Hearing Her Voice, Revised Edition: A Case for Women Giving Sermons

Fresh Perspectives on Women in Ministry

by John Dickson

A fresh approach to the hot-button topic of women in ministry
Based on his study of a key word for “teaching” in the New Testament—an activity often thought to be prohibited to women—and on various other kinds of public speaking in which women in Scripture clearly participated, scholar John Dickson builds a case for women preachers.

This expanded edition of Hearing Her Voice, published originally as a short ebook, presents an entirely new and convincing biblical argument. Focused and purposefully limited in its conclusions, Dickson’s case has the potential to change minds and merits careful consideration by complementarians and egalitarians alike.

This book will be useful for pastors, Bible teachers, college and seminary students, professors, and lay leaders who wrestle with the topic of women’s roles in ministry, and it will appeal to many with its fresh approach to this hot-button topic.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Nonfiction, Christianity, Faith, Gender, Religion

107 pages, Kindle Edition

First published December 25, 2012

About the author

John focuses on the big ideas that have shaped our world.

His journey is an eclectic one. Starting out as a singer-songwriter, he now works as a writer, speaker, historian of religion (focusing on early Christianity and Judaism), media presenter, Anglican minister, and director of a multi-media think tank.

With an honours degree in theology from Moore Theological College Sydney, and a PhD in history from Macquarie University, John is also an Honorary Fellow of the Department of Ancient History (Macquarie), and teaches a course on the Historical Jesus at the University of Sydney (Department of Hebrew, Biblical and Jewish Studies) .

John is a founding director of the Centre for Public Christianity(CPX), an independent research and media company promoting informed discussion about social, ethical and religious issues in modern life.

His book “The Christ Files: How Historians Know what they Know about Jesus” was made into a four-part documentary which aired nationally on Channel 7 in 2008. Now a best-selling DVD, it also won the 2008 Pilgrim Media award (see www.thechristfiles.com.au). His more recent Life of Jesus also aired on Channel 7 in 2009 (see www.lifeofjesus.tv).

Reviews

[Lara Knight · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow, this was so insightful and really helpful!

It presented an excellent case for the different contexts of the word 'teaching', in Paul's context and in ours.

I appreciated that it considered things from a predominantly unbiased perspective, and the logical approach was clear to follow.

There is always going to be personal influence, but John Dickson gave a very carefully considered opinion, taking care to acknowledge all of the major groups of thought.

Overall, this greatly benefitted me as I seek answers to my questions about the role of women in church, and it very clearly explained the passage from 1 Timothy.

[Susan Barnes · Rating 3 out of 5]

John Dickson makes the comment in the introduction of his book, Hearing her Voice that there will be those who will be disappointed that his book doesn't go far enough in allowing women to hold leadership positions in all areas of the Christian Church. While others will believe it goes too far in allowing women to preach. I'm in the first of these categories but nevertheless found the book very helpful.

Dickson makes the point that in our context we use the word "teach" in a broader range of ways – everything from sermons, to Sunday School lessons, to giving instruction in sport, or a job. Paul, however, uses the word in a very restricted way to mean the original passing on of what was to become the Scriptures as we know them today. The work of memorizing Jesus' words and the events of his life became the task of qualified men, like the passing on of the Old Testament Scriptures had been. Memorization was valued above the written word in that culture at that time.

Therefore it is not Biblically accurate to use the word "teach" in relation to a sermon. We would better reflect Biblical terminology if we were to use the word "exhort" or "prophesy" to refer to a sermon. The tasks of exhortation and prophesy were not restricted to men so Dickson makes the comment there is no reason why women cannot fulfil the task of bring a sermon.

This is the gist of Dickson's argument. He writes very strongly and sometimes repetitively to get his message across. Since I agree with his position, it was an easy book for me to read and enjoy. No doubt I would have felt differently if I disagreed with him!

[Peter Yock · Rating 3 out of 5]

Katharine and I really enjoyed reading this together. Helpfully stimulating. But ultimately, we thought his take on the word 'teaching' was too narrow, his take on 'authority' was anemic, and we weren't convinced by his overall argument. Still, there was lots of helpful stuff along the way and the book helped us engage well with the issue of women teaching in church.

[Schuyler · Rating 5 out of 5]

John Dickson is a thoughtful Bible teacher/scholar from Australia who I've had the pleasure of hearing guest preach at my church in MI several times. I didn't know he wrote a book about women in ministry, but have been so impacted by his depth of thought that I wanted to read his take. I read the revised edition (133 pages) on Hoopla. 

Dickson defines teaching in 1 Tim 2:12 differently than modern sermon giving. In New Testament culture, he says, exhortation or prophesying would be more equivalent with their emphasis on explanation and application, while "Teachers were not simply givers of sermons; they were the primary means of fixing in the minds of churches the foundational deposit firstly delivered by the apostles." Because they did not have the written New Testament at this time, the teachers were in charge of accurately preserving the words and life of Jesus and the inerrant teachings of the apostles through oral tradition. Women were specifically prohibited from that task, but not from comforting, exhorting, and applying the word to the congregation. 

While Dickson does not endorse women being elders, he does see a biblical place for women providing sermons to the congregation in partnership with their brothers in Christ in a way that is faithful with the biblical gifts still present today. Regardless of your view on cessationism, his arguments would be relevant to both sides. 

Readers may at points find it repetitive, but I think he repeats his definitions often so the reader won't forget or misunderstand what he is saying. It's a limited argument with very specific applications, but super helpful introduction to someone like me who hasn't done a lot of reading on it.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Still thinking about this... Either way, Dickson is a great writer; clear, persuasive, and carefully considered.

[Amy Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s not what you think. The position presented here could fit into either a complementarian or egalitarian schematic.

Summary: Dickson, through exegesis and historical context, defines “teaching” as Paul uses it in the pastoral epistles (including 1 Timothy 2) as the laying down and preserving intact of Jesus teaching through an oral tradition. With the canonization of the New Testament, this kind of authoritative preservation is done by the written Word, not Pauline “teachers,” as all preaching and teaching should be judged by Scripture itself. Exposition of a specific passage of Scripture, Dickson says, is closer to exhortation or prophecy: two activities we see women doing regularly in Scripture.

Evaluation: Steve and I talked about the premise of this book, he said he would need to see extensive word studies and historical background/extrabiblical research for that specific definition of “teaching,” and I think the book really provides a solid foundation in each of these areas. It will be interesting to see how further research either supports or disproves this position.

Who should read it: Definitely worth a read for evangelical complementarians. I think it always helps to read good, unreactive arguments that we disagree with to help us sharpen where we actually stand. I’ve seen a tendency to lump all leadership and many serving roles into the role of pastor/elder and then exclude women from these roles in real desire to be faithful to scripture. Often though, this “lumping” puts barriers in front of women’s ability to legitimately exercise spiritual gifts in serving the church. I think complementarian men, especially those who might consider leadership a particularly male role, have a great responsibility to exercise in making sure that women are listened to as spiritual mothers and sisters and enabled to serve the church.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Dickson is a compelling writer. He will be at odds with many in his book that women should be able to give sermons. Dickson, theologically trained at Moore College and an incredible historian is not afraid of taking an opposite view of many of his contemporaries. Thoughtful, provocative and generous in acknowledging others will not agree with him. A gifted writer makes this book easy to read despite its very complex nature. I now look forward to reading the likes of Peter Bolt's and others' responses.

[Tim Goldsmith · Rating 4 out of 5]

A patient, deliberate, thoughtful & scholarly work (as usual) by John Dickson.
I particularly appreciate the opportunity that this book provides to talk about a subject which is very important, the answer to which is often assumed rather than agonised over.

Here's to many meaningful conversations being born of this work m

[Luke · Rating 4 out of 5]

Three stars for clarity of material; five stars for willingness to take on a daunting topic with deftness, and there's your average of a four-star estimation. I've found Dickson helpful with his Doubters guides and The Christ Files. I've always appreciated Dickson's ability to limit the scope of what he's trying to prove. He said early on this was not an issue of whether or not women can be ordained to ministerial offices in the church (that is rightly a somewhat connected but separate issue).

Now, this could very well be the case that I'm not swift of mind for what he's saying, but I wasn't tracking his argument of "teaching" in the New Testament being "laying down and preserving the apostolic deposit". He came back to that point repeatedly, but I didn't sense he'd proven it in spite of several statements. Another issue was that even though this book was only about 80 pages long, it had the feel of 160. I sensed repetitiveness and wordiness throughout.

In the closing, Dickson makes the case of women being disallowed from only one thing (teaching), explicitly encouraging women to prophesy, and nowhere else being forbidden from other matters. All that is true. However, Dickson seems to have allowed the silence (not being forbidden) to color his sense that these matters are open to women. (Granted, we could have the same conversation about men...I get where the logic can take us...then who would speak?)

To be honest, this ends up being a classic case of where one can generally accept a writer's conclusions without being convinced of the premises. I don't think that Dickson's explanation of what "teaching" was and continues to be is very convincing, and I believe teaching, exhorting, etc., might be more tied to the issue of ecclesiastical authority than one might imagine. On that matter of authority, I'll go full disclosure and say that, yes, I believe that the biblical data leans strongly to having bishops and presbyters/priests be men only (yes, I'm aware I'm using Anglican categories; there's a reason for that...I'm Anglican) but that we should encourage both qualified men AND women to be deacons. I think a strong case can be made for that from Scripture. In that vein, provided that a qualified woman is under the authority of her priest and bishop, might there be no reason to bar a woman from giving a sermon? One could make the argument there are many instances where this may be feasible. I am careful to say "may" and that this matter is one where I think one might make a "case". That's different from "ironclad proof", to be sure.

That's one final matter about the book. The one I read had differing subtitles. On the front cover, the subtitle of "Hearing Her Voice" is "A Biblical Invitation for Women to Preach". On the inside of the book, the subtitle is "A Case for Women Delivering Sermons". Those are actually two differing stances. The first is a more bold assertion; the second is a limited argument set forth as a possibility. Maybe other editions have the subtitles more uniform.

However, Dickson's book deserves a hearing. There is no question he desires to equip the church and empower the saints. That's entirely commendable. And this little book, in spite of some of my reservations, is the best argument for women preaching that I have yet encountered.

[Benjamin Razey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dickson’s Hearing Her Voice is a well-written defence of women giving sermons in the church. Dickson raises a strong, coherent and biblically rich case for this theological position. His articulation is clear throughout and he does well in engaging with those who may disagree with him. Overall, Dickson’s conclusions are sound and reasonable, and I would align with him throughout.

I did have two areas I wished Dickson would delve further into. Namely:
-He doesn’t tackle the issue of why Paul would disallow “women” to “teach” rather than disallowing “anyone who isn’t an Apostle.” The gender divide that is clearly raised by Paul isn’t really expounded by Dickson, and I think it would have been helpful for him to concisely tackle this concern in his conclusion (where he seeks to engage with some potential viewpoints or disagreement).
-He engages well with those who may disagree with his points, but doesn’t consider any potential views that would agree with him in conclusion (women can preach) but not methodology. For example, to open his 4th chapter, Dickson writes, “If we wholly equate the modern sermon with ancient ‘teaching’ (διδάσκω), it makes sense to believe that women should be excluded from the pulpit.” This sentence suggests that if Dickson’s specific argument about why women should be allowed to preach is proven wrong, no further argument stands in support of this conclusion. This is a dangerous conclusion to draw as it wholly discredits all other reasonable arguments in favour of women preaching.

Overall, however, Dickson’s book is a great read, and I would commend it to anyone wrestling with the topic and wondering about a biblical case for women giving sermons in the church!

[Rachel I. · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read that brought depth to this topic. He was clear that he was only making the case that a woman should be allowed to “preach a sermon.” His main argument was we misunderstand the term “teach” when we try to interpret passages like 1 Tim 2. We often lump together all of the speaking gifts - prophesying, preaching, teaching, exhorting, evangelizing - when they are distinct. Teaching is not merely imparting some wisdom or understanding (exegesis), but it is the passing down of essential truths, as the apostles were responsible for before the full canon was formed. Therefore, preaching a sermon is often more similar to prophesying or exhorting than to teaching in this way. He does admit that preaching may at times involve a sense of teaching as he has defined it, and when it does, it should be left for a man to do. I think this gets a little muddy, as it may be difficult to determine this distinction before a woman gets up to preach a sermon.

[Abigail Stolberg · Rating 2 out of 5]

I finally finished this little book. In my opinion, it should be even shorter. It was difficult for me to engage with, and some of that is definitely just me, but I really did not enjoy the writing. It seemed convoluted. (This is such a nitpick, but the footnotes were pages long and just made me crazy.)
I’m not particularly convinced by his argument, although if it turns out to be less obscure than it seems to me, that might make a difference. The author argues that women can preach, but not “preserve or lay down the apostolic deposit,” because we’ve misunderstood what “teaching” means. Ultimately I think it still leaves me with the question: no matter what teaching means, why is it restricted to men?

[Samuel Kassing · Rating 3 out of 5]

An Anglican take on women preaching. Dickson makes the argument that the modern sermon can not be equated with the NT task of teaching.

I’d need to hear more at some key junctures of his argument. But, this was simply an introductory ebook. So I can’t fault him for that.

I think the gentleness and tone throughout the book are excellent and his arguments are even handed. I’m still left wondering what this would look like in practice though and why he maintains a male only eldership.

[Brooke · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought Dickson clearly and succinctly argued his point with relevant historical and biblical evidence that what Paul refers to as teaching in 1 Tim 2 is not equivalent to the modern sermon

[Andy Littleton · Rating 4 out of 5]

I appreciate that this book attempts to invite us into more complex questions regarding men and women in ministry. I have wondered about similar nuance and early church practice. Though it doesn’t land in the most clear place, I found it to be helpful and thought provoking.

[Daniel Pass · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very technical but needs to be to explain his reasoning. Clear conclusion of 4 responses.

[Christa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Five stars for such a clear argument and humble tone.

[Aaron Carlberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

What an interesting little book. Dickson says something in the introduction to the effect of...there will be those who will be disappointed that his book doesn't go far enough in allowing women to hold leadership positions in all areas of the Christian Church and others will believe it goes too far in allowing women to preach. I can totally understand what he means after reading this book.

At times I felt many of his arguments were too simplistic, though he will actually point that out himself. He says that the early word for teaching was understood differently and much more narrowly than we understand it today...but I would also say his definition at times also falls into the same category.

It will be a great book to spark discussion though. Other reviewers kind of get on his case for being a "soft-complimentarian," but give Dickson a break...he had the guts to make reasoned stand and position on something that could divide a lot of churches and did it in a very reasoned and honorable way in regard to the Scriptures.

[Laura Tiessen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not the easiest to read at times, but gives a clear rationale for women giving sermons in the church today.

[Karla Renee Goforth Abreu · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author confuses the reader by changing the word meanings of teaching and what it means to preach and all sorts of other quite ridiculous arguments. For example, apparently a woman can preach/teach but not in today's manner of teaching because that is not what Scripture means. A woman cannot expound nor explain any of the teachings of the apostles but she can preach/teach. One wonders what, in the name of heaven, A female is to preach, if not Christ and him crucified, the Gospel, according to the apostles' teaching. It is a hodgepodge of contorted deciphering and silly notions that this author has attempted to make an unfounded case for.

[Stephen G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Dickson lays out a very clear and concise argument that women should not be excluded from preaching on a Sunday morning because the modern day sermon is not equivalent to Paul's idea of teaching in 1 Tim 2:12. In his conclusion, he summarizes his argument in seven points that are roughly as follows:

1) Paul mentions different types of speaking: prophesying, teaching, admonishing, exhorting, etc.
2) While these different types overlap in some ways, there are distinct functions of speaking.
3) 1 Tim 2:12 restricts women teaching men but not women speaking in other forms (e.g. prophesying or exhorting)
4) Point four essentially repeats point three.
5) Paul's idea of teaching is an individual passing on the "deposit" of apostolic words in a time when the canon was not complete and the church was dependent on oral tradition.
6) No passage in the NT equates teaching with an exposition and application of a text (i.e. Dickson's view of what a sermon is)
7) A modern sermon is more in line with what Paul describes as "exhorting" or "prophesying."

It's a very nuanced argument that I had not come across before. Judging by the book's endorsements, like J.I. Packer and Craig Blomberg, some highly respected theologians find Dickson's argument worthy of being considered.

Despite what is a very clear argument and the respectable endorsements, ultimately, I found Dickson's case unconvincing. I think Dickson's view of the biblical gift of teaching is too narrow. It's so narrow, now that we have a finalized canon, he does not believe the gift of teaching (that Paul had in mind) is even in existence today.

I grant the first five points of Dickson's argument. However, points six and seven seem to miss the mark for me. Dickson seems to underemphasize what a sermon is. To me, I agree Paul's idea of what teaching is was different due to Dickson's point that churches were dependent on the apostolic tradition being delivered orally. However, now that the canon is closed, the teacher's work is far from done. While teachers aren't needed to orally transmit the apostolic tradition, they are needed to guard that deposit by making clear what the Scriptures actually says and what that deposit actually is. The sheer number of cults and even the endless number of denominations within Christianity today reveal the need for good teachers. It feels like Dickson has simply swapped "exposition and application" for "teaching" to avoid calling the modern day sermon, "teaching."

Also, and I understand many might disagree with this point based on their denomination, but to me prophesy is a spontaneous revealing of God's will for a specific person or scenario that they wouldn't know naturally for their encouragement or conviction (1 Cor 14, Acts 11:28, Acts 21:11). Exhortation is encouragement to obey what has been taught (more often than not, our issue isn't that we don't know what the Bible says but it's that we don't have the strength to obey what it says-- thus the need for exhortation). A sermon might have elements of both prophesy and exhortation, but it is mainly what Dickson calls "exposition and application," but is really "teaching."

[Logan S · Rating 3 out of 5]

On the positive side, I need to give Dickson a lot of credit for making an argument based on exegesis and history—that doesn’t seem to happen a lot these days in books arguing for women preaching (or, one step further than Dickson, ordination). So kudos for actually looking at the text and arguing from that standpoint.

However, I was not at all convinced of his argument. His interpretation of “teaching” is far too narrow, and I don’t think it’s actually that difficult to see this.

I was shocked he doesn’t even address 1 Timothy 5:17, “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” Paul says there are some elders-an office that continues through the present day-who devote themselves to preaching and teaching (διδασκαλία). Teaching. This right here shows that Dickson's argument that the same type of teaching does not continue today as it did back in Timothy's day is not accurate. His definition of "to teach" (διδάσκω) is too narrow and that matters because this assertion is a major pillar of his overall argument. Paul is saying that there are elders-today we might call them "lead pastor" or "preaching pastor"-who labor in preaching and teaching. Teaching continues even today, it isn't limited to simply "preserving and passing on the apostolic traditions about Jesus" (p. 61). Every time a pastor gets up to preach from God's Word, there is still teaching going on as he explains the meaning of the text and moves towards application and exhortation. Dickson even admits that there is always a degree of teaching going on in Bible exposition, though he says in a secondary sense (p. 68-69). If that's the case, then I do not see how 1 Timothy 2:12 has no bearing on that. Overall, though a commendable effort is made, this argument is lacking exegetically.

[Michael King · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dickson makes the case that women should be invited to give sermons to a mixed congregation in the church. Dickson's case primarily relies on his interpretation of the word "teaching" (didasko) as found in 1 Tim 2:12. Dickson argues that "teaching" was the practice of transmitting the "apostolic deposit" in the oral culture of the first and second century. Therefore, "teaching" should be distinguished from the modern practice of giving an exegetical sermon: 1 Tim 2:12 cannot be read as preventing a woman from giving an exegetical sermon.

I appreciated Dickson's clarity and succinctness. I also appreciated his attitude of humility and desire to avoid a tribalistic argument. I was encouraged to see the way he earnestly sought to engage with Scripture.

Without having done the hard work to go through each individual passage mentioned by Dickson, here are my three reservations to this book:
1) Dickson doesn't spend the time to make sense of 1 Tim 2:12 in its wider context (the only clear engagement I found was footnote 40 which was inconclusive).
2) Dickson doesn't seek to make sense of the broader anthropology of men and women in the Bible or comment on how this might impact our interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12.
3) Dickson very helpfully seeks to sharpen our understanding of "teaching" (didasko) in the New Testament. My gut feeling is that his interpretation of "teaching" as an act of oral transmission is too narrow to make sense of its semantic range in the New Testament. I don't think Timothy was merely reciting the words of Paul verbatim nor that he played a passive role in confirming or challenging the words of the members of his church. Yes, we need to acknowledge the oral culture in which Paul was writing. No, teaching was not only the act of transmission.

[Jennie]

I read another book in this series, Jesus, Justice, and Gender Roles, several years ago but wasn't interested in exploring the other viewpoints at the time. Recently, I've been listening to John Dickson's podcast, Undeceptions, and have been refreshed by his friendly, non-combative demeanor. In one of the Q&A episodes, he mentioned he authored this book, which piqued my curiosity.

I'm so glad I read this book. It's important to clarify that this book is not an argument for egalitarianism or the abolition of gender distinctions, which might disappoint some and relieve others (a point Dickson acknowledges early on). Instead, he presents a fascinating argument about the Greek word translated as "teach" in our English Bibles. Dickson openly admits that he's still refining his position. As a result, there are some interesting implications he doesn't fully flesh out. For instance, his argument seems to suggest that women giving sermons on a Sunday morning is not a violation of 1 Timothy 2:12, but a woman translating the Bible into a new language would be. If that is his interpretation, it's certainly one I haven't come across before, and it raises a lot of questions.

At the very least, you'll likely come away from this book with a bolstered conviction that the church should make greater efforts to utilize women's voices. The book also provides valuable insights into the transmission of Jewish doctrine in the first century, which is helpful beyond the immediate argument. Even if you don't agree with him on all points, this book will likely prompt a deeper examination of the issue.

[Phil Whittall · Rating 3 out of 5]

John Dickson is a minister in Australia and a senior research fellow in ancient history at Macquarie University in Sydney. He describes himself as a 'soft complementarian' and in this short e-book, Hearing Her Voice: A Case for Women Giving Sermons he makes the case for opening the pulpit to both men & women.

His argument is very simple and very concise but it's also limited. Dickson doesn't discuss leadership and as a result has ample opportunity to offend complementarians by going too far and egalitarians by not going far enough. Such is life when you stick your neck out into this debate.

In a nutshell Dickson argues that in the New Testament there are four different forms of public speaking evangelising, prophesying, exhorting and teaching and only one of those roles, teaching, is excluded to women. He then defines what he means by teaching and argues that what we call sermons are best described not as teaching but as exhortation or possibly even prophesying.

The point of contention is what does Dickson think teaching means? Dickson concludes that teaching (and yes we're thinking about 1 Tim 2:12) refers to 'preserving and laying down the body or oral traditions first handed over by the apostles.' As churches were being started, apostles would come and teach the words and sayings of Jesus and explain what they meant. This was the handing on of apostolic doctrine through the oral tradition. This task was given to reliable men and in a similar way the task of conveying a written message from the apostle faithfully to the churches would be a similar teaching task.

Dickson then argues that this role of laying down the fundamental layer of truth into a church has 'gone up a key' and is done through scripture - we no longer need teachers because scripture is our teacher. He argues that 'a sermon doesn't really preserve and lay down the apostolic traditions; it expounds and applies the Bible text where those traditions are already preserved and laid down." (kindle location 442)

Teaching is about preserving and laying down. Today, of course, believers can go straight to the Gospels and read Jesus' words...for themselves. No human being preserves and lays down the teachings of Jesus and the apostles any more. (loc 658)
So Dickson argues that while teaching should be done by men, most (if not all) sermons aren't teaching in the way Paul uses it and therefore sermons shouldn't be restricted simply to men.

He argues that we shouldn't be too troubled by the disappearance of the role of teacher because well we don't have a widows roll (1 Tim 5:9-11) and we might not be too fussed about that and the same goes for apostles. We're not worried that they're not around any more so why make a fuss about the role of teaching disappearing with the creation of the canon.

There's much to commend and I think many of his arguments are persuasive. Not all public speaking is restricted and those that aren't should be more open to women than they currently are, especially in complementarian churches. You don't have to listen to too many sermons to realise that in many churches what you are getting is exhortation rather than teaching. Sometimes that's with good biblical content and sometimes not.

However, my critique rests around his contention that teaching no longer exists today. I think Dickson focuses too much on scripture as a preserve of apostolic doctrine, a repository of divine wisdom and not enough on what it means to 'lay apostolic doctrine down' into the life of a church. You can, and some do, make the case for the ongoing role of the apostle today in laying down apostolic doctrine afresh in each generation and in each new church as churches continue to engage in mission.

However, if the language of apostles puts you off consider the role of a church planter - their job is to ensure to the best of their ability that the church is built on the foundations of the apostles and prophets. To ensure that foundation is properly laid down. That in the ongoing regeneration and renewal of the church, what is being built holds true to the apostolic mandate.

Or lets take another example, a new minister takes charge of a historic church that for many years has drifted in liberalism. The ministers job is to lay down again or perhaps (if it's a confessional church) lead the church to the rediscovery of the right foundations. However that task of leading a church through that change of foundation is precisely the role of teaching. The battles have (sometimes) changed but the task remains the same, 'this church believes this and not this.'

There are several times in my own experience as a church elder where doctrine gets questioned as a result of a wider controversy. This is not the 'should we do the Alpha course?' or 'let's call ourselves missional,' sort of questions. There are fundamental faith issues at stake. In just over ten years of being a church elder the doctrines of atonement and hell have been fundamentally challenged, Christian understanding of sexuality is being questioned & tested and behind that is the big question of how we read, use, understand and interpret scripture so we can know what scripture teaches and what it doesn't teach. Local church leaders are forced to answer the question, 'what does this church believe?' Answering those kind of questions, I think, is a teaching role.

Perhaps the main tool in the workshop that leaders use is preaching, but it seems from Paul's missionary adventures Paul uses far more than a sermon to lay foundations. It goes much wider including the training of key leaders like Apollos by drafting in key helpers like Aquila & Priscilla, or talking through the long hours of the night in extended conversation and in the doing so he would use all his team (men and women) to assist him. Paul laid down the foundations but he didn't do it alone and neither should we.

I've regularly invited women from my church to preach and I intend to continue to do so, so in one sense I'm already in agreement with Dickson and I'm grateful for the clearly laid out argument he makes. However, I'd argue that the role of teaching continues today in a way that Dickson does not, but calls for methods not confined to preaching and worked out in the context of a team. Basically, trying to do what Paul did. Simple.

[Andrew Brantley · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Dickson provides a thorough and compelling case for allowing women to deliver sermons in church. He focuses on the technical sense of the word "teaching" found in the Pastoral Epistles and argues that "teaching" refers to the authoritative transmission of the apostolic tradition in the early church. Sermons, he argues, do far more than this (at least they ought to). Paul's use of "exhortation" or "prophesy", activities open to women, are probably closer to the modern sermon than "teaching" (although teaching is certainly a part of the sermon). Dickson still argues from a complementarian position and believes that the position of elder and senior pastor is limited to called, qualified men. But, that does not mean that women are excluded from offering public expositions of scripture in the church.

This is a well argued, humble, and accessible work. Even if you reject his main argument that women should be allowed to deliver sermons, there are clearly a whole range of speaking activities that Paul leaves open to women in the church. "Hearing Her Voice" may not answer all your questions, but it is worth your time and attention.

[Luke Watts · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dickson is mostly clear in his argument, and does spend a great deal of time explaining (repeatedly) that the exclusivity of teaching by male elders in 1 Timothy 2:10-11 does not mean other public discourse. This is an easy & accessible book, though not a thorough one in its approach. That Dickson does not speak to 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is a telling one. I’m unsure it’s a text critical issue for him (not part of original, so no point engaging with it), or just an oversight. Either way, his silence on that is deafening. Also, he does spend a portion on hypotheticals rather dealing with textual issues such as 1 Corinthians 14, and an discussion on a category on authoritative teaching should not be done in isolation from a deeper discussion on the role of elders in general, gender more specifically, and the whole counsel of God on these issues (not just some epistles and historical references). By the end, you are left with an argument of “women can and should preach, they shouldn’t do authoritative teaching, but we don’t really know what that is, so we don’t really know where to draw the line”. Clarity with a splash of mud is the end result.

[Jordan Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a complementarian, this is the most convincing argument I’ve seen in favor of women giving sermons in the church. The main argument in this concise read is that Paul lists three speaking ministries in the church (teaching, exhortation, prophecy) and only teaching is clearly restricted to men (1 Tim. 2:12). Dickson argues that what we call a sermon today is more closely linked to exhortation than it is to teaching. While I think his argument may be too narrow, I do believe it is very important for the church to reflect and carefully discern what has been a traditional vs. biblical division of roles in the church. Women are critical to the edifying of the saints and I believe there is more room for speaking ministries than what we are accustomed to. At only 80 or so pages, this thought-provoking read leaves you wanting to learn more.

[Hannah Dietrich · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was an interesting and thought provoking text. It encourages a closer look at the role of women in the church. To be honest, I am rather skeptical of any argument suggesting women should have more power in the church simply because the idea fits perfectly into societal and political shifts, so it seems it would be a more acceptable today due to popularity rather than simply good arguments.

Dickson digs deeply into the concept of teaching as opposed to exhortation and prophesying. I feel the need to also analyze these terms in the Greek myself to ensure that his argument is founded solidly. However, if those are terms are defined rightly, then his position seems to be solidly founded.

I think it is important for Christians to always question tradition and compare traditions to scriptures to discover the truth, and for this purpose, this text was quite useful

[Connor Longaphie · Rating 1 out of 5]

This title is misleading. This doesn't really argue for females to be preaching. It argues that "teaching" and preaching are not the same but that teaching is a passing on of oral tradition which may or may not still be operative in the church and therefore women preaching is not forbidden. Not only is this position exceedingly odd, but having read the book I feel as if I still cant think of a single defense of this position. If you want to argue for women to be preaching then cool, do it. But don't do it by arguing that there was an oral tradition and an office or economy associated with it. -_- honestly, what? Even if, even if. Preaching is still part of the office of clergy, so the point would still fall flat. This... Ugh. What.