Dr. Preston Sprinkle has become one of the most influential voices in evangelical circles, writing on the topics of gender, sexuality, and the church. His newest book, From Genesis to Junia: An Honest Search for What the Bible Really Says about Women in Leadership, presents both his personal journey and his biblical case for why he has embraced an egalitarian understanding of women in ministry leadership.
The question of the role of women in ministry leadership is not merely academic; it concerns the way we understand Scripture, how we practice church leadership, and how we seek to faithfully order Christ's church.
The Calvary Chapel Cooperative holds to a historic complementarian understanding that while men and women are equally created in God’s image and are equal in dignity, value, and standing before Him, Scripture reserves the office of elder and the role of pastor for qualified men. This conviction is reflected in both our Clarifying Convictions and our Doctrinal Statement.
This issue is not merely theological for us - it is also personal. It was because of our convictions about the Bible’s instructions on this topic, that the founders of the Calvary Chapel Cooperative stepped away from leadership in another ministry organization. As that organization's understanding and practice concerning women in pastoral leadership shifted, we became convinced that faithfulness to Scripture required a different course.
Having carefully read From Genesis to Junia, I found much of it to be thoughtful, carefully researched, and graciously argued. However, I am convinced that the author’s conclusions are shaped by a theological method that ultimately does not account for the full witness of Scripture or give sufficient weight to the church's historic interpretation of the relevant passages.
My goal in this review is to interact carefully with Sprinkle’s arguments and explain why I believe the complementarian position continues to offer the most faithful reading of Scripture regarding the office of elder and the role of pastor.
An Objective Journey?
Preston Sprinkle’s From Genesis to Junia is portrayed as a memoir and theological exploration written in real time over the course of a two year research project. In the introduction, written at the outset of the project, Preston states that he was unsure what position he would land on in the end. However, it is Sprinkle’s research methods themselves which deserve some degree of scrutiny.
Theological method was a primary area of emphasis in my graduate studies in Integrative Theology, and therefore I found myself paying particular attention not only to Sprinkle's conclusions, but to the process by which he arrived at them. Theological method is the discipline concerned with the process by which a person arrives at their theological conclusions. A person’s theological method is the way they utilize the sources of theology in relation to each other, and which ones they prioritize compared to others. The five recognized sources of theology are: Scripture, reason, tradition, experience, and community.
Sprinkle claims that his aim is to investigate what the Bible itself says about the role of women in ministry leadership1, and yet, throughout the book, he draws on sources outside the Bible to reach conclusions about the nature of early church gatherings and structure, as well as Greek religious and cultural reconstructions, which are speculative and debated.2 Concurrently, he largely sets aside the interpretations of the relevant biblical texts by early church fathers.3 By doing so, he is giving greater interpretive weight to the speculative claims of a few modern historians than to the interpretations of the church leaders who lived in those societies themselves.
Throughout the book, Preston chooses between competing interpretations based on what seems more reasonable to him.4 That is not necessarily wrong to do, but it does prioritize personal reason over interpretive tradition in a theological method - showing that he is not merely determining what the Bible says, but interpreting the Bible through his chosen hermeneutical lens. All this to say: his interpretive method is far from objective. Throughout the book, he frequently chooses the views that lean toward an egalitarian conclusion, even where other interpretations have substantial exegetical and historical support.
The Central Issue: Does Servant Leadership Eliminate Hierarchy?
Sprinkle’s central argument is that leadership in Jesus’ kingdom is fundamentally characterized by self-sacrificial service, and therefore hierarchical structures - particularly those that restrict women from certain roles - are inconsistent with the ethic of the kingdom.
While there is much to appreciate in Sprinkle’s desire to elevate Christlike humility and service, I find several significant problems with both his assumptions and his conclusions.
Scripture consistently presents a vision in which authority and service are not opposed, but integrated.
● Hebrews 13:17 instructs believers to “obey your leaders and submit to them,” which assumes some form of recognized authority in the church.
● The Apostle Paul regularly appeals to his God-given authority as an apostle, not merely offering suggestions but issuing commands rooted in his office.5
● The church is described as the household of God (1 Tim. 3:15), a metaphor that naturally includes ordered relationships.
Even within the Trinity, we see what theologians have called a functional order (often referred to as the “economic Trinity”), where the Son submits to the Father during His earthly ministry. This does not imply inferiority, but distinction in role. The New Testament itself draws on this reality when speaking about relationships such as marriage, e.g. in Ephesians 5:22-33.
Additionally, Scripture explicitly instructs children to obey their parents, and servants (or slaves, in the ancient context) to obey their masters (Eph. 6:1–8; Col. 3:20–24).
These instructions reflect ordered relationships. While sin has distorted every human authority structure, Scripture does not present authority itself as a consequence of the Fall. If the submission of wives to their husbands is modeled after the submission of the Son to the Father, then hierarchy in human relationships cannot be inherently opposed to Christlike service. Rather, Scripture calls those relationships to be transformed by the self-giving love of Christ.
Is Authority Itself the Problem?
Much of Sprinkle’s case seems to rest on the assumption that hierarchical leadership is inherently negative - something redeemed people should move beyond. But the New Testament presents a different picture.
In Christ, authority is not abolished - it is redeemed.
Leadership in the home and the church is not portrayed as domination, but as responsibility. It is redefined by love, sacrifice, and accountability before God. The problem Scripture addresses is not authority itself, but the misuse of authority.
To reject all forms of hierarchy because of their abuse is similar to rejecting leadership altogether because some leaders have failed. The biblical solution is not elimination, but transformation.
The Role of Church History
Another significant concern is Sprinkle’s limited engagement with church history - particularly the interpretation of these passages by those closest to the apostles.
Historically, and especially in the early centuries of the church, there is remarkably little evidence of women serving as elders, pastors, or authoritative preachers in the way modern egalitarianism suggests. Moreover, the passages at the center of this debate were consistently interpreted in a way that aligns with what is now called a complementarian view.
To be fair, Sprinkle would likely respond that his goal was not to analyze church history, but simply to interpret Scripture. However, this claim is difficult to sustain, considering the fact that he does appeal to:
● Some church fathers (e.g. Origen and Chrysostom) to support the idea that Junia was an apostle,6 to explain cultural customs,7 and to interpret particular Greek words8
● Ignatius of Antioch’s second century writings about the three tiers of leadership9
● Cultural analysis of Ephesus to interpret passages like 1 Timothy 2:13
● Broader historical context when it supports his conclusions
In other words, historical analysis is not absent from his method; instead, it is selectively applied.
Sprinkle admits that complementarians have church history on their side,10 but he attributes this historical consensus to assumptions about women’s intellectual inferiority.11 To support this claim, he cites two modern writers rather than offering primary sources from the church fathers themselves.12 In this way, Sprinkle is dismissing the church fathers’ interpretations by assuming their motives, without offering the possibility that they interpreted the Scriptures faithfully based on the biblical texts and the traditions handed to them by the apostles.
A more consistent theological method would give careful weight to how the earliest Christians (those closest to the apostles, who lived in the cultures in question) understood and applied these teachings. By largely dismissing nearly two thousand years of interpretation and practice, Sprinkle risks what C.S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery,”13 assuming that modern readers have finally arrived at the correct understanding after centuries of error.
Sprinkle often asks whether perhaps Christians have misunderstood or misinterpreted the passages regarding women in ministry leadership for the past two thousand years, due to unquestioned misogynistic biases.14 That can be a healthy question, but it should be followed by an equally important question, which he never asks: "What if the historic church understood and interpreted these passages correctly?"
Protestants rightly reject the idea that tradition possesses authority equal to Scripture. Yet we also recognize that the Holy Spirit did not abandon Christ's church for twenty centuries only to reveal the correct interpretation in the twenty-first. Good Protestant theology is always willing to reform according to Scripture, but it is hesitant to assume that the Holy Spirit allowed every generation before us to simply miss what the Bible was teaching.
Are the Offices of Pastor and Elder Really Undefined?
One of Sprinkle's recurring claims is that leadership, including the offices of pastor and elder, were not clearly defined in the earliest decades of the church, and therefore we should be cautious about importing later church structures back into the New Testament.15
There is certainly truth in acknowledging that the first-century church was still developing its organizational structures. However, this observation is often pressed further than the evidence allows.
By the time Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles (1-2 Timothy & Titus), churches were already appointing elders (Titus 1:5), elders were required to meet specific qualifications (1 Timothy 3; Titus 1), and these leaders were charged with teaching sound doctrine, exercising oversight, refuting false teachers, and shepherding God's people.
Likewise, Acts portrays elders functioning as recognized leaders within local churches (Acts 14:23; 20:17-38), while Peter exhorts fellow elders to "shepherd the flock of God" (1 Peter 5:1-4).
The terminology may overlap - elder (presbyteros), overseer (episkopos), and shepherd/pastor (poimen) - but that does not mean the office itself is undefined. Rather, the New Testament consistently presents these as complementary descriptions of the same leadership roles.
If anything, the existence of these qualifications demonstrates that the offices were already sufficiently defined for Paul to regulate who should hold them. If Paul was already giving qualifications for elders and overseers back then, it seems difficult to argue that these offices were too undefined for the qualifications - including the limitation of the office to qualified men - to carry normative force.
Does Paul Reverse Gender Distinctions in 1 Corinthians 11?
One of the more surprising arguments in the book is Sprinkle's interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11. He begins by acknowledging that in verses 7-10 Paul argues from man’s priority in creation and the woman’s creation from and for the man. However, he believes that Paul’s words in verses 11-12 “clash with his previous argument.” Sprinkle then claims that the phrase “in the Lord” is “the key that unlocks the entire passage.”16
According to Sprinkle, verses 7-10 reflect an old-creation reality between men and women, while verses 11-12 reflect the inbreaking of new-creation realities in Christ, characterized by mutuality rather than hierarchy.17 I find this reading unpersuasive.
Paul certainly emphasizes mutual dependence: "In the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman." (1 Cor. 11:11) But mutual dependence is not the same as the reversal of the order Paul has just established.
In fact, verses 11-12 need not be read as Paul correcting or overturning the order laid out in verses 7-10 at all. Paul can simultaneously affirm that woman was created from man and for man (v. 8-9), while reminding men that every man since Adam has been born of a woman, and ultimately “all things are from God” (v. 11-12). The latter truth qualifies any sinful inference of male superiority without negating the ordered relationship Paul has just grounded in creation.
The flow of the passage is therefore not:
1. Establish hierarchy, then
2. Abolish hierarchy.
Rather it is:
1. Establish ordered relationships,
2. Insist that those relationships do not imply superiority or inferiority,
3. Remind both men and women of their mutual dependence, both in the natural realm and in the Lord.
That reading also harmonizes with Paul's teachings in Ephesians 5, Colossians 3, 1 Timothy 2, and Titus 2.
A Better Way Forward
At its best, Sprinkle’s work reminds us that leadership in the kingdom of God must be shaped by humility and self-sacrifice. On this point, we can wholeheartedly agree: Christian leadership is not about power, status, or self-promotion, but about sacrificial service for the good of others.
However, this does not require the elimination of structure or authority.
The biblical vision is richer and more nuanced:
● Authority exists, but is to be exercised with humility
● Leadership is real, but is accountable to Christ and to other believers
● Distinctions in role do not imply differences in value or dignity
Rather than flattening these distinctions, Scripture calls us to embody them in a way that reflects the character of Jesus. Servant leadership is not the absence of authority, but the Christlike exercise of authority.
Conclusion
From Genesis to Junia is an engaging read, and to Sprinkle’s credit, he rejects some common strawman arguments often leveled against complementarianism. For example, he rightly rejects the claim that because women were the first witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection and were sent to announce that news to the apostles, they therefore must be eligible to hold the office of pastor or elder. Complementarians do not argue that women are prohibited from proclaiming the gospel, teaching in every context, or speaking about spiritual things. Rather, the historic complementarian position has been that Scripture reserves the office of elder and the role of pastor - with its responsibility for the authoritative teaching and exercising of church discipline, for qualified men.
Nevertheless, despite its strengths, I remain unconvinced by the book’s contention that Christian servant leadership undermines ordered relationships, including gender-specific leadership roles in the church.
Ultimately, From Genesis to Junia illustrates how profoundly one's theological method often determines their conclusions. Throughout this book, Sprinkle gives weight to cultural reconstructions and modern historical theories, while giving comparatively little weight to the historic interpretation and practice of the church. In my judgment, a better approach is to interpret Scripture first through its own arguments, allowing clearer passages to illuminate the more difficult ones, while also giving due consideration to the testimony of the Christians who lived closest to the apostles and the cultures in which these texts were first received.
That approach leads me to the same conclusion that the overwhelming majority of the church has affirmed throughout its history: that men and women are equal in dignity, worth, and standing before God, yet God has entrusted the office of elder and the role of pastor to qualified men. In Christ, authority and ordered relationships are not abolished, but redeemed. Biblical leadership is not characterized by domination or privilege, but by humble, sacrificial service exercised under the lordship of Christ.
When rightly understood, biblical leadership does not reflect the patterns of the world, but the self-giving love of the Savior who came “not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).
(All biblical quotations are from the English Standard Version (ESV), 2001, Crossway)
- From Genesis to Junia, p. 17. ↩︎
- Sprinkle explicitly acknowledges that historical reconstructions involve a degree of speculation and that they are debated, e.g. on p. 278 and in Chapter 10 at large. He states that his exegesis of the passage in question is based on the text, not primarily on the cultural context. Nevertheless, his treatment devotes considerable attention to reconstructed features of Ephesian culture and these reconstructions play a significant role in making his proposed readings plausible. These include the Artemis cult, the Amazons, priestesses, and women’s economic independence before proposing that Paul’s instructions to men and women may be responding to those particular situations. ↩︎
- From Genesis to Junia, pp. 264, 292-293. ↩︎
- Examples of this are on p. 24, in Chapter 1, Part 3, and on p. 217 in footnote 16 of Chapter 8. ↩︎
- Romans 1:1, 5 — Paul identifies himself as "called to be an apostle" and says he received "grace and apostleship."
1 Corinthians 9:1–2 — Paul defends his apostleship and points to the Corinthian church itself as the seal of his apostolic ministry.
1 Corinthians 14:37–38 — "What I am writing to you is a command of the Lord."
2 Corinthians 10:8; 13:10 — Paul speaks of the authority the Lord gave him "for building you up."
Galatians 1:1 — "Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ..."
Galatians 2:7–9 — The Jerusalem apostles recognize Paul's apostolic commission.
1 Thessalonians 2:6–7 — Paul notes that "as apostles of Christ we could have made demands of you..."
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 12, 14 — Paul gives commands "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" and instructs the church to discipline those who refuse to obey his letter.
1 Timothy 1:1 — Paul introduces himself as "an apostle of Christ Jesus by command of God."
Titus 1:1–3 — Paul grounds his ministry in God's commission. ↩︎ - From Genesis to Junia, p. 143. ↩︎
- Ibid., p. 217. ↩︎
- Ibid. ↩︎
- Ibid., p. 117. ↩︎
- Ibid., p. 293. ↩︎
- Ibid. p. 292. ↩︎
- Ibid., pp. 264. The secondary sources referenced by Sprinkle to make this point were written in 2001 and 2021. ↩︎
- C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1955), 207–208. ↩︎
- Sprinkle accuses the Church Fathers in general of being misogynistic on p. 143, where he states that Chrysostom was less so than the others. ↩︎
- From Genesis to Junia, p. 99. ↩︎
- Ibid., pp. 210-211. ↩︎
- Ibid., pp. 213-214. ↩︎
