What a beautiful thing God has done! Now do we see any indication here that God wanted woman to have any dominion over Adam? No, she was made from Adam and Adam is the one who named her "woman" (Hebrew: Isha). She was not created to be his authority figure. Rather, the purpose God had in mind when creating woman was for her to help or assist the man. As we will see later, this is the reason why a woman is not to have authority over a man. This is her role all throughout the scriptures. She is to be loved and cherished by man in the home, and in the assembly. Every scripture which speaks of a man's and woman's role must be interpreted with this understanding as its backdrop. In the same way a fish was made to swim in the water and a bird to fly in the heavens, woman was created to be a help and companion to man.

Now imagine for a moment that you are Eve ("Chawah", as Adam named her in Gen. 3:20). Before God took her from Adam she did not exist. So in one moment she was nothing, and in the next moment she was. She was then brought to Adam to be a help to him. I think we can be sure that she didn't have any problem understanding her purpose. She was created for Adam, to be a companion, to be a help and to assist him. This is what a woman was created to do. Understanding this will help us to understand the role of women in the body of Christ. We can be sure that her role in the body of Christ fits well with what she was created to do. It is sure to be a role that is one of support, help and assistance to the man.

Ladies, to help put things in perspective for a moment, please ponder the common sense logic that is given in God's will for your life. Even the world realizes that a company needs some kind of management to make important decisions about the direction of things. Suppose there were a company that just let all the employees make all of the decisions? What if the employees made all the decisions and management just stood there silent and useless? Totally preposterous, right? Yet, this is the common picture of a home in today's world where "Women's lib" (or as a comparison, "Employee lib") has taken hold. Imagine a company where the "employees" call the shots and make it so that management either obeys or is going to be miserable. Today, the manager of the home often just stays out of the way and mumbles a few words here and there. It ought not be so. Even common sense tells us that YGod is right!

Ephesians 5:23-24 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the assembly; and He is the Savior of the body. 24 Therefore, just as the assembly is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

Of course, if the husband does not lead with love there will also be a home with much chaos and confusion. But he answers directly to God and God is (should be, must be) in control.

1Corinthians 11:3 - But I would have you know, that the head of every man is the Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of the Christ is GOD.

Aquila and Priscilla were a husband and wife team that proclaimed ministery in various ways. They were Paul's traveling companions (Acts 18:18) and at some point had an assembly in their house (1Cor 16:19). In this instance they saw that Barnabas was in need of a more accurate explanation of the way of Elohim. Is there anything in this verse which would prove that Priscilla did not walk in her role as a help-meet and support to her husband? Prominent Greek Scholar A.T. Robertson makes the following comment about the word translated "took him aside" (KJV "took him unto them") in this scripture:

Act 18:26 - They took him unto them (proselabonto). Second aorist middle (indirect) indicative of proslambanô, old verb, to their home and heart as companion (cf. the rabbis and the ruffians in 17:5). Probably for dinner after service.

Note that it seems likely that Barnabas was invited to their home. Since correcting Barnabas would take some time to do, it seems reasonable to suggest that they met for dinner. The New International Version translates verse 24 the following way:

Acts 18:26 (NIV) He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

In such a situation, it would only make sense that Priscilla prepared the meals and did other support duties while Aquila took on the role of teaching. They functioned together as a ministry to the saints and there is nothing here which proves that Priscilla was teaching or having authority over Apollos. God gave special roles to the husband and wife and when both of them are walking in those roles as a ministry team it is a beautiful picture of exactly how things are supposed to be


Gala 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Chirst. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

What is concluded from the above verse is a woman is 'equal' to men and can assume the role of the man in the assembly. But is this what it is really saying? Since there is neither male nor female in Christ, would it be okay for a man to behave as a female and put on pretty dresses? Or does God make it so that men can now bear children? Obviously, the fact that we are all "one in Christ Jesus"  does not negate the roles God has given each of us since creation. Men should still be men and women should still be women. It is the warped and perverted minds of this generation that want to even go so far as to let men marry men and women marry women. I assure you that the acceptance of homosexuality and lesbianism is in many ways a product of the "women's lib" mindset. So what was really meant when it says we are all "one in Christ Jesus?"

Let's examine another scripture where 'oneness' is spoken of:

John 17:20-21 I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 

Jesus himself prayed that we would all be one. Notice that He also prayed that we would be "one" as the Father is "one" with the Son. In fact, He prayed that we would be "one" with the Father and the Son when He said "that they may be one in us." Does our oneness with Jesus/God mean that we are God's equal when it comes to authority? Does it mean that we can be their leader? Are we living the role we were created to live if we chose to exercise authority over God? Of course not. As the body of Christ, our oneness with one another does not take away the purpose for which we were created. We are to be one in purpose, and will and thought... with God. When we are "one" in God and Jesus, we are "one" with each other as well! We are all "one body". Each member of the body performs different tasks. The hand does not perform the same task as the foot. The fingers do not perform the same task as the legs. Woman was not created to lead men any more than we were created to lead Jesus. The fact is, if a woman chooses to take over the role of a man, she is actually tearing down the oneness in the body. She is making the mistake of Eve in the garden and tearing down the order required for oneness to occur: