Re: "Women keep silent in the churches": Has that ceased or is it still for today?
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (NASB) [SUP]34 [/SUP]The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. [SUP]35 [/SUP]If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.
Speak - Greek Strong's Number: 2980Greek Word: λαλέω
Transliteration: laleō
Phonetic Pronunciation:
lal-eh'-o
Root: a prolonged form of an otherwise obsolete verb
Cross Reference: TDNT - 4:69,505
Part of Speech: v
Vine's Words: Say, Speak, Talk, Tell, Utter
Usage Notes:
English Words used in KJV:
speak 244
say 15
tell 12
talk 11
preach 6
utter 4
miscellaneous translations 3
vr speak 1
[Total Count: 296]
a prolonged form of an otherwise obsolete verb; to talk, i.e. utter words :- preach, say, speak (after), talk, tell, utter. Compare <G3004> (lego).
When we look at context of these two verses, we get the distinct impression that the women's talking was about asking questions during the service.
When we look at the context of the entire book of first Corinthians, we see that this church in particular had problems with abusing the gifts of the Spirit, and abusing their Christian liberty. As we look at the entirety of chapter 14, it is speaking about how prophecy should be properly used, decently and in order
Consider this: if a Jewish woman who under the old covenant couldn't say a word in the synagogue receives salvation where she is told she is free in Christ Jesus from the Law, and goes to a church where there are abuses in Christian liberty, what do you think will be the result? A committed Christian who is aware of their ignorance will desire to do all they can to learn. Since most of them couldn't read, the majority of their learning was during the service. Since the majority is new converts, we may be able to assume that the majority was also ignorant about the teachings of the new covenant. This could explain the abuses of the gifts as well as their Christian liberty.
If this speaking is about prophecy, which chapter 14 completely covers, it still has nothing to do with preaching and teaching, or using authority as a leader. None of the context of the chapter talks about preaching at all.
IMHO, this scripture is either speaking about asking questions during service, whether agitating the leader by constant interuption, or asking questions to those around them, stirring confusion.
Even today, you can walk into a church and within a few minutes into its service determine the general maturity level of the church due to its abuses and lack of order.
Hello brother Stephen
I hope you don't mind me engaging you a bit on this.
Would it be fair to say that your position is that this passage is restricting women only in the same way that men are restricted (if they're guilty of the same disorderly conduct), and ultimately, at least today, there is no distinction whatsoever between men and women speaking in the church, leading in the church, being a pastor, etc? Is it fair to say that according to you women are not "in submission" in the church any more than men -- no distinction. Your opinion on this passage is that it's saying women shouldn't "agitate the leader by constant interrruption". They can't agitate the leader but they can BE the leader, according to your position, and can even be the head pastor. And so, according to you, this passage only prohibits disorderly conduct, something that applies equally to men, if they're guilty of it (because of lack of education, or having previously been bottled up and then can't control themselves in an orderly church meeting, etc.)
So I'm just asking for a clear statement if I may. Is it the case that you believe that in today's church there should be no distinction whatsoever between men and women (as long as they're all educated and civilized) with regard to speaking in the church, teaching, leading, being the pastor, etc. And any passages about "being in submission" (in the church) actually would apply equally to men as well if men were guilty of the same disorder, lack of education, etiquette, etc. -- hence, in today's Western church with educated men and women there should be no distinction as to what they can do from the pulpit, leading, teaching the church, being the pastor, etc. Is this correct?
Of course you know I think there is a distinction, that the scripture teaches for women to "be in submission" in both the home and the church, in ways that do not apply equally to men (who can lead). But I just want to bring it out clearly if I may, because I think it's an important question and something to make clear on where we stand on this when discussing it. I mean this whole thing gets a little foggy with all the discussion and it's sometimes hard to see what people really mean.
And honestly, I don't know how we can get from "let the women be in subjection" (in 1 Cor 14) and "let the women learn in silence in entire subjection" (1 Tim 2) to "let the women lead and be the head pastor of the church" (and let men be in subjection to them).
Because then we've turned those passages upside down to where not only are women not in subjection but actually the men are then in subjection to a women or women who are leading/pastoring the church.
P.S. put nicely, I just think men need to lovingly lead, both in the home and the church, and women should be happy to have men being the spiritual leaders both in the home and the church, and should appreciate men leading the family and the church, taking on the responsibility to lead those under their care to follow Jesus -- that's a wonderful thing
