Schizophrenia

Let your women be silent in the churches, for it is not allowed to them to speak, but let them be submissive, as also the law says.  1 Corinthians 14:34

The Law – Some weeks ago, one reader wrote, “Perhaps at some point you could give a clear explanation as to what the thorough explanation of “let the women keep silence in the church” is. I do believe it was a cultural statement to women who, realizing their new freedom in CHRIST, were interrupting the preacher/teacher at church. However, I’d like the verification of a “scholar” like yourself. I had a ‘good’ Baptist tell me today that it wasn’t proper for a woman to lead in prayer in a public service, because that was tantamount to her ‘teaching’ men. He didn’t appreciate my comment that prayer was not teaching, but rather communication directly to and with GOD.”

There’s hardly a more controversial Pauline verse (except perhaps 1 Timothy 2:12).  So, let’s see if we can sort out some of the issues.  By the way, I am so glad that this reader put “scholar” in quotation marks since it would take someone far more gifted than I am to provide the final answer on this problem.  Nevertheless, we can at least make a few comments that might help.

Right off the top, we must admit that there is no scholarly agreement on Paul’s motivation or meaning.  Even the best Greek scholars in the world can’t come to unified understanding of this verse.  That should tell you something.  Anyone who says, “This is what Paul means,” must have a direct, divine revelation because the best Pauline exegetes still can’t come to a solid conclusion.  This is one of those verses that you dare not build a doctrine on.  There are a lot of things in Paul’s letters that are crystal clear and unambiguous.  This is not one of them.  Caution is the proper approach.

Secondly, we know that Paul was a superior student of Scripture.  As a Pharisee of the Pharisees, he undoubtedly memorized huge portions of Scripture, perhaps the entire Old Testament.  One thing is for sure.  He knew the Law.  He had no problem citing Scripture as the final authority on matters of faith and practice.  His letters are full of Scriptural quotations.  In fact, when he really wants to make a point, his usual practice is to say, “As it is written,” followed by the Old Testament passage.  But in this most crucial verse, Paul makes a huge “mistake”.  You see, there is no Scripture at all that says women must be silent in the synagogue.  Not one verse of the Law says anything like this.  Furthermore, it is completely out of character for Paul to say, “as the Law says,” and then not give us the reference.  Whatever is happening here, it is not anything like Paul’s normal writing.  On this basis, Bilezikian suggests that this statement is not from Paul at all.  How could it be?  It doesn’t sound like him.  It doesn’t read like him, and it has a serious flaw about the claim of Scripture.  Bilezikian believes that Paul is actually quoting the claim of his opposition.  They are telling the churches that women should be silent, and Paul is reminding his readers of their bogus claim before he attacks their error.  Bilezikian offers further proof of this reading in the details of the Greek text.  He makes a powerful argument, but even if you reject it, you must admit that this passage doesn’t look anything like Paul’s usual writing.  Once again, caution is the watchword.

Finally, for now, if we think that Paul actually issued this command, then we are faced with another serious problem.  If Paul really said this, then he must have experienced a schizophrenic episode, because just a few verses before this edict, Paul exhorts everyone (men and women) to speak in tongues, prophesy, and participate in the edification of the whole congregation.  How can he enthusiastically endorse the verbal activity of tongues and prophecy with one breath and then tell women to shut up in the next?  If there is anything we believe about God’s Word, it is that it is not self-contradictory.  If God inspired Paul to say that the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues (verse 23), then that same God cannot inspire the same author to tell half the congregation that they cannot open their mouths.  It’s a problem, isn’t it?  Caution, my friends, caution.

Of course, there is a lot more.  There is the Jewish background where women openly participated in the synagogue (and Paul certainly knew that).  There is the issue with the cultural concerns of Corinth.  There is the fact that a woman is the one who reported these difficulties to Paul (see 1:11).  There is the teaching of Jesus that there is no discrimination in the Kingdom.  And finally, there is the overwhelming evidence of Genesis and the role of the ‘ezer.  But those are for another day.

Your church may have handled this controversy differently.  I am not here to change your mind.  I am here to point to the text and remind all of us that it isn’t quite as clear as we would like it to be.  There are a lot of issues with this one.  In the end, something is happening here that we aren’t sure about, and for that reason alone, we must be very careful.  For what it’s worth, this “scholar” doesn’t see any way that we could build a hard case on this verse.  This one has to fit into much bigger concerns before it can make sense.

Now it’s your turn.  Think about it.

Topical Index:  women, silence, 1 Corinthians 14:34, law, church, nomos