later (25:37-38). David then took Abigail as his wife. The woman who had defied her husband’s wishes was rewarded by becoming the wife of Israel’s greatest king.
Queen Esther, too, challenged her husband’s established protocols by approaching him when she had not been called to appear (Esther 4:11, 5:2). Her purpose was to save her people—God’s people—from slaughter. God’s purposes were more important than the patriarchal social customs of her day.
Other female figures in the Old Testament demonstrated innovative leadership and devotion to God as well, whether the Hebrew midwives in Egypt (who disobeyed Pharaoh’s command to kill male Hebrew newborns), Rahab (who hid Israelite spies in disloyalty to her king), Ruth, Huldah the prophetess, and many others.
These stories demonstrate that God raises up spiritual leaders—whether male or female—who listen to God’s word rather than to the word of others and who reflect God’s image by demonstrating justice, mercy, and truth.
Dr. Suzanne Nicholson is Professor of New Testament at Asbury University in Wilmore, Kentucky. She is a Deacon in the United Methodist Church and serves as Assistant Lead Editor of Firebrand.
Additional resources: