Should Women Be Silent In Church?

[Derf]

I have a question. If Paul's instruction to the Corinthian church that women should keep silent in church and ask their husbands at home was to be applied to the Christian churches in general, and not specifically to the Corinthians, then why did he support Philip's four daughters prophesying in church? And if he outlawed women having leadership role in a church, why didn't he tell Lydia (Acts 16:40) that if she continue running a church in her home, she was being false and contravening Scripture? And if he didn't agree with women teaching men, why did he support Priscilla teaching Apollos the true gospel of Christ?

Was Paul two-faced, where he prohibited women speaking in one church and allowed it in others? Or was their a specific reason that he gave that instruction to the Corinthians because of something that was specific to them? Or, did he actually write that verse, because it seems out of the context of the passage, or what is some scribe who added it later on. We can't know, because we don't have the original that Paul actually wrote. We have a copy that was made 300 years later.

And if Paul instructed Timothy that a woman should not teach or usurp authority over men, then what about a woman teaching other women? There seems to be no prohibition on that. And having a woman pastor or elder, does that role necessarily involved usurping authority over the male elders of the church? In my Presbyterian church a woman elder has just one vote alongside the majority votes of the male elders. And we had a woman minister for a while, and she has just one vote on the board of elders as well, and she conducted her ministry and preaching with the full support and permission of the male ruling elders of the church. So she was usurping no one's authority at all.

But there are churches where the Pastor or Minister is the sole authority, and the elders are there just to rubber stamp his decisions. I don't think that is good church government and raises a number of serious problems in terms of money management and unmoderated teaching which opens the way for falsehood. So if a woman is holding that pastoral role where she is at the top of the authority pyramid, then Paul would be quite right in opposing her in that role.

I haven't read all of the posts here, so someone may have already posted this answer, but consider that the word translated "women" is often translated "wives". Thus, it may only apply within families. When it speaks of asking their husbands at home (1 Cor 14:35), that only makes sense in a context where they actually have a husband to ask. And if they are there without their husbands, as no doubt many were in the early church, how could he actually give any reasonable answer, especially if he were an unbeliever, knowing nothing of the doctrine of the church?

Consider also that Paul said women should not "pray" or "prophecy" without their heads covered. If they can't speak at all, then they can't prophecy, right? So some speaking was allowed for women.

I propose that this is a case where Paul is trying to maintain the biblical hierarchy of the family within the confines of the corporate church experience. He tells the women not to be jumping out in front of their whole family, as if they are the head of the household, and he says for the wives to give deference to their husbands by having the discussions between them at home, and not be giving conflicting messages to the church.

This should also apply (in my opinion) with regard to voting in our society--the wives need to vote along with their husbands--discussing everything/every candidate before casting the vote. The husbands need to hear their wives' concerns, then make a decision how the *family* will vote.

 

[pescador]

Paul's writing were relevant to first century society. There is no comparison between the lives of women in NT times and women in today's Western societies. Women were the property of their husbands, illiterate, and basically domestic servants. (There were a few exceptions.) Turning Paul's writings into some kind of commandment or law makes no sense in regard to the lives of women today. Should a woman who has a PhD in theology be silent in church? Should any woman who is called by God to teach His word be silent? That is total nonsense.

 

[Derf]

Paul's writing were relevant to first century society. There is no comparison between the lives of women in NT times and women in today's Western societies. Women were the property of their husbands, illiterate, and basically domestic servants. (There were a few exceptions.) Turning Paul's writings into some kind of commandment or law makes no sense in regard to the lives of women today. Should a woman who has a PhD in theology be silent in church? Should any woman who is called by God to teach His word be silent? That is total nonsense.

She doesn't have to remain silent if she has her head covered, I.e., if she's working under her husband's authority and permission.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The I Corinthians 14:34-35 verses about women being silent in church are NOT A COMMAND COMING FROM PAUL. Paul was QUOTING an excerpt from the Corinthian church's letter to himself, in which they were needing instruction about how to settle certain issues going on in the Corinthian assembly. ("Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me..." - I Corinthians 7:1).

After Paul QUOTED the I Cor. 14:33-35 statement of opinion which came from the Corinthian church's letter, he immediately begins his shocked protest over the men's stated attempts to silence women in the assembly.

"WHAT?", Paul asked in outraged rebuke in I Cor. 14:36. "Came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" (In other words, the word of God had not originated from the men of the Corinthian church. Neither had the word of God come only unto the men in the church - women had also received the word of God, since God had poured out His Spirit on all flesh in those days - both women and men of all ages, as the prophet Joel had predicted.)

If any of these men of the Corinthian church thought that they were a prophet, or spiritual, Paul told them in I Cor. 14:37 that they should give evidence of their spirituality by acknowledging that he, Paul, was giving them the correct commandments of the Lord. Paul then commanded these Corinthian men in I Corinthians 14:39 NOT to forbid speaking in tongues in the church, (as they were forbidding women to do so in I Cor. 14:33-35), as long as it was done decently and in order - one at a time, and with an interpreter, and with a maximum of three per meeting.

However, if those men of the Corinthian church wanted to maintain their ignorance about this issue of God allowing women to speak in the assembly, Paul gave them permission to stay ignorant in I Cor. 14:38. You can't fix stupid - whether in the first century, or in the 21st century.


Neither does Paul insist on utter silence from women in the assembly in I Timothy 2:11-15. The Greek word Paul used there was derived from "hesychia", which denotes A CALM SPIRIT OF MIND - not a domineering, restless attitude. This is the same "quietness" which was to characterize ALL of the church in their business dealings. "And that ye study to be quiet (hesychazein) and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands..." - I Thessalonians 4:11).

If Paul had wanted women to become absolutely voiceless in the assembly, he would have used the Greek word "sige", as in Revelation 8:1 when there was silence in heaven for about a half hour. Apparently, there was a then-current problem in the Ephesian church with women acting and speaking in an overbearing, domineering way over men in the assembly - with "authentein" - which Paul was correcting. The women were to CALM DOWN in their interchanges with men - NOT to become voiceless and mute in the assembly.

Christ was equally insistent that His disciples also NOT exercise this type of domineering authority over each other in Matthew 20:26 ("It shall NOT be so among you..."). Whoever wanted to be the greatest among them were to become servants. Men acting as "lords over God's heritage" over either men or women in the assembly was equally reprehensible to the Savior.

Along with Christ, I am thoroughly sickened over the whole debate over which gender is going to tell who what to do in the assembly. Our ONLY authority as "Head over all things to the church" is our blessed Lord and Savior. We are to call no one "master" when it comes to interpreting the word of God, which was given to all indiscriminately.

Some of the Jews' "vain traditions" of interpreting the law in those days were limiting the Torah to be taught only to men. This was the same mistaken perception that had leaked into the Corinthian church's letter to Paul - to the great detriment of gender relations in the family of God - both then and now. Paul called them on the carpet for this in no uncertain terms.

 

[Spingle]

They also protested to get the right to vote out of "defiance". Just like those of African descent were "defiant" when they sought to have the same rights as white people in the United States. And just like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to bow down to the image of Nebudchanezzar out of "defiance".

Defiance isn't wrong when it is about human dignity and refusing to put up with oppression.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was defiant against the Nazis, and became a martyr for it.
Martin Luther was defiant, and he received a bull of excommunication for it.
William Tyndale was defiant against King Henry VIII, and that eventually got him killed.

Women are people. And deserve nothing less than the fullness of actual human personhood.

St. Augustine reminds us lex iniusta non est lex, "an unjust law is no law".

-CryptoLutheran

Was Democracy ever mentioned in the Bible? Is racism not a sin? And no, actually, I'm quite sure defying government law is sin, UNLESS it would causeth one to sin. I know not of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, nor the reason for which he defied the law. Luther wasn't the greatest man, either. I know nothing of William Tyndale. Yes, women are people, but they are subordinate to men. to suggest otherwise would be a blatant denial of the teachings of the Apostles, and, by extension, God himself

 

[pescador]

Was Democracy ever mentioned in the Bible? Is racism not a sin? And no, actually, I'm quite sure defying government law is sin, UNLESS it would causeth one to sin. I know not of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, nor the reason for which he defied the law. Luther wasn't the greatest man, either. I know nothing of William Tyndale. Yes, women are people, but they are subordinate to men. to suggest otherwise would be a blatant denial of the teachings of the Apostles, and, by extension, God himself

Genesis 1:26-28, NRSVue: Then God said, “Let us make humans in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over the cattle and over all the wild animals of the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”

So God created humans in his image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

That is the way humans were created by God. Male and female were created in the image of God and gave them both dominion over His creation.

According to you, women are people, but they are subordinate to men. According to God they are not.

 

[Spingle]

Genesis 1:26-28, NRSVue: Then God said, “Let us make humans in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over the cattle and over all the wild animals of the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”

So God created humans in his image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

That is the way humans were created by God. Male and female were created in the image of God and gave them both dominion over His creation.

According to you, women are people, but they are subordinate to men. According to God they are not.

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

"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. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." -I Corinthians 14:34-35

 

[ViaCrucis]

Yes, women are people, but they are subordinate to men.

And that's how this conversation ended.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Wayne Gabler]

I have a question. If Paul's instruction to the Corinthian church that women should keep silent in church

That probably has to do with Adam being the head (as he was created at the start of day6 in the garden) and Eve was to be his helper (as she was the last creation on day6)
When the congregation gathers, it is the husband alone who speaks for the family. The other 6 days of the week, the wife is giving the husband the 'help' he needs so he sounds intelligent when he is speaking to other husbands at the weekly meeting.

Example: Joseph was a carpenter, his wife was a daughter of Arron, she would know every word in the OT, by heart as that group were very dedicated to Moses and Aaron and Miriam.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

And that's how this conversation ended.

-CryptoLutheran

Any woman I know would have decked me hard as soon as the word 'but' came out of my mouth.
Total stranger, close friend, . . . same ending.

 

[kiwimac]

No. Next question.

 

[3 Resurrections]

That probably has to do with Adam being the head (as he was created at the start of day6 in the garden) and Eve was to be his helper (as she was the last creation on day6)
When the congregation gathers, it is the husband alone who speaks for the family. The other 6 days of the week, the wife is giving the husband the 'help' he needs so he sounds intelligent when he is speaking to other husbands at the weekly meeting

This is a warped interpretation of what scripture intends by the word "head". The "head" of a river is not the boss of the river - it is the origination source. The "head" of a line does not tell the rest in line what to do - it is the starting point which is the beginning of that line.

Adam was the "head" of Eve since his physical body provided the origination of her body which God made out of his rib. God was the creator of them both, and He gave dominion over the planet to them both without preferment of one over the other. We should be laboring to restore this state of affairs, even in this life which is filled with the tragic results of the Fall of mankind.

I find it interesting that God said the man needed help, but He did not say that about the woman.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

This is a warped interpretation of what scripture intends by the word "head". The "head" of a river is not the boss of the river - it is the origination source. The "head" of a line does not tell the rest in line what to do - it is the starting point which is the beginning of that line.

Adam was the "head" of Eve since his physical body provided the origination of her body which God made out of his rib. God was the creator of them both, and He gave dominion over the planet to them both without preferment of one over the other. We should be laboring to restore this state of affairs, even in this life which is filled with the tragic results of the Fall of mankind.

I find it interesting that God said the man needed help, but He did not say that about the woman.

Thanks but I'm not really interested in your version. My comment was for another member, I will reply to anything he says about my post, anybody else, . . . not so much.

 

[Marilyn C]

I have a question. If Paul's instruction to the Corinthian church that women should keep silent in church and ask their husbands at home was to be applied to the Christian churches in general, and not specifically to the Corinthians, then why did he support Philip's four daughters prophesying in church? And if he outlawed women having leadership role in a church, why didn't he tell Lydia (Acts 16:40) that if she continue running a church in her home, she was being false and contravening Scripture? And if he didn't agree with women teaching men, why did he support Priscilla teaching Apollos the true gospel of Christ?

Was Paul two-faced, where he prohibited women speaking in one church and allowed it in others? Or was their a specific reason that he gave that instruction to the Corinthians because of something that was specific to them? Or, did he actually write that verse, because it seems out of the context of the passage, or what is some scribe who added it later on. We can't know, because we don't have the original that Paul actually wrote. We have a copy that was made 300 years later.

And if Paul instructed Timothy that a woman should not teach or usurp authority over men, then what about a woman teaching other women? There seems to be no prohibition on that. And having a woman pastor or elder, does that role necessarily involved usurping authority over the male elders of the church? In my Presbyterian church a woman elder has just one vote alongside the majority votes of the male elders. And we had a woman minister for a while, and she has just one vote on the board of elders as well, and she conducted her ministry and preaching with the full support and permission of the male ruling elders of the church. So she was usurping no one's authority at all.

But there are churches where the Pastor or Minister is the sole authority, and the elders are there just to rubber stamp his decisions. I don't think that is good church government and raises a number of serious problems in terms of money management and unmoderated teaching which opens the way for falsehood. So if a woman is holding that pastoral role where she is at the top of the authority pyramid, then Paul would be quite right in opposing her in that role.

Hi Watchman,

Also, women would not be able to pray out loud, give a testimony, read the Bible out loud, or even sing etc etc.
But the Greek reveals that -

`silence,` actually means the women were not to be meddlesome, keeping one`s seat, undisturbed, not to cause an uproar.

`not to have authority over, ` means not to usurp authority, not to dominate.

Much clearer.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Hi Watchman,

Also, women would not be able to pray out loud, give a testimony, read the Bible out loud, or even sing etc etc.
But the Greek reveals that -

`silence,` actually means the women were not to be meddlesome, keeping one`s seat, undisturbed, not to cause an uproar.

`not to have authority over, ` means not to usurp authority, not to dominate.

Much clearer.

You're right. What was happening in the Corinthian church was that wives who thought they had the right, were openly questioning prophecies and revelation given to others, disrupting the flow of the Spirit in the meetings. This is why Paul said that if these wives had questions, they should wait until they got home and asked their husbands there instead of disrupting the church meeting with their questions.

The reason why Paul instructed Timothy about women in the Ephesian church was that there were women prophets who were being dominant and needed their wings clipped.

The three rules about interpreting Scripture:
1. Context
2. Context
3. Context.

 

[anetazo]

Women can teach word of God. Huldah the prophetess was school teacher and woman of God. Several priests sent by king of judah, enquired of her. Its comical that 4 priests didn't know God's word and laws and sought kindergarten teacher. Malachi 2:7. For the priests lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law of at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts. Four clowns went to woman of God for counsel. Huldah was prophetess. Second kings 22:14. SO HILKIAH THE PRIEST, AND AHIKAM, AND ACHBOR AND SHAPHAN, AND ASAHIAH, WENT UNTO HULDAH THE PROPHETESS, THE WIFE OF SHALLUM THE SON OF TIKVAH, THE SON OF HARHAS, KEEPER OF THE WARDROBE; NOW SHE DWELT IN JERUSALEM IN THE COLLEGE; AND THEY COMMUNED OF HER. This is really sad. The priests are to know God's word and laws. Idolatry was so bad in Israel, assyria deported most of them. Judah had serious problem with idolatry. You can't mix heathen traditions and customs with true worship of God. A woman of God had to correct them. Acts chapter 2:17. And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men dream dreams. 2:18. And on My servants and on hand maidens I will pour out in those days of My spirit; and they shall prophesy. The word prophesy means teach, preach. Women will teach God's word. Of pastor is teaching sermon in house of God, both men and women are too keep quite. Don't chatter. I documented that women can teach word of God. What's sad is, they're are few insecure men who can't stand to see women be equal. Or see women with equal pay. God will use women to carry out His will. We don't want insecure men in the fox holes with us. The body of christ is unity, not division. These kind of individuals will put stumbling block in your path or corrupt your mind. Because they're destitute of the truth.