Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

1 Corinthians 14:33- As in all the church's of the Saints, 34. The women should keep silent in the church's. For it is not permitted for them to speak, but should be in submission, as the law also says. 35. And 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.

Someone said a few days back that Paul's writings were not controversial...so is it?

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

From a modern point of view it would be deemed sexist...

But the only scriptural controversy I see is that it wasn't something that Christ taught...

One might even argue that Christ didn't make distinctions between the sexes... His usage of the term "man" when teaching was a linguistic function, not a gender distinction...

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

Read it in context…

1 Corinthians 14:29-35 (NKJV)
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge.
30 But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent.
31 For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.
34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says.
35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

(29-33) Prophecy Must Also Be Conducted in Order.
Even as tongues are to be regulated in meetings of the church, so is the gift of prophecy. The whole meeting should not be given over to prophecy, but only two or three should speak at any given meeting.

Though Paul is far more positive about the use of the gift of prophecy in church meetings than the use of the gift of tongues, he still believes prophecy should be regulated. The gifts of the Spirit are never to be made the focus of congregational life. Worship and the Word are the focus, and the gifts flow under God’s direction around the focus of worship and the Word.

Even as prophets speak, others are to judge. No “word from the Lord” should to be received without careful consideration by the leadership of the church present at the meeting. As John said in 1 John 4:1, Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Indeed, Paul wrote in Galatians 1:8, But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. Even if an angel from heaven came with a message, it must be tested and judged.

What are the standards a prophecy should be judged by? First, it should be judged according to God’s established, revealed word. God will never contradict Himself. Also, He will not give the same gift of perfectly hearing Him He gave to the apostles and prophets who wrote the New Testament and gave the foundation for the church (Ephesians 2:20). It is wrong to assume anyone perfectly hears God, so it is also wrong to put too much trust and faith in a prophecy. It is probably a bad idea to record them, and meditate on them. Thank God for the edification and exhortation and comfort prophecy brings (1 Corinthians 14:3), but don’t let it eclipse God’s eternal Word.

Paul makes it plain that no one is “overwhelmed” by prophecy. They are still in control of the exercise of the gift, even when the Holy Spirit is moving upon them. The Holy Spirit does not take control like a demon does in demonic possession!

How do we explain the actions of those that shout and writhe and jump or act weird, supposedly under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Often, they are actually resisting the Holy Spirit, and this leads to stress, which finds an outlet in strange actions.

The goal is that all may learn and be encouraged. The gifts are merely servants to this purpose. The purpose is never to have a tongue or a prophecy at a meeting. You can have a hundred tongues, or a thousand prophecies, but if no one learns or is encouraged, there is no point to it. And if God chooses to bring the learning and encouragement apart from showing the gift of prophecy or tongues, that is up to Him. We judge the success of a meeting not by if tongues or prophecy were present, but by if God’s people learned, were encouraged, and were built up and equipped.

If there is confusion and disorder at a church meeting, it isn’t from God. God may do things we don’t understand, and things that seem strange or unpredictable to us, but there will not be a general atmosphere of confusion or weirdness.

Some, in justifying their strange and unbiblical practices at church meetings, have declared this spiritual principle: “God cannot reach the heart without offending the mind.” This is unscriptural nonsense. It results in the attitude that the more confused and crazy and weird it is, the more it must be from God. How different from the teaching of Paul here!

(34-35) Women Should Not Judge Prophecy or Disrupt Meetings.
Paul has already assumed the right of women to pray or prophecy publicly (as stated in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16). Here, he probably means that women do not have the right to judge prophecy, something restricted to the male leadership of the church.

Instead of judging prophecy, women should be submissive to what the leadership of the church judges regarding words of prophecy. If they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home: In the ancient world, just as in some modern cultures, women and men sat in different groups at church. Among the Christians in Corinth, there seems to have been the problem of women chattering or disrupting the meetings with questions. Paul is saying, “Don’t disrupt the meeting. Ask your questions at home.”

In the Jewish synagogues, men and women sat apart. But if a woman chattered or called out to her husband sitting far off, she would be dealt with severely. The Corinthian church may have adopted the same kind of seating arrangement, but with many women from Gentile backgrounds, they did not know how to conduct themselves at a church meeting. Paul teaches them how.

Again, because Paul assumed the right of women to pray and prophesy under proper authority in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, the context suggests speak refers to either the judging of prophecy (something for the leadership of the church to do) or to disruptive speaking.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Who made Paul's writings, canon?

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

So should women be stayed from leadership in the Roman/Protestant churches?

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Paul, formerly Saul, was a dedicated and indoctrinated Hebrew. Ask yourself, how could a Matriarchal society deny women a say in current affairs, Church or otherwise? Remember, Jesus bloodline to King David was through MARY, not Joseph. Hebrew men chaffed under Matriarchal rule.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Catholics... Council of Nicea...

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Good point

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

How does the genealogy of Christ work? Because if this is recorded in a patriarchal society, this is the line of Joseph, right? Doesn’t that mean none of this genealogy actually flows through Jesus’s blood? How is he from the line of King David if his real father is God and not Joseph?

The purpose of the genealogy in Matthew’s gospel is to demonstrate that Jesus is “the son of David, the son of Abraham,” that is, the legal heir of both of these men and thus the beneficiary (and ultimate fulfillment) of the covenant promises that God made to them.

All Jews were descended from Abraham. But Jesus was not descended from David, who was from the tribe of Judah, through his mother Mary, because she was instead a descendant of Aaron from the tribe of Levi. We know this because Luke’s gospel tells us that Mary was a “relative” of Elizabeth, who was a “descendant of Aaron.”

But when Joseph, who was descended from David, married Mary, this also constituted his legal adoption of the son she would bear. The language of Matthew’s genealogy reflects this legal understanding: “Joseph, the husband of Mary . . . the mother of Jesus.”

Later in Matthew’s gospel we see from the narrative that Jesus was considered to be Joseph’s son just as much as the other children that Mary and Joseph had together. The people of Nazareth ask, after Jesus tells a series of parables, “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”

Accordingly Paul can say of Jesus at the beginning of his letter to the Romans, “who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead.”

Luke says similarly in his genealogy that Jesus was “thought” or “supposed” to be the son of Joseph; the International Standard Version says that he was “legally calculated” to be Joseph’s son, and I think that’s a good way of expressing the meaning here.

So Jesus was the son of Joseph in the full legal sense, because he was adopted when Joseph married Mary, and thus Jesus is also considered to be a legal descendant of David.

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

The term “canon” is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and therefore belong in the Bible. The difficulty in determining the biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.

Compared to the New Testament, there was much less controversy over the canon of the Old Testament. Hebrew believers recognized God’s messengers and accepted their writings as inspired of God. While there was undeniably some debate in regards to the Old Testament canon, by A.D. 250 there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha, with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures.

For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115). Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John.

The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in AD 170. The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John. In AD 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with one book of the Apocrypha) and 26 books of the New Testament (everything but Revelation) were canonical and to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (AD 393) and the Council of Carthage (AD 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.

The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Is the book being accepted by the body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God’s imparting to His followers what He had already decided. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, and despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

A lot of information to look into. Thanks.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

There were seven known prophetess's in the Tanakh.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

This is a good read

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Yes... Like I said earlier, I don't think gender played a big role in the teachings of Christ...

For society, certainly, which is why we find differing rules for men and women in the OT...

But the NT is more about a personal relationship with God...

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

Hi Michael,

In the NASB, NIV and KJV versions of the Bible, what you have capitalized as though it began a sentence is not the beginning, that phrase ends the sentence and ends in a period, not with a comma, connecting it "the women..." as you have it: 33 "As in all the church's of the Saints, 34 The women should keep silent in the church's."

1st Corinthians 14:33 is a complete thought as follows: For God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. "As in all the church's of the Saints" is the end of the sentence. There is a period.

This is just at a glance, but only in the newer versions, the HCSB (now the CSB) and the ESV
is the phrase "As in all the church's of the Saints," treated as a beginning of a sentence connected to "the women should keep silent in the churches" as the continuation of one thought.

The creator of the system of chapters that is used to the present time was Stephen Langton (1150–1228), a professor of theology in Paris and later the archbishop of Canterbury. Langton introduced his chapter numbers into Jerome's Latin Bible - the Vulgate - in 1205, from which they were transferred in the ensuing centuries to Hebrew manuscripts and printings of the Old Testament, as well as to Greek manuscripts and printed editions of the New Testament.

The system of verse divisions that has prevailed to the present was the work of a Parisian book printer, Robert Estienne (Latinized as Stephanus; 1503–59). In the printing of his fourth edition of the Greek New Testament in 1551, he added his complete system of numbered verses for the first time. For the Old Testament, Stephanus adopted the verse divisions already present in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible, and within Langton’s chapters he assigned numbers to the verses. Following his own sense of logic as to the sense of the text, Stephanus, also within the framework of Langton’s chapters, divided and numbered the verses in the New Testament.

In 1555 Stephanus published the Latin Vulgate—the first whole Bible divided into numbered chapters and verses. Soon those divisions became standard in the printed editions of the scriptures in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and eventually in all of the modern languages. The first English Bible to have the numbered chapters and verses of Langton and Stephanus was the Geneva Bible in 1560.

Some have criticized Stephanus’s verse divisions as seeming arbitrary, citing the fact that while they often coincide with a single sentence in English, sometimes they include several sentences, sometimes they divide a single sentence, and sometimes they separate direct quotations from the situation of the speaker. They almost always divide paragraphs into fragments and cut up complete thoughts (e.g., Luke 2:5, 31). But clearly the advantages of organizing the text for reading and finding passages far outweigh any disadvantages, although for the casual reader, this can provide a rather serious obstacle, giving the false impression that the Bible is composed of a collection of disconnected sentences and phrases.

My only point is, as Parky60 pointed out, read the entire portion of Scripture, the complete context.

That was not my original focus... will add another post.