The typical arguments against the ordination of women are taken from an uncritical reading of a few New Testament texts. At 1 Tim 2:11-15, the author writes,
11 Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.This text is probably not authentically Pauline, but was written in his name late in the New Testament period. This was a time when the church was becoming an institution and was beginning to adopt some of the mores of the surrounding, patriarchal culture.
Even if it is authentic to Paul, it is worth noting that the author says “I permit no woman…” not “God permits no woman…” Compare this to 1 Cor 7:25 where Paul says, “Now concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy.” In other words, Paul, by his own admission, did not always write the direct words of God, but sometimes gave his opinion.
Another New Testament text quoted against the ordination of women is 1 Cor 14:33b-36:
(As in all the churches of the saints, 34 women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?)
Put into its context, these verses are in a discussion of prophesy in the church. Some interpreters suggest that Paul was addressing a specific problem in Corinth. There were particular women, they say, who were being disruptive in worship.
To place this passage even more securely in its context, it is good to note that in 1 Cor 11: 1 ff, women are referred to as praying and prophesying without any censure for Paul, except that they are to keep their heads covered when doing so.
Some interpreters suggest that in 1 Cor 14:33b-36, Paul was quoting from a statement made by the Corinthians in their correspondence to him. The Corinthians are saying that women must be silent. Paul’s response is at verse 36,“Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?” Essentially this negates the idea that women must remain silent. Bolstering this interpretation, verses 33b-35 are inserted in different places in some (unreliable) manuscripts of the NT, separating them from the negation in v. 36. The suggestion here is that a scribe with a vested interest in keeping women silent might have intentionally moved vv. 33b-35.
Recognizing the context and the culture of passages like 1 Tim 2:11-15 and 1 Cor 14:33b-36 leaves the door open for the possibility of women in leadership roles in the NT, and therefore for the ordination of women in today’s Church.
There are also positive examples of women in leadership roles to be found in the NT. For example, in Acts 21:7, the daughters of Philip the Evangelist are said to have the gift of prophesy. Again, at Acts 18:26, Priscilla, along with her husband Aquila, is said to have instructed Apollos in the “way of God.” Though this is private instruction, it seems clear that Priscilla is in a position of authority, teaching a man.
The best evidence for women in leadership roles in the NT is found in Paul’s greetings to various individuals in Romans 16. Here he calls Phoebe a “deacon of the church at Cenchreae” (16:1). Again at verse 7, Paul refers to Junia as “prominent among the apostles.”
Those who oppose women’s ordination argue against these references in various ways which I find both circular and disingenuous. The arguments are disingenuous because, if Phoebe’s and Junia’s names were replaced with masculine names, no one would argue that they were not a deacon and an apostle, respectively. The arguments are circular because they proceed from the assumption that women could not be deacons and apostles therefore, Phoebe was a “servant” and not a “deacon.” (The Greek word “diakonos” means “servant” but was applied to an office of some authority in the early church). And, they argue, either Junia was actually a man or that she was not an apostle, but only “well known to the apostles.” Eldon Epp has written a small (160 pages), but exhaustively argued (half of the pages are devoted to notes!) book called Junia: The First Woman Apostle in which he puts paid to all such arguments. The book is scholarly and difficult, but should be required reading for anyone who would argue against Junia’s apostleship.
Don't understand the salvific aspect you see here. The matter of God's natural order of His creation is Biblical. This not some man-made tradition.
I don't recall mentioning dominance. Please don't read that into anything I have written on the matter.