Guest Post: Leadership in the Church

The Senior Thesis of Kingston Adams

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash

At Grace Church it has now become a tradition for a high school senior to share a thesis for the church on “Graduation Sunday.” This year the honor went to Kingston Adams. His paper is evidence that, despite all the chaos, this generation is doing many things right. God is on the move:

---

Have you ever heard of the term “rage bait?” Rage bait are controversial statements aimed to bring out a negative emotional response, such as anger, frustration, or outrage. Example: There are only two genders. Abortion is murder. Love is not love. Fruit belongs on pizza. In a worldly setting, those statements, other than maybe the last one, could insight negative feedback, but in a biblical setting, there is one “rage bait” that sends many into a tizzy: “Women should be silent in church.” Perhaps we are looking at this statement through a worldly filter, when we should be using a biblical filter.

The role of men and women in church leadership has been persistent theological “rage bait” throughout church history. From the early church to today, the conversation around gender roles in ministry has generated intense debate, particularly regarding the extent to which women may serve in positions of authority within the local church. However, Scripture provides consistent and clear teaching on this issue. A central passage in this discussion is 1 Timothy 2:8–3:13, based on this passage, men are called to lead in the church while women are instructed to listen and be submissive, aligning with God’s design for order and authority in worship. This passage—and others like it—grounds male leadership not in cultural norms but in theological truths tied to creation and God’s design for the church.

Paul’s first letter to Timothy was written to a young church leader serving in Ephesus, a city heavily influenced by pagan religions, particularly the cult of Artemis, which elevated female deities and priestesses. Paul addresses false teaching, doctrinal confusion, and disorder in worship. In this context, Paul exhorts Timothy to restore proper church structure and authority. 1 Timothy 2:8–15 provides instructions for behavior in worship, culminating in a clear distinction between the roles of men and women. In verse 12, Paul writes: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” This instruction is not arbitrary; it is explained and supported in the verses that follow.

Paul immediately appeals to the creation narrative, stating: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:13), and “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (2:14). These references point back to Genesis 2–3, where God created Adam before Eve and assigned him the responsibility of naming, cultivating, and protecting the garden. Eve, created as a “helper suitable for him” (Genesis 2:18), was given a complementary role. Paul’s argument is that this design continues to inform the structure of leadership within the church. By rooting his teaching in creation rather than culture, Paul indicates that these instructions are timeless and universally applicable.

The pattern of male headship established in Genesis continues throughout Scripture. In the Old Testament, all priests were male, as were nearly all prophets, kings, and judges. While there are notable exceptions—such as Deborah in Judges 4–5—even she functioned more as a prophetess and judge than a spiritual authority over the covenant community in the temple context. Importantly, Deborah herself acknowledges male headship when she summons Barak to lead the military campaign, and he insists she accompany him—demonstrating his reluctance rather than a reversal of biblical gender roles.

In the New Testament, Jesus selected twelve male apostles (Mark 3:13–19), despite having many devoted female followers. This was not a reflection of social norms, as Jesus frequently broke with cultural expectations regarding women (e.g., the Samaritan woman in John 4, Mary sitting at His feet in Luke 10:38–42). The choice of male apostles reflects divine intent for leadership in the church—not societal conformity. Furthermore, the qualifications for overseers (elders) and deacons in 1 Timothy 3:1–13 consistently use masculine language. Paul writes, “An overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife...” (3:2), clearly assuming male leadership. The same language appears in verse 12 regarding deacons.

Some argue that Paul was merely reflecting the patriarchal culture of his time. However, Paul’s own statements undercut this view. In 1 Corinthians 11:3, he writes: “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” This verse not only affirms male headship in the home and church but also shows that submission within biblical relationships reflects the divine relationship between the Son and the Father. Christ’s willing submission to the Father does not diminish His divinity, just as a woman’s submission in church leadership does not imply inferiority. This framework is grounded in theology, not cultural accommodation.

In addition, 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 states: “As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” Paul reinforces the idea that the pattern of male leadership is not local to one church but is consistent across all the churches he oversees. The reference to “the Law” connects his reasoning again to the Old Testament and creation order, not to Greco-Roman social customs.

Nevertheless, the New Testament affirms the valuable role of women in the ministry of the church. Women like Priscilla (Acts 18), Phoebe (Romans 16:1–2), Lydia (Acts 16), and Mary Magdalene played important roles in the early church. However, none of these women are described as holding elder or overseer positions. Priscilla, for example, helped instruct Apollos privately alongside her husband, but she did not preach or exercise authority over a congregation. Phoebe is described as a “servant” or “deacon,” but there is no indication she held teaching authority over men. Titus 2:3–5 explicitly assigns older women the role of teaching and mentoring younger women—an essential ministry that aligns with biblical gender roles.

A common objection is that restricting women from pastoral leadership is oppressive or sexist. Yet Scripture’s model for leadership is one of servant leadership, not superiority. Luke 22:26 states: “Let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves.” Biblical leadership reflects Christ, who “did not come to be served, but to serve” (Matthew 20:28). Additionally, submission is not a lesser calling. Jesus Himself submitted to the will of the Father (John 6:38), and the church is called to submit to Christ. These relationships display beauty and harmony, not inequality.

Moreover, the concept of submission and headship is not exclusive to leadership roles but extends to family structures. Ephesians 5:22–25 teaches that wives are to submit to their husbands “as to the Lord,” and husbands are to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” This mutual dynamic of sacrificial leadership and willing submission is the same model presented for church leadership.

In conclusion, Paul’s teaching in 1 Timothy 2:8–3:13 provides a clear, theologically grounded case for male leadership in the church. His reasoning is rooted in the creation order, supported by consistent scriptural qualifications, and affirmed by the broader teaching of the New Testament. Leadership roles are reserved for qualified men, not as a matter of cultural tradition, but as a reflection of God’s created design and divine order. While women play essential and honored roles in the life of the church, these roles do not include teaching or exercising authority over men in corporate worship or governance.

The biblical model of leadership and gender roles in the church directly contributes to true human flourishing according to God’s design. Scripture teaches that men and women fulfill their highest purpose not by seeking interchangeable roles, but by joyfully embracing the distinct responsibilities assigned by their Creator. True flourishing arises when men lead with Christlike humility and servant-heartedness, and women exercise their vital ministries within the framework of biblical order. Just as harmony within the family reflects God's design for human well-being, the church, when ordered according to Scripture, becomes a place where both men and women thrive, honoring their God-given dignity and purpose. In this way, obedience to God’s structure for leadership is not oppressive but life-giving, leading the church toward the fullness of joy and peace found in Christ.

Therefore, I urge men to step up, get out of the LONGHOUSE,¹ and embrace their God-given role as spiritual leaders with humility, integrity, and servant-heartedness. I encourage women to support, respect, and participate in ministry within the biblical framework—especially in teaching, discipling, and mentoring other women. And I call the church to uphold the authority of Scripture, reject the pressure to conform to shifting cultural trends, and affirm the divine wisdom in God’s design for leadership and order in the body of Christ.

1. Note from Jed: The “Longhouse” is a metaphor to describe a culture or atmosphere dominated by female sensitivities, manners and social rules. The name is taken from Nordic and other communities that had a central house that was literally long, where all the community’s women would gather to knit, spin, socialize, etc. By ignoring the Scriptures Kingston examines above, many churches have become longhouses. And men can intuitively sense it as soon as they walk in the doors. To “leave the longhouse” does not mean demeaning or ignoring the feminine; not at all. It simply means being informed by the Bible in all things, even when it conflicts with our feminist assumptions.