God's Commandment For Women Not To Speak In Church

[Enow]

Still... those who oppose the OP have yet to correct or refute the use of the scripture as found in the N.T.

It still serves as a line of discernment regarding tongues without interpretation when the Holy Spirit would not break God's commandment to manifest tongues in women to speak in the assembly. Just saying. It is time for discernment by going to that throne of grace asking Jesus for help in discerning tongues without interpretation if it be of Him or not. Only He can help you see the truth in His words for testing the spirits and not believing every spirit that comes over you, bringing this tongue which never comes with interpretation, but is vain & profane babbling as found in the occult & other religions & cults.

 

[Enow]

There should be one overall leader of the Church,and that should be a man,but the women can speak in Church,but when the man that leads the setting of the saints together is talking the stand,do not disrupt until he says what is will say,and do what he will do,and then the saints can all sing together,worship together,prophesy together,and all have something to add to benefit the Church better than if the leader of the Church did it all himself.

The scripture in the OP does not support that, brother. Women are not to speak at all in the assembly, but to be in silence.

 

[Denadii]

I am really astonished to what lengths Enow will go to to discredit a manifestation of the Spirit.

In the beginning, God created woman and man and he gave THEM dominion. Eve was Adam's help meet . . . They would have worked in the garden hand in hand - each making the other better. A perfect union, a perfect marriage. When Eve ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil - things changed and man became head over woman. This did NOT mean that Adam beat Eve into submission . . . Eve lovingly put herself into Adam's care.

In the OT, which strictly excluded women from public ministry in the Tabernacle and Temple, acknowledged that women could prophesy or lead if they had the spirit of God upon them. Mirian, Moses' sister - Then Miriam, the prophet, Aaron's sister, took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women followed her, with timbrels and dancing. Exodus 15:20
Deborah was one of the Judges of Israel - (Judges 4 and 5) Now Deborah, a prophet, was leading Israel at that time.
Hilkiah and those the king had sent with him went to speak to the prophet Huldah, who was the wife of Shallum son of Tokhath, the son of Hasrah, keeper of the wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem, in the New Quarter. She said to them, This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: . . . (2 Chronicles 34:22,23a)
There was also a prophet, Anna, the daughter of Penuel, of the tribe of Asher . . (Luke 2:36-38)
In Acts on the day of Pentecost - the prophecy from Joel - I will pour out my Spirit on all people, Your sons and daughters will prophesy . . . Even on my servants, both men and women . . . Includes women doesn't it?
Acts 21:9 - Philip the evangelist, had four unmarried daughters who prophesied. In 1 Cor. 11:5 - every woman who prays or prophesies needs to have her head covered . . . Ask yourself with the evidence of women prophesying - why, all of a sudden, are women being told to keep silent? Ask yourself Why is God contradicting himself now?

The above alone should make you question the insertion of 1 Cor. 14:34,35. Many scholars have commentaries regarding this section of scripture being inserted . . . Alan F. Johnson, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary, (The IVP New Testament Commentary Series; 1 Corinthians (interVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL< 2004) p. 271 Simon Kistemaker, 1 Corinthians (Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 19913), p. 511; Richard Horsley, The Abingdon New Testatment Commentaries (Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN. 1998), p 188; Anthony Thiselton, Professor of Theology, The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Epistle to the First Corinthians (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapides, MI 2000), p. 1150

Actually these verses make good sense when they are read in context...Sometimes to get that context you have to read a few chapters....For example....Paul saying here in 1 Cor. 14:34,35 Paul was speaking in what is called "Responsa" No doubt you can see quite easily what the word means. That he was answering questions. Sometimes the question comes as a question, and sometimes it comes as a statement. But Paul answers it...."
As in all the congregations of God’s people, [SUP]34 [/SUP]let the wives remain silent when the congregation meets; they are certainly not permitted to speak out. Rather, let them remain subordinate, as also the Torah says; [SUP]35 [/SUP]and if there is something they want to know, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for a woman to speak out in a congregational meeting." There is the question...The man who 'posted' it goes by Torah...Paul answered it. "Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?" He was answering by way of question there. The man was holding his 'flock' to the law. Paul answered it well..."Did the word of the Lord originate from you [Corinthians], or has it come to you only [so that you know best what God requires]?

 

[UnderGrace]

The scripture in the OP does not support that, brother. Women are not to speak at all in the assembly, but to be in silence.

Just like the tongues, Paul's teaching is to be understood in context.......

[h=2]If we say women must be Completely Silent during Church Meetings..... then Paul is inconsistent[/h] At first glance, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 seems clear: women are not permitted to talk in congregational meetings and must be silent. This is the stance that many have taken throughout much of the Church’s history.

From Tertullian[3] to Thomas Aquinas[4], commentators concluded that women could not even sing or pray audibly among men. Although the Reformers relaxed some of these restrictions, as late as the 1890s certain Presbyterians still forbade women’s singing in the context of church worship. (Grenz 1995:121) ​

Silence is called for three times in 1 Corinthians 14: in verses 28, 30 and 34.[5] In 1 Corinthians 14:28 and 30, silence is called for in specific situations to regulate congregational contributions to the meetings. (The “silence” in verses 28 and 30 is not gender specific.) It is very likely that the silence called for in verse 34 is also addressing a specific situation and is not meant to be a blanket statement to silence all women for all time in church meetings. In fact, Paul’s intention could not have been to silence women at all the times during church meetings. In 1 Corinthians 11:5 Paul acknowledges, without disapproval, that women prophesied and prayed aloud in church.

Paul not only approved of praying and prophesying by women in the assembly but he encouraged it! Reading 1 Corinthians 11:10 with the literal, active voice (“has authority”) instead of the presumed, passive voice (“sign of authority”), Paul states that a woman has authority[6] (has the right!) to pray and prophesy . . . (Hicks 1990) ​

If Paul condones verbal ministry from women in chapter 11 it is very unlikely that he censures it in chapter 14. Paul was probably prohibiting a certain form of speech from the women in 14:34-35. Several theologians have tried to identify the type of speech that Paul appears to be disallowing.

Continue reading here....
[h=2]Women must not Engage in Idle Chatter in Church Meetings[/h][h=2]Women must not Disrupt Church Meetings with Rudimentary Questions[/h]Women must not Evaluate Prophecy Audibly
[h=2]Women must not ask Personal Questions of the Prophets[/h]Conclusion
The summaries presented in this article are just a sample of some of the better-known interpretations of 14:34-35. Still more interpretations have been proposed by respected scholars. Because of this vast variety of interpretations, it is difficult to know precisely how to apply these verses, especially in the context of the contemporary church.

One thing is certain. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 cannot be used to completely silence women from speaking in church meetings, as Paul condones the verbal ministries of prayer and prophecy from women. Taking into account that Paul condones women who prophecy, it is difficult to see how 14:34-35 can be used to exclude women from other equally influential and authoritative speaking ministries in the church. [29]

The meaning, intent, and even the authorship, of 14:34-35 is uncertain. Because of this uncertainty, 14:34-35 should not be used definitively in the continuing debate about women’s roles in ministry. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 cannot be used legitimately to prohibit women who are called, gifted, and qualified from exercising a ministry which includes public speaking.

Interpretations and Applications of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

 

[Tabitha4thelord]

He's 33 Tab's ...

Ohhhhh lol
My Bad!!!

 

[graceNpeace]

Just like the tongues, Paul's teaching is to be understood in context.......

If we say women must be Completely Silent during Church Meetings..... then Paul is inconsistent

At first glance, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 seems clear: women are not permitted to talk in congregational meetings and must be silent. This is the stance that many have taken throughout much of the Church’s history.

From Tertullian[3] to Thomas Aquinas[4], commentators concluded that women could not even sing or pray audibly among men. Although the Reformers relaxed some of these restrictions, as late as the 1890s certain Presbyterians still forbade women’s singing in the context of church worship. (Grenz 1995:121) ​

Silence is called for three times in 1 Corinthians 14: in verses 28, 30 and 34.[5] In 1 Corinthians 14:28 and 30, silence is called for in specific situations to regulate congregational contributions to the meetings. (The “silence” in verses 28 and 30 is not gender specific.) It is very likely that the silence called for in verse 34 is also addressing a specific situation and is not meant to be a blanket statement to silence all women for all time in church meetings. In fact, Paul’s intention could not have been to silence women at all the times during church meetings. In 1 Corinthians 11:5 Paul acknowledges, without disapproval, that women prophesied and prayed aloud in church.

Paul not only approved of praying and prophesying by women in the assembly but he encouraged it! Reading 1 Corinthians 11:10 with the literal, active voice (“has authority”) instead of the presumed, passive voice (“sign of authority”), Paul states that a woman has authority[6] (has the right!) to pray and prophesy . . . (Hicks 1990) ​

If Paul condones verbal ministry from women in chapter 11 it is very unlikely that he censures it in chapter 14. Paul was probably prohibiting a certain form of speech from the women in 14:34-35. Several theologians have tried to identify the type of speech that Paul appears to be disallowing.

Continue reading here....
Women must not Engage in Idle Chatter in Church Meetings

Women must not Disrupt Church Meetings with Rudimentary Questions

Women must not Evaluate Prophecy Audibly
Women must not ask Personal Questions of the Prophets

Conclusion
The summaries presented in this article are just a sample of some of the better-known interpretations of 14:34-35. Still more interpretations have been proposed by respected scholars. Because of this vast variety of interpretations, it is difficult to know precisely how to apply these verses, especially in the context of the contemporary church.

One thing is certain. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 cannot be used to completely silence women from speaking in church meetings, as Paul condones the verbal ministries of prayer and prophecy from women. Taking into account that Paul condones women who prophecy, it is difficult to see how 14:34-35 can be used to exclude women from other equally influential and authoritative speaking ministries in the church. [29]

The meaning, intent, and even the authorship, of 14:34-35 is uncertain. Because of this uncertainty, 14:34-35 should not be used definitively in the continuing debate about women’s roles in ministry. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 cannot be used legitimately to prohibit women who are called, gifted, and qualified from exercising a ministry which includes public speaking.

Interpretations and Applications of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Sensible summary!

The fact that Paul's comments about women speaking in church are ONLY directed at the Corinthian church is telling!
Even a cursory read of First and Second Corinthians shows a church way out of control!
Men and women!

In order to generalise anything Paul said with respect to the Corinthian church one first needs to get the context of Corinthian church.
It is not as simple as a literal "the Bible says it therefore I believe it" scenario.
Paul was addressing a specific church with specific problems.
(And in other Epistles to other congregations Paul also addresses issues specific to them!)

It is clear from the tone of Paul's letter that women, ignorant of the things of God, were exerting undue control in the Corinthian church. As part of rather extreme measures, the command to women to be silent is only one of several blunt measures directed by Paul, Paul is attempting to regain control of a church threatening the stability and reputation of the entire nascent New Covenant church.
This is NOT business as usual!
These are "emergency measures" for an emergency situation!

If your church is currently doing business like an orgiastic brothel feel free to try and implement these measures IN YOUR CHURCH...
Otherwise, do not try and impose direction to a church that is NOT suffering the same disorder.

Frankly, the real take home message of this whole epistle, is that anyone, singly or as a group, that threaten the good order of a church need to be disciplined.
This is not a blanket directive to every church for all time that women are instructed to silence!
Plenty of Scripture has already been posted to show women engaged in fruitful ministry who could not have been doing what they were doing if a blanket "command to silence" were in operation!

I have to say, as a male, that my spirit has been mightily offended by the misplaced and vitriolic misogyny and chauvinism expressed by some in this thread - shame on you!

 

[Dino246]

Still... those who oppose the OP have yet to correct or refute the use of the scripture as found in the N.T....

Well, since you asked for it...

... 1 Timothy 2:[SUP]11 [/SUP]Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.[SUP] 12 [/SUP]But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.[SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was first formed, then Eve.[SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Use a little logic here. Is there any sense in thinking that just because man was created first, that woman should therefore be silent? Is that not the essence of a non sequitur? This passage makes perfect sense if Paul is addressing cultic beliefs that the woman was formed first and had secret knowledge, and that a woman teaching such things in the assembly ought to be silent and learn the truth first.

It is a principle of hermeneutics and exegesis that "if the plain sense makes sense, then seek no other sense". However, in this case, the plain sense doesn't make sense, so it is worthwhile to look further.

Again, we get that referenced below as being a commandment from the Lord.

1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]34 [/SUP]Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.[SUP]

[/SUP]
Nowhere in the Law does it say any such thing. That is a big clue that Paul is quoting someone else. Again, the plain sense does not make sense.

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

The order is significant. It is not God-Christ-man-woman! If it were, this might be a slam-dunk argument. However, the terms are singular, which suggests the context of marriage, not the assembly.

Genesis 3:[SUP]16 [/SUP]Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

As I noted earlier, and have done so many times, a careful reading of Genesis 3 will reveal that this is not a command at all. It is a statement of consequence... what will happen, not what must happen. As it is neither a curse nor a command, it does not support either 1 Cor. 14 or 1 Tim 2. in the complementarian view. Actually, the complementarian view is a perfect fulfillment of the consequence... men attempting to rule over women (and not always in a righteous way, as earlier comments demonstrate). Consider this if you still don't accept my view: why would God, Who is the essence of wisdom, righteousness and holiness, install now-sinful man as the head over woman?

 

[Desertsrose]

Well you keep getting it wrong no matter how many times you posts scriptures that have nothing to do with beatings...........And people keep hating your posts! God's chastening is not beatings!!!

You keep getting proven wrong. And people keep liking your posts.

How much more simple can it be? God corrects people through hardship / chastening, to make them better.

Proverbs 22:15
Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.


Proverbs 23:13
Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.


Proverbs 23:14
Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.


Proverbs 29:15
The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

 

[WineRose]

lol im done

his fruits are hanging for everyone to see


hes unforgiving
hes vile and rude
hes ignorant of Gods word and perverting it for his love of violence

he hates his brothers and sisters

he has lied and twisted my words

and he suuure loves to argue and debate



zen

i will pray for you

i hope youre not already reprobate

Well my friend, wanna join me at the sidelines?

I have cake

 

[WineRose]

I've reported him as well

Already did, too.

 

[Huckleberry]

Still... those who oppose the OP have yet to correct or refute the use of the scripture as found in the N.T.

This has probably already been addressed,
but I'm not reading through 13 pages of comments to see.

1 Corinthians is addressed to the Church at Corinth,
and is basically a rubuke of the church as a whole.
There were divisions, rampant fornication,
and many other problems within that church.
Chapter 14 concerns gifts, and the context in verse 34 specifically concerns
tongues and the fact that some of the women were causing confusion.
It's a rebuke of that church concerning those women.
It's not to be taken as the be-all-end-all doctrine of every church for all time.
Pulling that verse out a la cart and pairing it with 1 Timothy 2:11 is ignorant at best.

1 Timothy is addressed to Timothy, and Paul is instructing him on how to run his church.
In chapter 2 he tells Timothy to teach the women modesty and reverence.
There's a lot of pastors nowadays who could use a letter like this from Paul.
Oh, wait, they have one, they just didn't read it!
Some people think it wasn't even written by Paul, but an impostor,
in which case it probably shouldn't have been included in the Bible.

Conclusion: If you're a member of a Ruckmanite or similar church, you're going
to be taught these verses out of context and feel justified in abusing women.

 

[tanakh]

Where in the Gospels do we find Jesus beating up Women or Children? He is our example to live by.

 

[JesusLives]

Hummmm.....clears throat.....

As far as I was taught I understand that the two tablets of stone held 10 Commandments and women to be silent in church is not one of them. I find it interesting though that in today's church culture some refer to the commandments as being nailed to the cross and not for us today and have been told by many that the 10 were written for the Jews. Yet they take a teaching of Paul and turn it into an extra commandment for women to be silent in church and want it to be followed today.

I say but wait....if we aren't under the 10 anymore because they were nailed to the cross then why are we under this added one? Just asking....

 

[WineRose]

Bahahahaha ... what a completely incorrect response. That was God's statement of consequence which would happen, not a command for what should happen. Zen...

View attachment 171749

Thanks for the new meme! It would look great in my meme album...

 

[mj007]

ISIS exists because it bends and twists things in the quran. How these distortions exists in Christianity is a little more sublime, it exists in the sense of superiority. Some people distort things to mean that they are superior to everything, which often leads to aggression or violence, most often brushed under the carpet behind closed doors. But this is what happens when you spend so much time focused on the superiority of God, rather than the love of God which is on the same level, equal to us, when we express love too. Jesus was that example. But the same happens if you put Jesus on a pedestal. Whether Jesus was better than those around him, do you think he looked at things that way? How many people shun the outcasts of society and try to live in their own perfect bubble of safety? This in itself is a form of growing superiority whether you recognise it or not.

 

[Zen]

The scripture in the OP does not support that, brother. Women are not to speak at all in the assembly, but to be in silence.

If only it stopped them from being horrible to people following scripture in this thread. They don't care. They have an opinion and no man's going to stop them! Go feminism!

 

[Zen]

In chapter 2 he tells Timothy to teach the women modesty and reverence.

What would he have done if a dozen of the women would attend church boasting loudly to each other about how they've reported him to the Pharisee?

 

[Jennie-Mae]

Modern women are horrible. I find it staggering that men don't beat sense in to women any more.

Sounds like a Class A felony, my friend.

 

[plainguy]

Modern women are horrible. I find it staggering that men don't beat sense in to women any more.

It's funny to see so many young people (who are probably not disciplined and taught respect by their fathers) jump in to mock someone who has posted common sense, facts and biblical wisdom regarding the importance of family in God's eyes.

It's funny to me because if you lived 2000 years ago when families were much better, you'd have been beaten for being disrespectful. I guess you can enjoy your online immunity to correction, though.

1 Corinthians 11:3
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

I'm no longer surprised by these forums. Most of you are actually atheists who believe that God's scripture is stupid.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you witnessed your father teaching your mother the meaning of respect ?

 

[Enow]

if God said that he would pour out his spirit on all men and that their sons and daughters would prophesy. Then that is a settled promise from God.

If you are implying that God's promise would involve making women speak in church, that is not true. Women can have the Holy Spirit poured out on them at their salvation without causing them to speak in church, let alone manifest tongues on them.

Just as the same for men when they are saved when God sends His promise; not all speak in tongues when that happens when it is a sign towards the unbelievers that are around them.

Paul talked mostley of married women in a household. god the head .man is his covering. Womans covering is the man. No man wants to be an infidel in his own household.

Paul also talked about why women are not to speak in church and be subject into silence as a commandment from the Lord as the Word of God must come through the men first. That is the decency and order of all things spiritual.