Because Christianity is bigger than Biblical manhood or Biblical womanhood (Blog of Retha Faurie)

Should women be silent?Different views on how to understand 1 Cor 14:34-35

Possibility1) The complementarian view: Women should indeed keep silent.

It is the simplest interpretation of those 2 verses in isolation. But it runs into lots of trouble when compared to the rest of the passage. It seems to contradict “all have a psalm/ doctrine/ tongue/ revelation/ interpretation, all (psalms/ doctrines/ tongues/ revelations) should be used to edify (the gathered believers), all could prophesy, desire to prophesy, forbid not to speak…” context of the passage. It also contradicts some other evidence of women as teachers, apostles and gospel workers in the New Testament.

I have noticed no complementarian effort to reconcile these apparent contradictions. Their view doesn’t explain the “What! Did the word of God go out from only you? Or did it reach only you?” following this passage either.

And it has the glaring problem that nothing in the Old Testament law says it. Paul knew OT law, so why is the words “as the law also say” in the passage?

Possibility 2) “Silence” is meant only in a certain regard

Paul tells tongue speakers to be silent – unless an interpreter is present. (1 Cor 14:28) They could speak again later – when there is an interpreter. We could sensibly assume that a tongue speaker who also wants to give a teaching/ song/ interpretation/ prophesy that does not include tongue-speaking, would not have to remain silent because (s)he sometimes speaks in tongues.

Paul tells prophets to be silent – and to give turns to others to prophesy. (1 Cor 14:30-31) A silenced prophet giving a turn to another would obviously not have to stay quiet forever. Prophets and tongue speakers have to keep silent in some situations because of good order.

Similarly, goes this argument, women (who sat on the opposite side of the meeting room from the men, in that culture) were probably shouting questions to husbands, or chatting with each other, adding to the general disorder. Preaching is not the topic in “Let your women keep silence” but shouting questions and/or chit-chatting while others are speaking in church is. This silence, like the silence of tongue speakers and prophets, is not everlasting and does not prohibit teaching/ prophesy/ giving an interpretation (the gifts in :26, brought along to edify the congregation).

This argument is not new – Chrysostom wrote that as his view in about 400CE.

Possibility 3) Paul quotes the Corinthians, and refutes the quote

I find this likely, because:

a)  Paul is writing the letter of 1st Corinthians, or some of it, to answer things the Corinthians wrote to him about. See 7:1. And scholars believe that some sentences in the rest of the letter are quotes from the letter they wrote to Paul.

b) It fits in with the “all should bring their gifts” context. It also fits in with women speaking in the meeting of believers to tell them Jesus rose, women speaking at Pentecost, Junia as apostle, etc.

c) It gives a context to the verse after it. “What! Did the word reach you only?” do not make sense under any other view listed here.

d) The Greek letter eta, used at the beginning of :36, is often used by Paul to negate what was said before.

e) “As the law also says” is out of character for Paul. Paul preached liberation from the law as one of his central themes. It is unlikely that he would have reminded people to follow the law. Besides, there is no “women should remain silent” law in the Old Testament. An out-of-character statement is easy to explain if it is from, well, another character.

Possibility 4) This is not part of Paul’s words at all, but a later addition

Some scholars say that :34-35 is a later addition to the text. They base that largely on some old manuscripts having this passage after :40. Some also discuss marks in some very old manuscripts, which may indicate addition. They contend that these two verses should be deleted from the Bible. This would also explain why this contain the out-of-character and not-from-OT-law, while Paul knew the law, statement made with “as the law also says.”

Possibility 5) Women are not allowed to orally judge prophesy

I found the view that women are allowed to speak, but not to say whether they agree with prophesy or not, on the Internet, but there was no defence of it. Why would God give the high and respected ministry of prophesy to women (1 Cor 11:4-5 imply women prophesied in the meetings of believers), but not judging truth? Elsewhere in the New Testament, believers are told to judge truth and stay away from untruth – without restricting it to one gender, and without saying one gender should do it quietly and the other may speak about the judgment. * Some other thoughts on that view is found here.

Question: But Retha, those are 5 or 6 different interpretations! What if I am not sure of the right interpretation of “women keep silent”?

If you are unsure, start with what you know from the text: All have some gifts from God for teaching or prophesy or interpretation, all of it should be used to edify the meeting of believers. Don’t let half of the teachings or prophesies or interpretations go unused because of an unclear verse. Risk speaking and allowing women to speak.

Remember the parable of the talents, what was said of the cautious slave – and risk it. Risk letting them speak. If you are a woman, risk speaking yourself.

If you are unsure, do not limit women’s speech based on your lack of knowledge. Risk letting them speak. Let God get rid of tares, lest you root up wheat.

If you are unsure, remember that we should not quench the spirit, that God gave us all gifts according to His will – and risk it.

Remember all the needs in the world – and risk it. Risk speaking what you believe He put inside you, even if you are a woman. Risk letting others do the same. Because a certain woman’s words could be just what someone needs.

Remember that God is just, and no respecter of persons (Act 10:34, Rom 2:11, Eph 6:9) – and choose to treat female speakers with justice and impartiality.



* As I was composing this blog entry, another idea entered my head. This is not proposed as the meaning of the passage by any Bible scholar I ever read, and is not even my preferred interpretation. I add it merely for the sake of interest:

Possibility 6) Paul asked them to (temporarily) act according to the law of that culture

This passage asks women to be silent “as the law also says.” From that, we could deduct that some law somewhere said women should be silent. That law is not in the Bible.

Paul told them not to break that law in meetings of believers. He spelled out just before that he wants all to speak. But the Corinthians, sadly, had to consider a law that limits half of them from some forms of speaking.

Sometimes in the New Testament, Christians are asked to behave in a way that don’t cause unbelievers to blaspheme the gospel. Accommodating this law -where and while that law was in effect – may be one of those things the Corinthians and some other churches of the time had to do for the sake of unbelievers in Christ, who would have found women speaking in the meeting shameful. Christians in the 21st century do not live under Corinthian law, and thus don’t have to keep silent because of it. We live in a world where women who cannot speak in church are causing unbelievers to blaspheme the gospel as misogynic, and we should watch our testimony accordingly.

This don’t explain :36 either.


Comments on: "Did Paul find “women keep silent” preposterous? (Part 2)" (5)

  1. […] How tragic would it be, if we read “women keep silent”as a command, if the Scriptures actually refutes it! Several forms of testimony in the Bible make the above interpretation more likely. I will try to cover them in part 2. […]


  2. Very well written and researched!! Bravo!


  3. […] is what happened: This morning, I made a minor change to this old blog post. When going back to my main page, I saw that WordPress put up my updated post as a new post with no […]


  4. Thanks for letting me know about post 853. This post was one I had missed, so for me it was a new one that I greatly enjoyed. Thanks for posting it!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: