INTRODUCTION

In my time on social media during the last twenty years or so, I have increasingly seen a huge proliferation of women exercising what amount to Christian public teaching ministries, some with many hundreds of thousands of fawning followers. Most of these ‘influencers’ that I have witnessed are peddling wayward teachings, indulging in hearsay and speculation, especially in the areas of soteriology and eschatology. They are thus influencing many in a negative manner. In fact, they are exercising a teaching ministry, whether they admit it or not. If one dares to point out to them that the apostolic consensus in the early church was that women are not to teach, for very special reasons, they will claim either that this was just a cultural custom of the time or that this only applies to the official ministries of local churches and that outside of that women can teach as much as they please. I beg to differ very radically with this view, and in this article I shall lay out my extensive reasons for doing so. The failure to curtail these self-styled ministries has led to a profusion of false teaching and a neglect of Divine authority. This is no coincidence, as I shall show.

So, first, we will examine the key texts in relation to this subject:

1) WHAT ARE THE KEY TEXTS INVOLVED?

In the New Testament, women are given clear apostolic instruction concerning their mindset and demeanour. Firstly, the Apostle Paul lays down the way that women should put their narcissism on a leash in the way that they dress and present themselves to the world:

“I want the women to adorn themselves with respectable apparel, with modesty, and with self-control, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, as is proper for women who profess to worship God” (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

The discovery and practice of true femininity by many women today is at the very least a dying art, if not a not far off completely lost one. ‘Ladettes’ are trendy; and for a woman to make herself into an aggressive, ‘driven’ personality is considered to be “a strong independent woman” by whom men feel threatened — though the reality is that real men just find such a woman to be completely fake, a betrayal of the true feminine, and not at all suitable as a confidante, friend, or ‘wife material’. The way that a woman presents herself outwardly is all part of the way that disciples of Christ must “deny themselves”. Anyway, I have already dealt with those two verses in 1 Timothy 2 in other articles.

However, immediately after that, Paul says: “A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). The Greek word translated as “quiet” there, ἡσυχίᾳ, hēsychia, implies that inner tranquillity, calmness and mature stillness which is especially the woman’s realm of mind when she has been spiritually transformed in Christ and had all her issues ‘straightened out’ — some of which she needs to work on herself through progressive sanctification (about which there will be much more below). It is a mystical word rather than just simply meaning that a woman must button her lips and shut up so that no sound comes out (which is how many choose to completely misunderstand and misrepresent it). This womanly “quietness” goes very deep and is very spiritual. It is a quietness of soul which leads to a tranquil nature and gentle speech which is attractive beyond measure to a real man. This is what happens when a woman operates “from the inner disposition” of her heart, delighting in “the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight” (1 Peter 3:4). Oh that a woman would bathe in this wonderment!

Of course, there are those who claim that Paul’s instructions here are simply a cultural aspect of his era and that they are not relevant for women today. But what reasons does Paul give for all this? Is it just his own rabbinic whim? Was he simply making something up which only applies to the first century? Not at all. For the extraordinary reasons he gives are that “Adam was formed first, and then Eve” and “it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:13-14). So Paul defends this need for female submission to male authority and not having a public authoritative teaching role by citing the order of man and woman in the original creation and the fact that it was Eve who was first deceived by Satan. In other words, this authoritative apostolic decree is rooted in the creation and the reality of the Fall — hardly Paul’s rabbinic whims or merely a first-century practice!

This is contentious for so many women but it has to be understood correctly and seen for the wisdom that it is. An authentic woman in Christ will see this clearly and accept it as wisdom rather than some perceived “threat to her independence”. I will say more about all this further below.

Then, along similar lines, Paul says to the Corinthians: “Women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says” (1 Corinthians 14:34). Many women have apoplexy when they read these words. But that is indicative of a sinful response to a most wise directive. Women can speak, contribute to the experience of the assembly, only if it is not to give direction, instruction, teaching, or exercising authority in the ekklesia. That still leaves a massive amount of scope for other verbalization, which I will develop in a later section.

2) WHAT SORT OF TEACHING IS IT IN WHICH A WOMAN IS FORBIDDEN TO ENGAGE?

The Apostle Paul plainly said that a woman should not be in a leadership/teaching role. The teaching being referred to essentially involves the authoritative, public presentation concerning the person and work of Jesus Christ in particular (Christology) and the whole teaching of the Scriptures in general (see, e.g., Ephesians 4:11-14; 1 Timothy 2:7; 2 Timothy 3:16), which would include theological instruction (spiritual anthropology, soteriology and eschatology) and the theological discipline of apologetics. All this is specifically a man’s work, by apostolic decree, as it is shaping the minds and souls of others and holding authority over men, which is not the place of women. All the ‘Eves’ of today will, of course, vehemently disagree with that statement but that does not alter the veracity of it.

In section 9, I will elaborate on the circumstances under which, and areas of which, a woman is permitted to teach.

3) BUT WHAT ABOUT OUTSIDE THE CHURCH’S ASSEMBLIES?

1 Corinthians 13:34 obviously applies specifically to teaching and authority within the local assembly. But what about the Timothy text, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man”? Many will say, “But Paul was only referring to pastoral ministry in a church situation. So you are going too far”. But these women “influencers” who are running ministries on the internet teaching Bible and formulating eschatology, while shaping the minds of gullible (in most cases, extremely gullible) people are indeed exercising a pastoral ministry. They are pastoring their followers. They are shaping their minds and souls. They just happen to be doing it on the internet rather than in a local assembly, where it would not be permitted.

I am not primarily referring to all the big-deal huge names in the women’s ministry scene (e.g., Paula White, Victoria Osteen, or Joyce Meyer) — though they are bad enough — but to a plethora of non-mainstream women who minister on the internet on social media websites and on YouTube. Many of the people who they ‘pastor’ wouldn’t go anywhere near a church. Those women’s internet ministries are their church (or one of them)!

Many think that Paul’s forbidding of women to teach is just confined to the internal ministry of local churches. But these days, the exercise of a teaching ministry has gone way beyond merely local churches. Surely Paul’s injunction about women teaching must apply not only in local fellowships. It is a singular fact that a huge number (if not most) of those who claim to be Christians today get most of their teaching input from the internet, where countless numbers of women are exercising a teaching ministry which includes teaching from the Bible, teaching theology, proffering (mostly wacky) eschatology, speculating about Endtimes matters, indulging in hearsay and take-downs on genuine ministries, and all while having authority over men.

It would be totally ludicrous if Paul’s injunction about women not teaching meant that those women can sit quietly for an hour in a local church on a Sunday morning and then spend their entire time outside of that hour ministering to hundreds of thousands of people on the Internet, teaching them (even heretically) about biblical matters, about the things surrounding Jesus’ return, warning them about what are in their view false teachers (many of whom aren’t) because of their own limited understanding of biblical and theological matters, all of which is shaping people’s minds pastorally. It would seem that the folks who want to confine Paul’s injunction merely to a local church situation are giving women a pass to teach anything they want outside of that local church situation — all of which makes a mockery of Paul’s intentions. Not only that but many of these self-styled teachers are ministering to (and thereby placed in authority over) men. Double-whammy.

Many seem to think that a woman can just sidestep what Paul said by setting up an internet (Bible/theology/eschatology) teaching ministry with a website and a YouTube channel as (so they think) what Paul said does not apply to that and only has reference to the church. However, firstly the internet today is the new church for a great many. Every day on social media I see posts from women who have massive followings, some involving hundreds of thousands of people, and almost all of them are teaching a large degree of nonsense. Do you really believe that Paul’s injunction about women teaching or being in authority over a man could only apply on a Sunday in a church assembly which has a handful of people in it, yet have no application whatsoever to a woman teaching hundreds of thousands of wayward but hungry souls on the internet. Would that be God’s intention? That they just have to button their lips in a church meeting on Sunday with ten people there, then when they get outside the church building they can just let rip with teaching up to a million tender souls and beyond, every minute of every day and night? I think not! That would just not make sense. They are not told to keep silent just because they are a liability in the churches but because it was “the woman (Eve) who was deceived and fell into transgression”. This is why all these modern “Eve-ish” women should not be teaching.

All of the above has repercussions for those women who set themselves up as teachers and who usurp the authority of the men. This includes all kinds of public ministry which exercises that authority. Many areas of instruction, even in the churches, are actually pastoral teaching in disguise. Being a so-called “worship leader” is one example. Now, you may say to me, “What’s wrong with that? You are being a misogynistic chauvinist. Worship leaders are not teaching”. Oh, but they are! Hymns ‘teach and admonish’ (see Colossians 3:16). Public prayers teach too. Public addressing as a leader of any kind also teaches. If a woman is choosing songs and performing public prayer at the head of a congregation, and generally leading from the front, she is teaching as well as setting herself up as being in authority over all the men present. It is not quite as direct as actual preaching or leading a Bible study, but they teach nevertheless by inference and influence. Hymns have always been ‘teachers of faith’, although many of the modern choruses are so effeminately superficial and “me-centered’ as to be laughable — therefore all one is teaching with them is trite shallowness and a feel-good factor, which is the very opposite of what a true believer should be or what worship is really all about, for he or she loves the ‘deep things of God’ (1 Corinthians 2:10). To lead a whole service from the front is an authority position and it should not be occupied by a woman. This not me making up the rules. It is by apostolic decree.

Now you may say, “But I know of one ministry run by a woman which is actually rather good”. If you use that as the basis for making women’s teaching ministries acceptable, you will be giving carte blanche to all the others which teach baloney! If a female church pastor you knew was an okay preacher, you wouldn’t use that as proof that female church pastors are acceptable. You would say, “Tough! It’s not allowed… period!” And so it should be with running a Bible/theology/eschatology teaching ministry outside the Church too, because that is pastoring, leading, being in authority over men.

I am not referring to a woman who casually makes observations on her personal social media page, or who speaks about Christ and what He has done for her. I am referring to a woman deliberately setting up an internet teaching ministry about biblical and theological matters which goes out to masses of people, thereby also exercising authority over men.

4) IN SCRIPTURE, IT IS NOT ONLY ABOUT WHAT IS EXPLICITLY STATED BUT ALSO ABOUT WHAT IS BEING INTRINSICALLY COMMUNICATED

Here we have a section which is to give some extra clarification. So someone pipes up: “You are making this up. It doesn’t say anywhere in the Bible that women cannot teach outside the Church”. That is a logical fallacy known as an argument from silence. It is a golden rule that apparent absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. You cannot definitively prove a claim is false simply because there is no explicit mention of it. The diligent student of the Bible not only follows what is explicitly said there, but also what can very obviously without a doubt be deduced by good and necessary consequence. Allow me to give some examples of this:

Firstly, the Bible does not say explicitly that Jesus did not come to start another religion. But it is very clear that He did not do so because of all the places where He said what He did come to do and that what He came to do was clearly unique and that all those with messianic pretensions who came before Him (and presumably after Him) were thieves and robbers (John 10:7-9).

Secondly, the word “Trinity” is not written in the Bible, but the teaching about a Triune Godhead is clearly shown through the fact that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each explicitly called God and are each shown to have distinct personality (see my article here: https://diakrisis-project.com/2023/09/08/the-blessed-three-in-one-the-christian-teaching-concerning-the-trinity-proven-from-scripture/ ). The conclusion is unavoidable.

Thirdly, the Bible never uses theological terms like the “two natures of Christ” or “hypostatic union”, but the conclusion about the human and Divine natures of Christ is so easily deduced from the plethora of evidence in the Bible (see the relevant section in my commentary on Matthew chapters 24 and 25 for further discussion on this: https://diakrisis-project.com/2026/04/23/new-in-depth-commentary-on-matthew-24-and-25/ ).

Fourthly, the Bible doesn’t explicitly say that God ceased to give new revelation after the Scriptures had been written. However, it can easily be deduced through the statement that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Ephesians 2:20), that the faith was “once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3), and that the qualifications for an apostle can no longer be met by anyone since the deaths of the original Apostles — e.g., accompanying Jesus during His earthly ministry (Acts 1:21-23), having heard Jesus firsthand (Hebrews 2:3), witnessing the resurrected Christ (1 Corinthians 15:7; 9:1; Acts 1:22; 4:33; 10:39-42), receiving a personal call from Christ to Apostleship and a commission to fulfil its duties (Luke 6:13; Mark 3:14-15) and more. (On this, see my eBook “Signs, Wonders & Divine Revelation” here: https://diakrisis-project.com/2023/05/13/new-book-signs-wonders-divine-revelation-the-gifts-of-the-spirit-their-abuses-in-todays-churches/ ).

This is why I say that in Scripture it is not only about what is explicitly stated but also about what is being intrinsically communicated — what can very obviously without a doubt be deduced by good and necessary consequence. By ‘good consequence’ (well-grounded logic) and ‘necessary consequence’ (the only possible conclusion to which one can come), one uses spiritual discernment to make valid deductions. And the plain valid deduction about women teaching in both the churches and in the wider world is that it is forbidden, as I hope that you too will believe by the time you reach the end of this article.

It is also interesting to note that the women who want to give themselves carte blanche to teach — whether in the churches or outside of them — by saying that Scripture does not explicitly forbid it, have in other circumstances no real respect for what the Scriptures do teach at all. They only get legalistic with you when they want to enable themselves to play at being men.

5) WOMEN HAVE A BUILT-IN WEAKNESS FOR ‘WOO-WOO’

Paul’s observation that it was Eve who was deceived by Satan is most pertinent. For Adam was deceived by Eve, whereas she was directly deceived by Satan, who was plainly well-aware of which of the two would be easier to dupe. Remember also that it was Eve who “saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom” (Genesis 3:6). There was not an ounce of discernment operating in her and she coveted this satanic wisdom which was on offer. There was no hesitation after Satan had contradicted what God had said.

This is precisely why women should not be leading or teaching and should be in submission to men. All non-Christian women and probably even most professing “Christian” women will be absolutely horrified to read those words. It is in this connection that women in the secular scene have so often had a tendency to be witches. Women operate by nature on a plane which can either be their liberation or their downfall. They are easily attracted to, and have a weakness for, what one can call ‘woo-woo’. (Dictionary definition of ‘woo-woo’: “Pseudoscientific, supernatural or emotion-based beliefs with little or no scientific or logical basis”). That is why the New Age scene is so dominated by women with wiccan tendencies. Unregenerate and undeveloped women can be extremely unstable, making decisions based on subjective emotion rather than fact, especially if they are not grounded in the fullness of faith.

Many of the ‘New Age’ type of witch, if they had a teaching role before their alleged conversion, then desire to continue to exercise the authority of a teaching ministry on the internet under the guise of “New Age to Jesus”. This is because another trait of women — if they are unregenerate, or if they are regenerated but do not know how to exercise submissiveness and have not ‘done the work’ of progressive sanctification — is to continually seek validation and admiration from others and bask in the limelight. One only has to delve into social media briefly to see this in action en masse. These women seem to think that because they were previously New Agers then that gives them some kind of special exemption from being subject to Paul’s injunction about women teaching. They regard their situation as unique and are always going on about their former lives. It never stops. One would think that there was no other background worthy of being proud of relinquishing than a New Age one. And “pride” is the word. It is really tiresome. Such a character is not what is required for good leadership and authority.

It is hardly surprising that so many woman today regard this reference to Eve by Paul the Apostle as being a misogynistic religious plot to put them down. For example, the  Columbian singer, Shakira, once said, “Eve was a story created by misogynists to put women in the little box where we have to remain silent, not speak our minds, and not be a catalyst for change. To keep things as they are” (from an April 2024 interview in “Allure” entitled “Shakira’s She-Wolf Feminism”).

However, that nature in a woman will be to her advantage if she submits to God and becomes a disciple of Christ. For when a woman’s spiritual energy is put into godly pursuits instead of satanic ones, there is nothing more beautiful than that. In any intimate relationship, a woman can be a kind of spiritual lightning conductor for her man, whose consciousness operates in a very different manner (though complimentary to hers). That spiritual ‘lightning conductor’ ability — when operating in the Light of Christ rather than as a messenger from Satan — is potently and abundantly wonderful.

Yes, a woman is supposed to be under the authority of a man, which in marriage means her husband. Cue now for cries of “Male chauvinist pig!” from the sisters. But being under a man’s authority does not mean being a put-down doormat. If a genuinely Christian woman is with a genuinely Christian man, the whole thing works on a voluntary basis in which the woman recognises her man’s authority by submitting herself to him, and the man, in turn, recognises his duty of care and love towards the woman (Ephesians 5:33). There is no way that he could ever exploit her, and there is no way that she could attempt to undermine his authority. This is a beautiful symbiosis.

If a man justifiably confronts the typical modern woman about her behaviour or tries to set boundaries, many will say that he is being ‘toxic’ and so on. This is the woman being “Eve-ish”. This is why Christian women need to work on themselves to throw off these undeveloped ways of being, as they should have no place in their lives. Such work is part of her taking up her cross and denying herself. Such work is an intrinsic part of the process of progressive sanctification (about which I shall be saying much more below). Being a full-blown genuinely Christian woman is a serious business. But a great many women do not take it seriously enough to stop resisting Paul’s apostolic injunction about the place and comportment of women.

We have seen how women are not permitted to teach based on the fact that it was Eve who was deceived. The nature of untransformed or undeveloped women is that they can easily be deceived and fall for all sorts of nonsense because the decisions are being made on the basis of feelings, emotions and gut instincts which give rise to openness to deception. Not only that, but such women are very easily open to flattery or that which gives them a sense of validation or ‘specialness’, which can easily be exploited. Social media has very successfully exploited this tendency, making it super-easy for women to become top-level narcissists.

Eve was not only deceived by Satan but she led her man down the wrong track too. Another double-whammy. However, that does not excuse Adam. Essentially, not only did he reject the Divine will by going along with his woman’s waywardness but he, in great weakness, let Eve take the lead in the whole matter which was of huge significance to the passage of history. So I now ask a couple of questions:

6) BUT WHAT ABOUT ADAM? DOES HE GET OFF SCOT-FREE?

At this point, many women will be jumping up and down saying, “What about the men?” as a distraction from taking any accountability for their own situation, because unregenerate and undeveloped women are hopeless at being accountable. Or they will be saying, “Why is it always the women, you misogynist! Adam was involved in the Fall too, so why should he be allowed to teach and women not allowed?” I love questions like this because they give me the opportunity to develop something extra. In order to show that this is not just a takedown of undeveloped women, I can say a little about men.

The tendency for unregenerate or undeveloped men (i.e. those who have not engaged in any real progressive sanctification — ‘doing the work’ for personal development) is not only to be weak and lacking in genuine authority — though often revelling in exercising false authority in order to compensate, like a tyrant — but also to become cold, lacking compassion, and veering towards sociopathy or even psychopathy. Many such men even thrive in Church elderships, hiding behind a veneer of piety.

Moreover, if Eve could be described as the first feminist — which, in a major sense, she was, as she did not submit to Adam’s male authority but overrode him, setting herself up as a supposedly “strong, independent woman” — then Adam was the first ‘beta-cuck’. The term “beta-cuck” is a slang phrase used primarily online to describe a man who is perceived as submissive, passive, or weak, or lacking traditional masculine qualities and authority. It is a compound term combining two distinct concepts: “Beta”, which refers to a non-dominant, less assertive, or subservient man — the type who would allow women to walk all over him — and “Cuck”, a shortened form of ‘cuckold’, which was originally referring to a man whose woman has been unfaithful (so he has been “cuckolded”), now used in the shortened form of “cuck” to denote a man who allows himself to be dominated or “cuckolded” by others. This Adam did with Eve. Adam was created first. It was his job to keep her in check and care for her welfare, ensuring that she doesn’t go off the rails, as it is with all men and their wives. But Adam was weak and unauthoritative. And that is the Adamic tendency in all men if they do not take control of their lives (and their wives!): Weakness and submission to a woman. Eve taught Adam to walk away from God. But Adam allowed her to do so.

Really, all this interaction between Adam and Eve is both archetypal and prototypical. It set the scene for the rest of human history: Pseudo-independent women and weak, easily manipulated men (who often play at being tyrants so as to compensate), with both of them having about as much discernment and spiritual deception as a disused telegraph pole!

So there you go, ‘sistas’. Are you happy now that I’ve “balanced the books” (so to speak) and done a takedown on Adam? Now back to you!

7) THE LINK BETWEEN SUBMISSION AND PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION

Before going any further, as this has been much mentioned, it is necessary at this point to say a few words about progressive sanctification — the need to ‘do the work’ which is involved in progressing in the Christian life. ‘Doing the work’ is an intrinsic part of Christian development.

When we are initially regenerated by the Spirit we are definitively sanctified and nothing can take that away. Definitive sanctification is the once-for-all-time, decisive break with the overruling power of sin that occurs at the moment of regeneration, known as “conversion”. Rooted in the believer’s spiritual union with Christ in His death and resurrection, it means that one is legally and foundationally freed from being in slavery to sin and then set apart for God. But there is another process dealing with any remnants of sin that lasts throughout the life of the disciple of Christ which involves being progressively sanctified, made clean and holy. This is progressive sanctification.

So many think that God just infuses His people with knowledge, wisdom, and understanding in some kind of mystical manner. This is not generally the case at all; although He may, from time to time, when necessary, directly inspire us — a classic example of which is in Luke 21:12-15. But that situation will be greatly enhanced if we have ‘done the work’ to accrue the necessary knowledge and courage beforehand. We are not divinely-directed robots! He expects us to ‘do the work’ and He works with that, enabling us. It is a big part in our progressive sanctification process. This is the way with the sanctification of true believers. If we show the first initiative, He steps in and enables us. But is not like that with salvation, by which we are definitively sanctified, set apart for God. That is all of the Lord (Ephesians 2:8-9; John 6:44,65). But with progressive sanctification there is to be the desire and movement towards increasing holiness. As soon as we make a move in that direction, God steps in by His Spirit enabling us to achieve our goal. Progressive sanctification means not only knowing that we are out of line in some way but also knowing why we got into that situation and then taking steps to ensure that we never get into it again! Progressive sanctification means self-awareness concerning one’s thinking and behaviour (please see my article on the necessity of self-awareness to spiritual growth: https://diakrisis-project.com/2025/10/13/christian-know-thyself-the-necessity-of-self-awareness-to-spiritual-growth-aka-sanctification/ ). Definitive sanctification instils the desire to be as clean as one can possibly be, thereby sowing the seeds for progressive sanctification — the desire and motivation to ‘do the work’ which will sustain, hone, and improve that cleanliness of heart.

The Lord expects us to get wise and He counsels us to acquire wisdom. “Wisdom is supreme; so acquire wisdom. And whatever you may acquire, gain understanding” (Proverbs 4:7). How many professing Christians do you know who are wise? Seriously. Are you yourself wise on any level? There is nothing egocentric about being able to reply “Yes” to oneself. We need to be able to examine ourselves and see a quiet progression in our level of wisdom with the passing of each year of our lives. But if wisdom is the most important thing and reigns supreme, why do so few of us acquire it?

Here are some of the Scripture texts which refer to this lifelong process of progressive sanctification:

  • “And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:18).
  • “Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience. When you lived among them, you also used to walk in these ways. But now you must put aside all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to one another, since you have taken off the old self with its practices, and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator” (Colossians 3:5-10).
  • “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God” (Romans 12:2).
  • “Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good purpose” (Philippians 2:12-13).
  • “Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18).
  • “Therefore, beloved, since we have these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from everything that defiles body and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians 7:1).
  • “If you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” (Romans 8:13).
  • “You are to put off concerning the former way of life the old man, which is being corrupted according to the desires of deceit, and to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and to have put on the new man, having been created according to God in righteousness and holiness of truth” (Ephesians 4:22-24).
  • “Everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as Christ is pure” (1 John 3:3).
  • “God has not called us to impurity, but to holiness” (1 Thessalonians 4:7).

An undeveloped professing Christian who has not grown in grace and a knowledge of the truth is actually a complete anomaly. So many people professing to be Christians do not develop at all in any way. In fact, when a person professes to be a Christian but doesn’t practise what is necessary for progressive sanctification, there is a likelihood that no real regeneration has taken place. For regeneration is always naturally followed by the willingness to progress in grace and a knowledge of the truth, along with the profound desire to put to death any remnants of sin which may remain. This is a lifelong process which is quicker in some than in others, depending on what there is to deal with and how ready and willing we are to deal with it. But when there is no progressive sanctification whatsoever because one has not ‘done the work’, the only thing that develops is a kind of inward iniquity masked by a phoney outward piety that fools everyone except the more discerning among God’s people.

So many of the problems in churches are the result of unregenerate people playing at being Christians and therefore not ‘doing the work’ necessary for progressive sanctification to take place. Scheming church elders who connive and plot how to lord it over the flock or undermine those by whom they feel threatened; gossips who never cease from their destructive tittle-tattle; husbands who do not exercise their authority and take the moral or physical lead; wives who constantly undermine their husbands and have no understanding of (or even the desire to understand) what submission means; people who think that sanctification is only what happens at conversion and they just need to do nothing except go to church and suck up to the pastor; people generally failing to practise the precious art of ‘mortification’ and thereby not developing in wisdom; husbands who do not love their wives as Christ loves the Church; people failing to develop in kindness, empathy, selflessness and love; women who do nothing to overcome their narcissism, their refusal to be accountable, their constant need for validation and their inability to stop their toxic gossiping; etc.

Following the teachings of Christ holds one to a certain standard of behaviour — not merely outward behaviour because that can easily be faked, either consciously or unconsciously; but one’s whole inner world too, the way one’s mind works; the way one regards the world outside; the way one deals with impure or unfitting thoughts; the way one leaves behind all the old affiliations and prejudices; the way one shuns anything which can interfere with one’s spiritual development; the way one wrestles with and overcomes any residual personality quirks and disorders left over from one’s unregenerate life which have stamped themselves into one’s being (which includes any so-called “trauma-patterning”). One doesn’t always succeed right away, and it is certainly not an overnight job (although some elements do drop away quicker than others). But thanks to penitence and forgiveness and the ever-ready presence of the Holy Spirit, one improves and, above all, one wants to improve. That is the main element in progressive sanctification: Improvement. One can see in oneself a tangible trajectory of betterment — what Paul calls “intensifying glory” (2 Corinthians 3:18). It is nothing to brag about. It is nothing on which to rest one’s laurels. But it is a quiet encouragement to oneself that the Spirit is working within. You can see the evidence of it every day, and it sometimes amazes you to see how it all works — not to mention that this steady improvement also increases your faith. There will be slips and stumbles along the way, but these are simply incentives to the betterment which I have mentioned above.

Therefore, one should become aware of the development in oneself of a deeper sense of such things as compassion, mercy, insight, perception, self-awareness, discernment, love of truth, hatred of lies, the conscious putting to death of sin and all forms of moral failure, a self-effacing humility, loving empathy, and so on. I could have added other things such as holiness, righteousness, and justice as separate items; but one has to be careful these days because those can become subtle pietistic ways of spiritual virtue-signalling to others about how pious one is, and there’s a lot of that about. A lot. So the practice of holiness can turn into a “holier-than-thou” attitude (always seeing others’ sins but not so much one’s own). The practice of righteousness can turn into self-righteousness (involving a complete blindness to one’s own obnoxiousness). Justice can turn into fanatical crusades riding on the crest of bandwagon waves. The reality is that holiness manifests in the compassion, mercy, loving empathy, self-effacing humility and conscious putting to death of sin. Righteousness manifests in an abundant self-awareness which fingers one’s own peccadillos and gives one a love of truth and a hatred of lies. Justice manifests in the insight, perception and discernment which have countless fruits in one’s life. All of this, and so much more, should be a growing part of the disciple of Christ’s inner and outer comportment, whether male or female.

It actually takes much conscious work to deal with any remnants of the old nature. So many people have a somewhat esoteric view of sanctification and imagine that they can just leave it all to the Spirit to deal with us mystically in some kind of a way. “Poof!” and we will be sorted out without having to lift a finger. It does not work like that. We have to ‘do the work’. That work is what is meant when Paul said that we should “put to death” the components of our earthly nature, citing sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry, not to mention anger, rage, malice, slander, obscene communication, lying, etc., and clothing ourselves instead with hearts of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience, forgiveness and love (please see Colossians 3:5-14; cf. Romans 8:13). We have to ‘do the work’. That is what “putting to death” the dross in us is all about.

Now here’s the good bit: As soon as we start to do the work, the Spirit then steps in, gets alongside us (which is the actual meaning of the word “Paraclete” — Greek, Παράκλητος, Parakletos, to be called alongside, John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7) and assists us all the way. But we have to ‘do the work’, to initiate it first, then the Spirit will do the “Poof!” bit in our assistance. That is how our progressive sanctification operates. It is a pagan idea that ‘the gods’ sort you out and you don’t have to do anything. But that is not the Christian way. The Spirit loves hard-workers — those who exude diligence — which is what regenerated people really are, if they are being well-taught and they are serious about their faith. So if you initiate the work, the Spirit will be the wind under your wings in assistance.

The reason this is so important in relation to the main subject of this article and the practice of submission by women is that genuine submission can only take place in those women who have ‘done the work’ — who have consciously engaged in progressive sanctification. Women are not naturally submissive by nature, that “Eve-ish” nature. But when they are regenerated as disciples of Christ a process begins which enables them to foster that true-natured submission, which I shall now develop in the next section.

8) UNDERSTANDING AND PRACTISING THE (LOST) ART OF SUBMISSION (GOD’S PLAN)

There is a silly saying, “Happy wife, happy life” — as if everything has to be gynocentric, revolving around the woman. In fact, the husband is the head of the household, so it would be better to be phallocentric and say, “Happy hubby, family bubbly”! 🙂 There is actually a hierarchy involved in the male-female milieu. As Paul put it: “I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). This is more or less mirrored here:

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, His body, of which He is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything” (Ephesians 5:23-24).

Usually, at this point, people will be waving wildly, saying, “But it says somewhere that we are all supposed to submit to each other”. Yes, it does say “somewhere” (in Ephesians 5:21, to be precise), “Be submitting to one another in fear of Christ”. But that does not mean mutually submitting to each other in a universal sense, as has sloppily come to be the prevailing idea in many circles. It is obvious that it could not do so because the husbands are not told to submit to their wives (Ephesians 5:22,24), parents are not told to submit to their children (Ephesians 6:1), and the masters are not told to submit to their slaves (Ephesians 6:5), as that would be contradictory and rather silly, undermining the hierarchical idea of what this submission is all about. That verse in Ephesians 5:21 is a go-to text for feminists, egalitarians, or anyone else who wants to undermine what Paul is teaching, as they pluck it entirely out of its immediate context. As they say, “If Paul says that we must submit to one another in every way, therefore he must mean that husbands have to submit to their wives too”. Obviously, there is a mutual putting of the other before oneself, “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or empty pride, but in humility consider others more important than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Philippians 2:3-4). But that is not mutual submission. In fact, the words in Ephesians 5:21 are an introduction to the verses which follow. Thus, when the word says: “Be submitting to one another in fear of Christ”, Paul then elaborates on that in Ephesians 5:22 – 6:9 by showing us precisely how that submission operates as it should, in relation to the situations where it is called for. So, the Scripture is saying, “Be submitting to one another in fear of Christ” and in the verses following it is showing how that submitting will work out in practise. This is surely the only rational, commonsense interpretation, as it does not make any sense whatsoever for us all to be submitting to each other in every sense.

The Greek word translated as “submitting” there is ὑποτάσσω, hupotassó. This word is derived “from ὑπό, hupó, ‘under’, and τάσσω, tássō, ‘arrange’ — properly, ‘under God’s arrangement’, i.e. submitting to the Lord. That is what biblical submission is really all about. Essentially, submission is all about submitting to a higher authority as this is how we operate in line with God’s plan. This is why the popular cockeyed idea about us all submitting to each other that I mentioned earlier — which is so beloved by feminists and egalitarians — is so terribly misplaced. So, if proper submission is to be taking place, i.e. living under God’s arrangement rather than operating according to our own desires, the order is plainly spelled out in the text in Ephesians 5:22-30. Thus, both men and women should be in submission to God and His great plan (in other words, consciously living under His unique arrangement). Women should be in submission to men in the same way that Christ’s Church is in submission to Him. Men should love and cherish their wives to the same degree that Christ loves His Church. It is in that way that we are all subject to one another, i.e. operating under God’s arrangement. That is His plan. When we all live our lives according to that plan, everything works harmoniously. But as soon as we step outside that plan, chaos and heartache ensue. There is no oppression involved in that plan. It is wholly voluntary. Men do not force their wives to submit. Wives do not have to pressurise their husbands to love and cherish them. It all happens naturally when all concerned are genuine disciples of Christ who have done and continue to do the work.

Similarly, when Paul says that “a woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness” (1 Timothy 2:11), rather than setting herself up as a teacher or putting herself in authority over a man, the woman who is a genuine disciple of Christ does not have to be strongarmed into that quietness and submission. It all happens naturally and beautifully because she knows that she is being the woman that God intended her to be, and that will always foster the continuance of faithful living.

The big problem in the “Christian” scene is that so many are not truly “born from above” (John 3:3), i.e., regenerated by God. So there is always this struggle in them against the idea of submission. But the truly ‘born-from-above’ person has no struggle with that whatsoever. Submission never has to be inculcated into a person who has truly come to Christ. It all happens naturally and willingly once it has been revealed to him or her from the Scriptures; and it is seen as a great and positive thing rather than a burdensome one. Christian submission, when seen it its true perspective, is a most beautiful and fruitful mindset. The woman submits to the man; the man cherishes her. It is a symbiotic relationship which, when working correctly, is the ultimate fulfilment. No one is downtrodden or subjugated in God’s precious arrangement. It is all voluntary and harmoniously complementary.

9) ARE THERE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH A WOMAN CAN TEACH?

However, all the above having been said, there are circumstances in which a woman most certainly can teach. Obviously, as has been said, she cannot teach publicly in a local church congregational setting, for that is a position of open authority. As Paul says: “Women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says” (1 Corinthians 14:34). However, privately and personally a woman can teach in all humility. For example, in Acts 18 we find a Jew called Apollos who was teaching publicly though his understanding was in some ways inadequate. Later on, he was taken to one side by the husband-and-wife team of Aquila and Priscilla who “explained to him the way of God more accurately” (v.26). Obviously, Priscilla was acting under the authority of her husband but she was nevertheless part of the team which taught Apollos a more accurate understanding of Scripture.

Can we take this a little further? What if a mature Christian woman was walking down the street and heard a public preacher presenting the Gospel in a less than accurate manner so that there was a flaw in his presentation and people were thus being misled? Would she be justified in humbly taking him to one side privately and gently showing him from Scripture where that inadequacy was in his teaching? Or should she leave this alone which would then mean that people were, in some way, being misled? Obviously, if it was needed immediately and if she had no man to do it through, then I believe that justice would be served in her doing so. If she was mature and humble enough and he was equally humble, he would be grateful for the adjustment in his public proclamation. The spirit in which such things are done is all-important.

Let it also be said that the more mature women are encouraged to teach not only their children but also to teach the younger women how to be better women, wives and mothers, and therefore how to be more spiritually-minded (Titus 2:4). We do not see enough of this in churches today. But this is a role to which the more mature women are called.

Naturally, in case you are wondering, all women can personally evangelize to unbelievers, for we are all called to do so (see Matthew 28:18–20; with Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15). It is only public teaching with instruction and the exercise of authority which is prohibited.

Finally, obviously, the constraint on teaching does not apply to imparting a skill to others or teaching in a class which does not involve biblical or theological instruction.

10) THE AMELIORATION OF THE CURSE IN THE FALL FOR A WOMAN

In fact, Paul specifically states that rather than engaging in teaching or exercising authority over men, women “will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control” (1 Timothy 2:15). Remember how part of the curse of the Fall was the pain involved in women childbearing, as well as being in submission to the man. As God said to Eve: “I will sharply increase your pain in childbirth; in pain you will bring forth children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you” (Genesis 3:16). So Paul in his words to Timothy is essentially saying to the women,

“I know that the Fall means you will be in submission to your husband and having great pain in childbearing (which would also include having to witness the sickness and deaths of their children), but all of that will be ameliorated if you willingly submit to the authority of the man and if you continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control”.

Thus, the woman comes into a life of freedom and joy not by rebelling against her husband and deliberately eschewing having children but by embracing those things in all submission and humility. To do so is the only way to bring spiritual and life fulfilment.

Now, you may say, but what about women who do not or cannot have children or do not marry? In fact, Paul does say, “Now to the unmarried and widows I say this: It is good for them to remain unmarried, as I am” (1 Corinthians 7:8). Throughout that chapter Paul is plainly revealing that the celibate, unmarried life is preferable spiritually (obviously because there are less distractions) but each had to act according to his or her own conscience (1 Corinthians 7:7-9). And always there is the need to be in submission — both of them in submission to God and the woman in submission to the man.

CONCLUSION: The Disease of the ‘Spirit of Jezebel’

Now, despite all the above scriptural input, women are running around finding no problem with teaching and leading as a public ministry to vast numbers of people. Why do you think this should be? Firstly, many churches have imbibed the doctrine of ‘wokeism’ and feminist ideology, especially the mainstream denominations, but many evanjellycal churches too these days. Secondly, in the rebellious milieu of today so many newly (allegedly) converted females refuse to be under the authority and teaching of a man in real life (claiming that the Holy Spirit will give them special revelation) and they also have no problem whatsoever setting themselves up as teachers on social media (even though they have only professed to be “Christians” for five minutes), despite Paul saying that even elders (those who do have authority) should not be recent converts (1 Timothy 3:6). It is also stated in Scripture that not many should seek to be teachers because they will be subjected to a stricter judgement (James 3:1), yet these rebellious women can hardly contain their desire to set themselves up as teachers. That prescription of James should stop them dead in their tracks!

I have to say that the reason that nonsense ministries thrive so opulently is because people in general love nonsense! In fact, they are addicted to it. The more outlandishly speculative they are, the more the mass of people love them. Some of the many teachings which the ministries based on false foundations put out there (most of which are run by women) are the idea of a pre-tribulational “rapture”, nutty utterly off-the-wall Endtime ideas and interpretations of the Book of Revelation (or “Revelations” as they mistakenly refer to it), a vituperative denial of Divine election, a scornful denial of the eternal security of the saved, a vicious denial of Jesus’ very clear teaching about what is known as “hell”, a bitter despisal of what are known as the “doctrines of grace”, with a load of baloney about a flat earth thrown in, plus some deeply ignorant and loopy ideas about “chemtrails”, plus many more equally off-the-wall notions. The ignorance — nay, wilful ignorance — is phenomenal!

All this is a disease that I call the ‘spirit of Jezebel’ and it is rampant both in the world and in the churches. These folks with the ‘spirit of Jezebel’ seem to have no problem whatsoever ignoring the fact that pastors and teachers (elders) in the church should be male, by apostolic decree. They want the limelight and they want it now. But why should all this be happening at this point in history? There are solid reasons. The Women Leader/Teacher bandwagon is not some isolated development which has happened in a vacuum. It is all part of the gathering apostasy which was prophesied by the Apostle Paul (2 Thessalonians 2:3), and includes a multitude of other delusional, trendy bandwagons which have hit the church by way of impostorship and counterfeit during the last century and a half and are now considered to be normative. So far has human society strayed from the values, mores, and principles that I am presenting in this article that most would think that I am a cultural dinosaur! But these are the values, mores, and principles that God has laid down in His word for the stable betterment of church life, family life, and for the authentic representation of spirituality in the wider world.

The Scriptures clearly show what is expected for the comportment and mindset of a woman. The Book of Proverbs carries many insights into the wonders of a man having a real woman in his life. Having made the shrewd and accurate observation that “It is better to live on a corner of the roof, than to share a house with a contentious woman” (Proverbs 25:24), which could be applied to so many women today (whether professing ‘Christians’ or not!), Proverbs 31:10-31 provides the much-needed counterbalance. In fact, those verses form an acrostic poem, each verse beginning with the successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The opening three verses state this: “Who can find a wife of noble character? She is far more precious than rubies. The heart of her husband trusts in her, and he lacks nothing of value. She brings him good and not harm all the days of her life” (Proverbs 31:10-12). Finding a woman such as this, who is soft and kind, with a gentle and tranquil spirit, and gentle of voice too, respectful of her man, not at all contentious, a woman who loves beautiful things, whose own beauty comes from within rather than outwardly, who clearly knows the Spirit, who brings joy into a household, who does not practise psychological or spiritual bypassing, who has no burning need to set herself up as a pastor/teacher on the internet, and who is perceptive enough to see through the madness of the world though not discouraged by what she perceives — finding such a woman today is like trying to find a firefly in Antarctica. The lack of those qualities in a woman should be clear dealbreakers before considering any relationship.

Such a woman would obviously have no problem with this article. She would recognise it as true and needing to be said. She knows her strengths and has no need to be pushing herself forward at every opportunity.

If there is a problem with this article, it is that most likely those who do read it will already be in complete agreement with it, whereas those who really do need to read it would not touch it with a ten-foot bargepole or will abandon their reading as soon as an unfamiliar idea looms into view — a very common way of avoiding having to rethink the wayward ideas with which one has been inculcated! Short of Divine intervention, that is sadly how it will be. So be it! Amen.

.

.

.

© Copyright, Alan Morrison, 2026
[The copyright on my works is merely to protect them from any wanton plagiarism which could result in undesirable changes (as has actually happened!). Readers are free to reproduce my work, so long as it is in the same format and with the exact same content and its origin is acknowledged]

.