(Having listened to Mike Winger and reading on GotQuestions.org, my thinking has been heavily strengthened and sometimes changed by their views. If you are looking for a lot more detail on the subject please check out the sources below.)
Men and women are equal in value but have different God given roles
Egalitarian
Men and women are equal in value and in roles
Inferioritism is not a Biblical view
Biblical words
Elder/overseer/shepherd
Acts 20:17
Paul calls the elders to him
Later in vs 28 we see that the elders were overseers
So elders and overseers seem to be referring to the same office
1 Timothy 3:1
Paul gives a list of requirements for overseers
Later in vs 8 deacons are mentioned separately leading me to believe that they are not synonymous with elders/overseers
1 Peter 5:1-4
Here we see elders are told she shepherd and oversee others leading me to conclude that the words elder/overseer/shepherd are the same office but, as we have previously seen, deacons are not
Pastor is not a word most translations use except for Ephesians 4:11
This makes its use in this discussion confusing since it depends what is meant by it
I find that it gets used of both elder and deacon roles and other roles as well whereas the Bible separates these roles so I recommend avoiding the term unless you can get a clear definition of it in your conversation and stick to it
Personally, I am a complementarian
Typically I have heard people point to Genesis to show that Adam and Eve were created equal and then point to Ephesians 5 to show that wives should submit to their husband
But since you are probably familiar with those arguments, I want to look at other cases outside of marriage
Ephesians 6:1
Children and parents are equal in nature but with a hierarchy of roles
Ephesians 6:5
Employees and employers are equal in nature but with a hierarchy of roles
The party in authority also has responsibilities of course since those under them are equal in nature
Ephesians 6:4
Ephesians 6:9
I think that there is a clear distinction between equality of nature and submission in roles illustrated by the Trinity
John 10:30
Jesus shared the same nature as the Father
Philippians 2:6-7
He took on a lower role even though He was not lower by nature
Luke 22:42
Jesus submitted to the Father
Luke 2:51
Here Jesus, who was by nature higher than his stepfather, accepted His God-given role to be under the authority of another
This seems to be a very clear case of Jesus as superior submitting to those infinitely inferior to Him by nature for the sake of obedience to God
Even, and this is not a Biblical example, the 2nd paragraph of the US Constitution of Independence it reads that all men are created equal but some must submit to others holding a higher office such as the president or a court judge
James 3:1
It is dangerous to be a teacher and I actually think that God forbids some people from that role in order to protect them
It is important to base our beliefs on Scripture even if it goes against what we believe
This topic is very important
For instance:
If it is true that women can teach men in a congregation then those who are against it are potentially refusing to allow half of Christians to fulfill their God-given calling
On the other hand, if it is true that women can not teach men in a congregation then those who do allow it are doing what God has forbidden in front of the whole congregation
Both of those would be travesties which is why we must carefully examine the Bible so that we don't forbid God's calling on people and so that we don't directly disobey God
Genesis 1:26-28
Both men and women are given dominion over many things
Both men and women are in the image of God
Both men and women are blessed
Genesis 2:18
The woman is referred to as a helper
The word helper in English often denotes a lower position
"I hired a helper"
God is called our helper (same word in Hebrew)
Psalm 33:20
Psalm 146:5
Hosea 13:9
Although not used exclusively of God, the Hebrew Bible refers to God as our help or that our help comes from God about 15 times
So this phrase should not make us think that Eve was beneath Adam in worth
Help seems to be referring to getting help for something we could never accomplish by ourselves
So far we have only established what complementarians and egalitarians agree upon
The equality of worth of both men and woman
If their roles are different this equality in value is not affected
Children and parents have different roles and one is over the other yet they have the same value as humans
Kings and subject, police and civilians, employers and employees all have the same fundamental value and are equally precious in God's sight even though there is a leadership vs being lead distinction
Differences
Adam was made first, Eve was made second
While it could be argued that order doesn't indicate anything it seems to me that the Bible does see this fact as relevant
1 Timothy 2:12–13
Genesis 2:16
Adam was given the instructions and passed them on to Eve
1 Corinthians 11:9
Eve was made for Adam, not vice versa
Genesis 2:23
What does naming things imply is Scripture?
Parents
Women naming children
Genesis 19:37
Genesis 29:32,35
Genesis 30:6, 8, 11, 13, 18, 20, 24
Genesis 35:18
Genesis 38:4
Men naming children
Genesis 4:26
Genesis 5:3,29
Genesis 16:15
Genesis 21:3
Genesis 38:3
Genesis 41:51
Jointly naming children
Genesis 25:25
Genesis 4:25 & Genesis 5:3 indicate that Seth too was jointly named
Exception: Matthew 1:20-21
Joseph was not the father of Jesus and therefore God the Father was responsible for naming Him
Rulers
Daniel 1:7
Kings
2 Kings 23:34
2 Kings 24:17
God
Psalm 147:4
Matthew 16:18
It seems that in the Bible the one doing the naming of someone or something else is claiming some degree of authority over it
Genesis 3:9
While both had sinned, Adam is called to account for his actions first
Who was to blame? Adam or Eve?
Obviously they both sinned, but does that does mean that they were equally responsible?
Hosea 6:7
Romans 5:12,14,15,17,19
1 Corinthians 15:21-22
Why is the blame put on him when he wasn't the first to sin?
Perhaps he was the first to sin in his heart
Perhaps because of his role in marriage he was ultimately held responsible
Perhaps because he committed willful sin rather than being tricked
2 Timothy 2:14
Genesis 3:16-17
There is no curse mentions for Adam or Eve (only the serpent and the ground)
There is a punishment however
Adam's punishment affects all of creation while Eve's affects only women
Perhaps this is because of their leadership roles?
Eve
"Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." (NIV)
"Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, and he shall rule over you." (ESV)
"You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you." (NET)
What does the word desire mean in this context?
Song of Solomon 7:10-11
Here a man is desiring a woman (same Hebrew word)
This verse makes it seem like a good thing
If this is all it means then the verse would seem to be a blessing, a lovely attraction
But surely God is not rewarding Adam and Eve for sinning
Genesis 4:7
Here we have a very similar phrase to 3:16 in the same book
The idea in this verse is that sin had a desire to control Cain
This is a role-reversal type of control since we ought to be in control of sin rather than the other way around
So using this verse to understand 3:16 it seems that the woman would want to control the husband which is a role-reversal and a negative thing
Adam
1 Peter 3:7
I do not think the Genesis 3:17 is saying that it is wrong to listen to one's wife, but rather that it is wrong to go along with her is she tempts a husband to sin, or anyone else for that matter
Being the head is a great responsibility and therefore the consequences of leading poorly are greater as well
While equal they are definitely different
If they were the same then God would probably have had them created at the same time from the same dirt and they would have named each other and the animals together. And when they sinned they got the same punishments simultaneously.
When dealing with Adam and Eve we are looking within the context of marriage
What about women's roles outside of marriage?
Obviously most of the leadership roles mentioned in the Bible were held by males but was that just a product of the culture or God's ideal?
Here are some Old Testament exceptions
Miriam (Moses and Aaron's sister)
Exodus 15:20-21
She was a prophetess and lead women in singing
Micah 6:4
She is named along with Moses and Aaron
Moses humanly speaking was the leader of Israel and Aaron was head of the priests
So perhaps Miriam was in charge of some things too
The only examples we have of this are in Exodus 15 where she was a prophetess (likely to men and women), and lead women in singing
But regardless, Moses is for sure in a superior role to his siblings
Numbers 12
Some say that God choses women when men are found lacking but Miriam was a prophetess while Moses was also a fantastic prophet (Deuteronomy 34:10)
We will find more examples of prophetesses contemporary with other godly prophets
Huldah
2 Kings 22:14
Huldah was a prophetess and the king consulted her
Isaiah's wife
Isaiah 8:3
Isaiah's wife was also a prophetess
There is no reason to assume that being a prophetess was only for telling women what God said
Deborah
Judges 4:4-5
She was a prophetess
She adjudicated tricky disputes for all the tribes of Israel
Judges 2:16
She was appointed by God to have this important role
Jezebel
1 Kings 16:30-31
Ahab was the king and Jezebel was the queen
1 Kings 21:8
Jezebel needed her husband's seal because he was ultimately in authority as king
The fact that he picked her to be his queen in the last passage also indicates that he was in power first and gave her a position alongside his position
Perhaps she was using the king's seal behind his back or perhaps it was with his full consent just like in Esther 8:7-8
Athaliah
2 Kings 1-3
She reigned in Israel by killing all who stood in her way
Because she was so wicked we cannot use her as an example that women rulers of nations is good
Esther
Esther 2:17
She was queen of a foreign nation but always under king Ahasuerus, doing things only with his permission
Restrictions in the Old Testament
Priests
Exodus 28:1
Only Levite men could be priests
We aren't given a reason, only a command to obey God's decision and trust that it was the right one
Roles not restricted in the Old Testament
Queens (with kings over them)
Judges
Prophetesses
Proverbs 31 also describes a good example of a woman running a business and giving wisdom and making discissions
New Testament women we need to examine
Prophetesses
Acts 21:9
Acts 2:17
Just as in the Old Testament, women can be prophetesses and share messages from God to both men and women and 1 Corinthians 11:5 explains how wives can prophecy properly which indirectly indicates that they can prophecy
While prophecy might seem similar to teaching the Bible consistently differentiates between the two as should we
In general I think that prophecy is sharing a message the prophet has heard from God and teaching is explaining what God has already said
Nympha
Colossians 4:15
There was a congregation in her house but that doesn't mean that she was leading the congregation
Also it is difficult to tell from the manuscript evidence whether Nympha was a man or a woman and whether the word should be translated "his", "her", or "their" house
While we shouldn't use an ambiguous passage to build doctrine on, it is entirely possible that a woman owned and probably hosted the congregation as did Mary in Acts 12:12
Euodia and Syntyche
Philippians 4:2-3
These two women worked alongside Paul
Priscilla and Aquila
The order they are mentioned in
Verses with Aquila first:
Acts 18:2
1 Corinthians 16:19
Verses with Priscilla first:
Acts 18:18
Acts 18:26
Romans 16:3 (Prisca)
2 Timothy 4:19 (Prisca)
While it is unexpected to see Pricilla's name usually listed first it may just indicate prominence or fame rather than a specific leadership role
Acts 18:24-26
The couple taught Apollos in private
This is a positive example of a married couple (with the wife listed first as perhaps prominent) privately educating a man on doctrine
This is not an example of a woman alone publicly teaching a congregation in a formal capacity
Romans 16:3
While Prisca was a fellow worker with Paul, having co-workers does not imply that they are bosses
Apphia
Philemon 1:1-2
Although it is unclear who's house it is, there is no indication that any of them have a leadership role over the congregation
Elderly women
1 Timothy 5:9-10
While these widows were elderly that does not mean they were elders any more than assuming that the oldest people in our congregations are automatically elders
Titus 2:3-5
These elderly women were commanded to teach young women
This is not the same as an elder who teaches the whole congregation (males and females)
Female believers
Colossians 3:16
There is quite a difference between having a teaching ministry and teaching and admonishing someone just as there is quite a difference between having a singing ministry vs being a person who sings (an illustration from Mike Winger)
What are the biblical requirement to be an elder?
1 Timothy 3:1-7
Notice the frequent use of the word 'he' and the phrase "husband of one wife" which I find impossible for a woman to be
The exact same can be said of Titus 1:5-9
This is just a requirement with nothing in the text to suggest that it was because of culture or anything else
Deacons
Romans 16:1
Here the deacon is a woman
While the word for deacon usually just refers to a servant, it seems that deacon is more appropriate since the context is of the congregation
From reading 1 Timothy 3:8-13 it seems that deacons are men but Phoebe is a woman and is commended by Paul
One theory (although I don't know if it is correct) is that the official office of deacon is only for men but women can also serve in a similar fashion and function similarly or even alongside their husband as his helper as established in Genesis
And the same would go with all the other qualifications:
Unmarried people can serve
Children can serve
New converts can serve
But under this theory they cannot become official servants/deacons
In other words, the wives of deacons are called deaconesses and they help their husbands
Another theory is that there are rare exceptions to men being deacons
But regardless, it seems most likely that women can be deaconesses at least sometimes
Junia
Romans 16:7
This could be translated as Junia being well known to the apostles or well known among the apostles with respected translations on both sides
See the ESV/NET vs NASB/NIV
Again we should not lean too heavily on an ambiguous verse although there seems to be some recent scholarship that has convinced me that it is far more likely that the NET got it right
1 Corinthians 9:5
Here we see that apostles could take along a wife which seems to suggest that they were men
Either way BDAG defines Apostles as messengers with or without extraordinary status: delegate, envoy, messenger
Just because someone is a messenger of God does not make them a leader of people any more than a prophetess
They are middle-men/women between God and the world
Questions for egalitarians
Why do 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 not use gender inclusive language?
Why didn't Jesus pick 6 male and 6 female apostles
He certainly picked people who would not be respected by the culture and he had no problem doing counter cultural things with women like talking to the woman at the well so why not when it came to apostles?
Why isn't a lack of education ever mentioned as a reason for not teaching
1 Timothy 2:11-14
Notice that vs 13 gives the reason for this rule and grounds it in the creation of Adam and Eve
When Christians are asked about LGBTQ+ questions we ground our beliefs in the creation of Adam and Eve to indicate the forever permanent standards
Why don't we do the same with this topic too?
Weren't the disciples also uneducated and yet they could teach?
Acts 4:13
If they had false beliefs or were somehow bad at teaching then why were older women commanded to teach young women?
Why does the egalitarian view require assuming cultural backgrounds and hidden motives as a way around the clear meaning of the text?
Shouldn't the most natural view based on the least assumptions be preferred?
I would suggest that the egalitarian view is based far more on today's culture which is opposed to Scripture than anything else
When the views of a world hostile to God and the Church are aligned I think Christians should take a careful examination that it has not become worldly
Not that the world never pushes anything good, only that it tends to be in opposition to God
Are we eager to follow the word of God even when we dislike it?