Why belabor the point about Deborah? Because it is crucial to see that nothing in Deborah’s example indicates that God is now overturning the pattern of male institutional leadership among his people and that women may now hold the position of authoritative teacher and leader in the church. 

In the debate over men’s and women’s roles in the church, egalitarians often point to Deborah as an example of a woman in institutional leadership, using her story to argue that women may also serve as authoritative teachers and leaders in the church. The argument proceeds as follows.

Deborah served Israel as both prophetess and judge, roles that required her to exercise authority over men and assume significant leadership responsibilities. Her appointment to leadership and the nature of her ministry demonstrate that women are also capable of filling positions of institutional leadership, including leadership within the church. The example of Deborah—together with other female leaders in both the Old and New Testaments—suggests that no hierarchy of leadership should exist between men and women in the church. Both women and men may hold positions of leadership and authority within the gathered congregation.

What should we make of Deborah? Specifically, does Deborah’s example overturn the complementarian position that only men should serve in the role of authoritative teacher and leader in the church (1 Tim 2:11-14)? In this article, I will argue that the nature of Deborah’s leadership and the historical context of her rule do not undermine the complementarian position.

Institutional Leadership in the Old and New Testament

I begin with this basic point: When it comes to institutional leadership, men are, almost without exception, the leaders and teachers of God’s people in both the Old and New Testaments. Adam was designed and designated by God to be the leader in relation to his wife (Gen 2:7-3:19; 1 Tim 2:13-14). God called Abraham to lead his family out of the land of Ur and settle in Canaan (Gen 12:1ff). God made a covenant with Abraham, and then his son, Isaac, and Isaac’s son Jacob. All men. The twelve tribes of Israel were all designated by their male progenitor (Gen 49:1-27; Ex 24:4).

When Israel needed deliverance from slavery, God called Moses to lead and teach the nation, and he appointed Aaron and his sons to serve as priests. From that point on, all priests in Israel were men. When Moses died, Joshua became the leader of Israel (Josh 1:1-9). All of Israel’s military leaders were men. With the exception of Deborah, all the judges were men. During the monarchy, with the exception of Athaliah, there were only kings, not queens, in Israel. Although there were a few queen mothers in Israel, they were never in the role of national ruler. While there were female prophetesses in Israel, all the writing prophets were male. Elijah and Elisha, two non-writing prophets, were men.

When you come to the New Testament, we see that Christ chooses twelve men to be his apostles, and these men would teach and lead the church, establishing it upon authoritative revelation and sound doctrine (Eph 2:20). When Judas betrays Jesus and commits suicide, the apostles pick another man to fill his place (Acts 1:20). Even after Pentecost, after the Spirit had come upon the church, when the apostles needed help with some administrative tasks, they chose seven men (Acts 6:3). When Paul instructed Timothy and Titus about who they were to place into leadership, he commanded that qualified men fill this role (1 Tim 3:1ff; Titus 1:5-9). All the writers of the New Testament Scriptures were men. When we come into the eternal state, there will be an everlasting memorial to the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles (Rev 21:12-14).

Deborah’s Ministry as Judge in Israel

Deborah’s ministry, then, stands out as an exception to the typical pattern in both Israel and the church. Up to this point in Israel’s history, all national leaders had been men. The appearance of Deborah in a role previously filled exclusively by men should prompt us to consider her significance in the narrative. Why, after a continuous succession of male leaders, does God raise up a woman? Was this meant to foreshadow a future overturning of male leadership through the coming of the Messiah and the outpouring of the Spirit? Or might there be another explanation that better accounts for the presence of a woman judge at this point in the redemptive storyline?

We should note that Deborah’s ministry as a judge occurred at a time when everyone in Israel was doing what was right in their own eyes (Judges 17:6; 21:25). The period of the judges was not a season of spiritual health for the nation, and many of the judges themselves exhibited serious character flaws. We should be careful, therefore, in assuming that these leaders are commendable examples. Barak’s cowardice (Judges 4:8), Gideon’s hesitancy to trust the Lord (Judges 6:36-40), Samson’s unbridled sensuality (Judges 14:1-3), and the Levite’s brutality (19:1-30) should not be followed as models of godly conduct. Yet, these men were, at the time, the appointed leaders of Israel. Leadership in Israel was a mess during the time of the judges.

What accounts for Deborah’s appointment to judge, then (Judges 4:4)? We are not told directly, but this lack of a straightforward explanation is not unusual for biblical narrative. Unlike didactic literature, such as the New Testament letters, narratives do not often teach directly, but rather indirectly, through the way the narrative is told. The refrain, “There was no king in Israel, and everyone did what was right in their own eyes” (Judges 17:6; 21:25), is a crucial key to interpreting the book.

Rebuking the Nation

It is reasonable, therefore, to see Deborah’s appointment as a means of indicting Israel’s leaders and highlighting Israel’s deplorable spiritual condition. In fact, you find Deborah rebuking Barak for his refusal to do what God has called him to do.

Read More