Women in the Church? #3
Answers to various arguments
WOMEN'S ROLE IN THE CHURCH SERVICE......CONTINUED, PART THREE The Way: Have you ever been in an audience somewhere before a program begins, and on all sides of you is the sound of talking from the people around you, but you can't really tell what anyone is saying? All you hear is the hum of people talking. That's a good way of describing laleo. It's not necessarily intelligible speech - it's just the sound of the human voice. That's what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 14. If you have received the gift of speaking in another language, but it's a language no one else in the room understands, trying to address the group in that language is pointless -- no one will understand what you are saying! All they will hear is the sound of your voice! That's the "speaking" (laleo) in tongues (glossa, languages) Paul is referring to in this chapter. What many people have missed is that Paul is not speaking about tongues, and then about women. The Greek shows us the unifying factor: Paul is discussing the subject of laleo, of useless or non-edifying application of the human voice during services! What Paul said was that women are not allowed to laleo, and it is disgraceful for a woman to laleo in the church. In this passage, Paul is not addressing women preachers at all! COMMENT: Wooww! Just wait a minute! Yes, Paul is speaking about tongues that do not profit anyone if there is no interpreter. BUT he is also speaking about a whole lot MORE than that. He is speaking about "prophets" and "prophesying" - about speaking to edify and instruct. His whole theme in this chapter was that of clear instructional edification for everyone. In verse 26, he acknowledges that everyone there had something they could contribute, so was the magnitude of the gifts of the Spirit in their congregation. He then sets about giving them instructions on how order should be within their assembly during the service. He even lays out for them that only SO MANY (with the gift of tongues and those who could prophesy - speak the words of the Lord) could speak and that IN TURN. He tells them there is no such thing as "well I just could not help but speak, for the Spirit made me do it" as the spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet. The Spirit does not force anyone to speak, it does not just "take over" a person like a demon sometimes does that enters an individual, and where that person then has no control of what and when and how they do things. Paul instructs them God and His Spirit do not function that way, where confusion is the end result. You will notice the LAST thing, before introducing his instructions concerning women, that he talks about is NOT tongues but it is the PROPHETS and prophesy. Those who can speak the words of the Lord either by direct revelation on the spot, or instruct and teach the revelation of God from the Scriptures. So if we want to argue any "nearest" context in the Greek, for our "women keep silence" issue, then it is not tongues but prophesy that they are to be silent on. The full truth of the matter is the WHOLE chapter context, that I have already given above in earlier comments. But a repeat is worthwhile. Paul knew most of the congregation at Corinth had some gift of the Spirit, including the women. They did not control those gifts, they did not have order in the service, they were all just letting it hang out as they say, anytime they felt like it. Paul corrected them on their misuse of the gift of tongues and how such a gift in the assembly should be used. He instructs them on some order they should have in their service and even limits certain gifts to two or three. He understands even the women had some of these gifts, and knows the question will arise (especially among the Jews there) about whether they are allowed to use that vocal gifts in edifying and instructing the congregation during the time when the church comers together into one place. It is at the END of all his correcting and instructions he gave to them that he answers that question, as it would then cover ALL that he has given instructions on. Paul answers the question of all women with any gift of being able to teach, instruct, preach, the words of the Lord, by saying, THEY are to be SILENT in that regard, even to the point of asking questions. If they have any questions they are to ask their husbands at home (a general statement, without going into the exceptions of those who are not married, divorced or widows). The Way: In fact, Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:4-5, regarding men and women praying and prophesying with their heads covered or uncovered, strongly implies that the women were able to take part in worship, in praying, and perhaps even in teaching (one of the definitions of prophesying) in the assembly. COMMENT: We have already show and proved that this section of Scripture in 1 Cor. 11 has nothing to do with "when the church comes together into one place" but it does concern every man and woman in the body of Christ on an every day basis outside of the church coming together. The Way: Notice this footnote to 1 Corinthians 14:33-40 in the Key Study Bible: "... it was not an instruction to all the men in general not to permit any woman to speak in church, but to husbands to guide and teach their own wives lest they produce confusion and disturbance in a meeting. ..." COMMENT: Now let's use some logic and some common sense as to how Paul wrote and the before context he wrote in. He had just gone through expounding and explaining and correcting the errors of speech the members of the congregation were practicing in the church coming together at Corinth. He had made it clear there was not only confusion in their services, but people speaking who could not be understood by anyone. He then instructs them what church services should be for - edification for all, and he further lays down certain rules of how many can speak who have certain gifts of the Spirit. This he tells them is in order NOT to have confusion, for, under inspiration of the Spirit he says, God is not the author of confusion. Plainly, he is telling them that their confusion in services is from somewhere else other than God, I think they would have understood where he was telling them it was from, without naming any names of those in opposition to the Lord, and who are part of the unseen world of the created spirits. If Paul, after saying all this, was now wanting the husbands to make sure their wives were not part of this confusion, he could have easily said after verse 33, something like this: "Husbands, make sure you teach and train your wives at home, so they will not bring any confusion in speech as they participate in the teaching and preaching when the church comes together." That's all he would have needed to say, for IF, and for the sake of argument we shall say it was so, women were already fully participating in the teaching, preaching, expounding of the word, in the Church of God services everywhere, then a simple short paragraph such as I have given above would have been all that Paul would have needed to say after verse 33 of chapter 14, to the husbands and the wives. There would have been no need to have said anything about "the law" or about "learning" or about "asking their husbands at home" for everyone would have known women were on par with men in the teaching and preaching during services. If there was any problem with wives bringing in confusion during the teaching service then a short sentence like above would have been all that Paul needed to say. Then such an idea that it was the women who were mainly responsible for the confusion is a real slap in the face for them. To think that bringing in talk confusion in the teaching part of the church service is only a problem that women have, and need some extra instruction at home under their husbands, to control and overcome it, is not only a slap in the face towards women but is a close-minded and blinded view to the fact that MEN can have just as much a problem with confusion in talk when they start going at each other and disagreeing over what the word says or means. Men are just as likely to interrupt each other in speaking, disagree over the meaning of a verse or verses, get all emotional, and cause confusion in an open forum (as the Corinthians obviously were practicing before Paul instructed them about "order") as women are! So who were going to teach the men lest they produce confusion and disturbance in a meeting? Then why would anyone want to teach another in the homes not to cause confusion and a disturbance in the church meetings when Paul had JUST NOW instructed them in the ORDER of things, so there would be no confusion? He had just given them what he said were the COMMANDS of the Lord. He had just instructed them in no uncertain way about those who would give edification talks to the congregation. He had instructed them HOW NOT TO BE IN CONFUSION! To think that the women still needed further instruction on the matter, makes out the women and wives to be either not listening, not able to read, or just plain slow and dumb. Again, it would be another insult and slap in the face for women. Paul had a number of women that were workers with him in the gospel. He wrote and spoke highly of them in not a few of his epistles. To understand Paul as teaching and saying what Zodhiates, the Key Study Bible, and the authors of this article want you to accept and believe, is not only not understanding Paul and his theology, but is also filled with much il-logic. The Way: "The word 'speak' should be taken to mean 'uttering sounds that are incoherent and not understood by others.' Paul says that instead it is better to have silence. Paul uses the same word 'keep silent' to admonish a man [any person, actually] who speaks in an unknown tongue without an interpreter (vv. 28, 30). " COMMENT: So "keep silent" then does mean to "keep silent." Those who could speak in a tongue were not to speak - keep silent - not utter sounds of speech, IF they had no interpreter, or could not interpret for themselves. So Paul said what he meant and meant what he said. If the tongues speaker was to be silent, not to speak (which is admitted to mean just that - not say any words in edification, teaching, preaching, expounding, and prophesy from the Lord) unless there was an interpreter, then Paul also meant what he said and said what he meant, when he said women were to keep silent and that it was not permitted unto them to speak. The context as we have seen is edification, teaching, expounding, revelations, instruction from the Lord, not the mere fact of saying "hello" to someone, or telling the children to stop making a noise. Paul then clearly tells us that women are to "keep silent" in teaching during services where instruction and edification for the whole congregation is the purpose of coming together into one place. The Way: "What Paul is saying is that only one man [person] must speak at a time, for if two speak at once, there will be confusion. ... The issue is not men versus women, but it is confusion versus order. In God's sight, it makes no difference who causes the confusion. It is a shame for any woman to bring confusion into the local church (v.35), even as it is for any man to do so." COMMENT: The issue up to verse 33 is first to correct and instruct about the prevailing confusion that was present in the church service, and to lay down rules for order. Then he addresses after all that, the issue of whether women can use the gifts of the Spirit they may have, in teaching, preaching, edifying the congregation from the word or revelations of the Lord, during that part of the service devoted to that purpose - teaching and edifying from the Lord to the congregation, which he had just finished addressing and laying down instruction. The Way: And again, as mentioned previously, the word gunaikes (Strong's #1135, a derivative of gune) in verse 34 should not be translated "women," but as "wives." COMMENT: Not so, it should be as nearly all Greek and English translation give - women. Paul was meaning all women as shown in 1 Tim. 2, where the instruction on dress and outward appearance for women applies to all women, not just the married, and where the instruction in verses 11,12 applies to all women not only to the married. The Way: Once again, the point of the verse is that wives should submit to their husbands. Paul isn't teaching the subjection of women to men in general, but rather that husbands and wives fit into the family unit ordained by God. Zodhiates writes that "the duty of the husbands is to restrain their own wives from out-bursts during the worship service. Whenever Paul speaks of submissiveness by a woman, it is always on the part of a wife to her own husband." COMMENT: Wow! Read that again where they quote from Zodhiates. Yes, I guess he wrote it, they quote it. Now, in a world where many nations had kept their women as practical slaves, and where they were not permitted to go on to higher education, where they were often looked upon as part of the "possessions" of a man. Where the Jews could cast them aside with the stroke of a pen, and go on to another one, or two, or three (polygamy was still allowed in Jewish life), it would seem if we adopt the suppositions of Zodhiates in what Paul was teaching under the sections we are concerned with in this study, that there were some pretty wild and powerful and emancipated wives in the Churches of God, who would really "go to town" as they say, during the church come togethers. It would seem they would rant and scream and put on quite the out-bursts during worship service, so they needed to be restrained in some fashion (maybe holding, maybe standing between their wife and the person their wife was going to cat-claw, maybe putting a rope around them and tying them down, maybe some other type of restraining like a straight jacket) during services. This was so bad that Paul even had to tell the husbands to teach them restraint and to teach them to be under the husband's authority, at home, somehow, in some manner. Now, how would you do this at home, away from the situation of many others coming together and where arguments could take place if there was no order or an open forum was practiced? Would you get the kids to confront their mother so she was close to an out-burst, and then teach her to restrain? Would you call in the neighbors and have them niggle your wife unto she was ready to explode in vocal vociferousness, and then teach her to restrain? Would you deliberately pick a fight with her to then teach her to restrain from throwing the cooking pot at you? I speak of course with tongue in cheek. For the sake of the argument, we shall go along with the supposition and theory of Zodhiates. By the time Paul wrote his epistles it was just common practice within all the Churches of God, that women were teaching, preaching, expounding the word of the Lord in church services just as much as the men were. But they were getting out of hand, just causing far too much confusion, bringing too many out-bursts into the worship service, and so Paul found it needful to tell the husbands to do some teaching at home, so their wives would be more restrained and come under their authority and be subject to them, not usurping their husband's authority. How would he tell her she had gone too far and was now usurping it over him? Would it be if she spoke too often, or spoke too fast, or too slow, or too continuously without a break for three minutes? Would it be if he thought she was smiling too much at the other men in the congregation? Or maybe, if she did not smile at him enough times in any five minute period? Perhaps he would deem she had gone beyond his authority if she did not allow him to speak, once every ten minutes at least. Maybe he would have to restrain her somehow if she laughed too many times, or got a little emotional over a verse or point of doctrine or someone else commenting on something. I can see the people and couples and ministers of the church spending large amounts of time trying to figure out how to establish and practice this type of family instruction we are to believe Paul was teaching to the husbands. Perhaps, when Paul was alive he wrote it out for them in fine detail, but it got lost along the way, and we today are left in the dark and left to fend for ourselves, and figure it all out for ourselves. Oh, the many hours of wrangling, disputing, arguing, fretting, and confusion it would take and produce, to probably get nowhere in a slow hurry. It would probably end up making as much sense as the words "slow hurry." The Way: A DIFFERENT SET-UP IN THOSE DAYS But why should there be any extraneous talking such as this? In our modern congregations, families sit together, and we all sit respectfully and listen to what is taking place. In ancient times, however, the seating arrangement with which we are familiar was probably not what people were using. Note this passage from the Jewish New Testament commentary in reference to 1 Corinthians 14: "Sha'ul [Paul] is answering a question (7:1) the Corinthians asked about wives discussing with their husbands what is being said while it is being said. This would disturb decorum even if the wife were sitting next to her husband; but if the universal Jewish practice of the time (and of Orthodox congregations today) was followed, wherein women and men are seated separately in the synagogue, it would obviously be intolerable to have wives and husbands yelling at each other across the m 'chitzah (dividing wall)." COMMENT: Yes, of course it would be distracting and end in confusion if many wives were asking their husbands questions about what was being said, while it was still being said, while the speaker was still teaching and expounding the word of the Lord. So Paul, knowing that, also made sure his readers understood that his directive for women to keep silent while the teaching part of the service was under way, included even keeping silent concerning questions their wives may have as the teaching service was under way. They were to note their questions and ask their husbands for answers when they were at home. And as I have already pointed out, Paul was thus upholding the family structure by honoring the husbands to answer their wive's questions and not the Eldership. I would suppose if the husband did not know the answer he would go to the Eldership for it, and then instruct his wife. The Way: EDUCATIONAL DIFFERENCES Another possible explanation for Paul's instructions to husbands about their wives "speaking out" in the assembly is this: During Paul's time most women were not very well educated. Men were the ones that delved deeply into the issues of the day, especially the issues relating to theology. Imagine a doctrinal message being given in Corinth that requires a foundational understanding of the topic. In order for individuals to contribute to the edification of the assembly, they would need a deeper understanding of the topic. There may well have been great differences in the educational levels among the men and women of the Corinthian congregation, which led to confusion at times. As it was written on another occasion, "We have much to say, and it is difficult to explain, for you have become sluggish in hearing. Although you should be teachers by this time, you need to have someone teach you again the basic elements of the utterances of God. You need milk, (and) not solid food" (Hebrews 5:11-12, The New American Bible). COMMENT: The fault with this reasoning is that it forgets again the context of the chapter and the context of the church in Corinth. Here was a congregation blessed with more GIFTS OF THE SPIRIT than probably any other congregation in the Churches of God at that time. The gifts of the Spirit are given to all (including women) as the Spirit distributes. What lack of formal education some of the women in the church had, having a gift of the Spirit would nullify, and when it would come to teaching and preaching and expounding the word of the Lord, many a man and woman would excel if filled with not only the Spirit of the Lord but also a gift from that Spirit. The Way: Imagine that we are the Corinthian congregation. Someone's wife abruptly interrupts the meeting, on a fairly regular basis, by asking a question in the middle of the discussion. It may be a very good question. Yet, it would require such a digression back into the fundamental levels of the topic that it takes away from the edification intended for the whole group. To answer and explain her question would not allow the topic to move forward. Of course, there's nothing wrong with that, and occasional review is good for everyone. The problem arises when this happens week alter week. Some of the members have expressed feelings of frustration over this situation. Because we, in Corinth, wish to resolve this problem, and a number of other problems we are currently experiencing in our local fellowship, one of the leaders of the congregation sends a letter to Paul in order to see how he would want us to handle these situations. Paul sends us the letter that would later be known as the book of 1 Corinthians. In the section of his letter giving instructions about how our assemblies should be conducted, he addresses the problem of handling interruptions by wives asking questions of their husbands during the meeting, a process that slows down the learning in the assembly. He tells us, "Let your wives be at peace and in control of themselves in the assembly, for it is not permitted for them to be continuously speaking out and causing a disturbance. They are to be subordinate to their husbands as we are instructed in the scriptures. If they want to learn more about what is being discussed, they should ask their husbands later, for it is totally inappropriate for wives to speak out and disturb the edification process in the assembly" (authors' paraphrase). This way, husbands and wives can prepare together, ahead of time, and discuss the background of a discussion topic, so they can both be prepared to contribute and learn. This discussion, and the instructions about husbands and wives given in 1 Timothy, should help us better to understand the group dynamics that were taking place at Corinth in the middle of the first century and how Paul instructed them to properly conduct their meetings. COMMENT: Interesting scenario, but Paul's language is not what the authors paraphrase. He could have used words like "peace" and "self-control" and "continually speaking out." He could have used words like "I hear your women are causing a disturbance when the church comes together" and words such as, "I hear the wives in your assembly are prone to out-bursts" or "as for the wives asking questions while the prophet speaks." He could have used words to say, "I hear the wives are speaking out and edification is hindered." The Greek language had words for all the above. Paul could have used them and written very similar to what the authors give us in their paraphrase. BUT HE DID NOT! And for one simple reason. That was not the problem as such, and it was not the thought Paul was answering. He was answering the logical question from all the talk on the gifts of the Spirit that preceded (and all the instruction of when, and how, and who could speak to edify, and some order given in the number and control to be exhibited) up to verse 33, and that question would be: Can the women use their gifts of the Spirit in the teaching/preaching/expounding of the word to edification, part of the church service? And Paul's answer was "no" - they are to remain silent in this, even to the point of asking no questions to their husbands about what is expounded, but to save their questions and ask their husbands at home. The Way: WHAT LAW IS REFERRED TO? Next we need to consider the enigmatic phrase, "as the Law says" (verse 34). What law does Paul mean? The King James Version really gives womanhood a connotation of slavery in its translation of verse 34: "Let your women (gune, wife] 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." Notice how the KJV translators have added the italicized phrase, "they are commanded." In the KJV there is definitely a strong, domineering bias showing through in this verse by the translators. Then, adding the phrase about "the law" to back up what Paul was saying could make it sound like the law, Paul, and churchmen in general were down on women. COMMENT: The KJV is under attack once more, made out to be the murderer of women. The words "they are commanded" are in italicized words in the KJV, which the KJV tells you at the beginning are not in the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. I would find it much more of a plot and clandestine plan if the scholars of the KJV had not italicized these words but put them in matching letters to the rest of the words that are in the Greek. I see no deliberate bias here on the part of the KJV translators. Paul was after all backing up his stand on this matter with "the law." His authority to be so dogmatic on what he had just stated was not from himself per se, not his idea at all. He had authority to state what he did concerning women being silent and not using their spiritual gifts in the teaching/expounding the word of the Lord, part of the church service, from "the law." It is interesting that the Greek word Paul chose to use for the word "permitted" in the KJV carries the overtone of "command" within it. See the Greek lexicons. The Way: But what we are reading is the result of men translating these verses while harboring the mental concept toward women that we saw earlier! Yet, what this verse appears to say (in the KJV) is not fully consistent with what we know of the love of God that created these relation- ships. COMMENT: Was there some terrible mental hate being exhibited by the KJV translators towards women when they translated verse 34 of 1 Cor. 14 ? Oh, they added some words but told you by putting them in italics that they are not technically in the Greek. Yet, we have seen the word "permitted" in the Greek carries the overtone of "command." The KJV translators were Greek scholars. How do the modern Greek/English translators Green and Berry, translate this verse? "Let the women of you in the churches be silent, not for it is allowed to them to speak, but let them be subject, as also the law says......a shame for it is for women in church to speak" verses 34,35, as rendered into English by Jay P. Green, Sr. "Women yours in the assembly let them be silent, for it is not allowed to them to speak; but to be in subjection, according as also the law says.......for a shame it is for women in assembly to speak" verses 34, 35, as rendered by George Berry. As you see not that much different from the KJV. Are Berry and Green biased towards women? If you are a Greek scholar and you give a literal translation from the Greek into English as close as possible going from one language to another, then you translate as Green and Berry did, and as the KJV translators did. All three very close to translating with the same English words. Of course you may want to say all three had bias towards women. And I could say look up these verses in dozens of other translations and you will find many more scholars of Greek with bias towards women. God is love, and He personally took a rib from Adam and made from it a women. He looked at all He had created and made and said it was "good." He has no bias towards women, He is perfect righteousness, and it was He who inspired these words in verses 34 and 35 of 1 Cor. 14. In His love for men and women He also created basic roles for them, outside the church service and inside the church, when it comes together into one place. The Way: Let's understand what "the law" means. "Law" is translated from the Greek word nomos (Strong's #3551), which is always translated "law" in the KJV. However, nomos can refer to any number of things: the Ten Commandments, the Torah, Jewish customs and traditions, or even an agreed-upon procedure. There is, in reality, no clear-cut law in scripture authorizing men to subjugate women and treat them like children! COMMENT: Now we see a psychological mind move here. If you are not agreeing with the authors' reasoning and teachings on this matter, and are still agreeing say with me, then you are not understanding the Scriptures and still following the clandestine plot supposedly planted in the KJV by the scholars who translated for King James - and that plot was to subjugate and treat women like children. I have read the KJV from the age of six years, that is nearly 50 years ago now, and I have never once found any passage in it that was teaching anyone to treat women like children. So if the KJV scholars were trying to put forth that instruction in some of their translations of the Hebrew and Greek into English, they surely did a lousy job of it. The Way: Paul may have been thinking of Genesis 3:16: "To the woman he said, I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." There is another translation of this verse, which also needs to be given consideration. It is found in a footnote of Genesis 3:16 in The New Living Translation: "Then he said to the woman, "You will bear children with intense pain and suffering. And though you may desire to control your husband, he will be your master" [Or, "he will have dominion over you."]. According to this footnote, the thrust of the verse implies that the wife may have a desire to be in control of her husband, and thus the family. But, the instruction from our Father is that the husband would have the dominant role in the God-ordained family. This is more in line with the instructions from a loving Father of how the marital relationship should be -- the husband and father of the family having dominion and lovingly guiding and leading the family. This lends a much better understanding of this verse than the master/slave connotation the KJV gives. Why would a wife "desire to control [her] husband"? The reason is that she has rejected God's revealed knowledge of proper marital relations. Was Paul referring to Genesis 3:16 when he said, "as the law says" in I Corinthians 14:34? Perhaps. However, it's also quite likely that Paul was actually making a non-specific reference to the God-ordained set of family dynamics, as if to say, "You are well aware of how the family should be run, so please apply that knowledge in this situation." COMMENT: The KJV in Gen.3:16 is not a good translation in some ways, but the NLT given above is also not good in other ways. First of all many women in the world do NOT have any "pain" in childbirth, that this verse has taught many to believe. For generations many have assumed it was natural and God's intent here to make sure all women have physical pain when giving birth. Such is not the case at all, and there are thousands upon thousands of women who have delivered their babies naturally without any physical pain. The Hebrew words here do not mean physical pain, but that is a whole new subject. Granty Dick Reid in his ground-breaking book "Childbirth Without Fear" goes into all this in great detail. The last part of this verse the NLT has done a much better job in translating than the KJV, or should I say understanding the meaning and intent of the Hebrew. Jay Green gives the literal translation of this verse this way: "to the woman He said, greatly I will increase your sorrow and your conception, in sorrow you shall bear sons, and your husband your desire shall be, and he shall rule over you." So once more we see that the KJV scholars did a pretty accurate translation of the Hebrew into English, if we go with the literal translation and not a paraphrase or interpretive translation. Looking at all the Bible, and then understanding or interpreting this verse, I agree with what the authors say above. For an in-depth study of this I recommend the book before mentioned called "Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective" by James Hurley. As some Bible commentators state, when Paul said "the law" here, he may not have been thinking about any one particular passage of OT Scripture at all. He may simply have been stating that the whole general teaching of the OT was that women were never given the role by God to teach, preach, instruct, expound the word of the Lord in official congregational gatherings when the church came together into one place. The general reading of the OT will clearly show forth that truth and give the reader that instruction. No woman was ever a part of the official priesthood of Israel that did all the praying and teaching on the holy convocations - when the church (Israel was the church in the wilderness - Acts 7:38) came together into one place. The Way: "IN THE CHURCH"? As we saw above, Paul wrote: "Let your women keep silence in the churches." What did he mean by this? Turning to Paul's letter to Titus, we read this: "Likewise, teach the older women to he reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God" (Titus 2:3-5, NIV). Paul is instructing Titus to teach the older women to teach the younger women! Women are to teach! "Yes," some will say, "but this means at home, not during services." Remember, though, that the scripture quoted earlier doesn't say that a woman isn't to "speak during church services," but rather that it is disgraceful for a woman to laleo in the church. Yet, here we see that Titus is to instruct older women in the church to instruct younger women in the church! While the first instance may be construed to mean that people should not laleo "during church services," or "during the assembly," this passage in Titus is clearly talking about women "in the church" -- members of the Body of Christ -- teaching other women who are also "in the church"! COMMENT: Of course they are going to say Paul was just saying in 1 Cor. 14 women should not "chit-chat" or be "asking questions" to their husbands or others while some teaching is being presented, as it causes distraction and hence confusion. But we have more than just 1 Cor. 14 we also have 1 Tim. 2 on this matter. And as I have tried to show, the problem was not "chit-chat" from women or speaking in tongues no one could understand, for Paul had already talked about that problem and instructed as what to do about it. If it was confusing chit-chat from the women he then wanted to correct, he could have easily used language like: "I hear the women are talking to each other and asking questions to their husbands while someone is expounding the word of the Lord. Tell them to stop this talk as it brings confusion to the assembly." Now to Titus. Please read carefully chapter two, read chapter one also if you like. Can you find the word "church" in those chapters? Can you find the words "when you come together into one place"? Can you find the words "when the church comes together"? No! Such words and phrases are just not there. Paul is instructing Titus about certain things that he should instruct others to do or not to do. He was to instruct the older men. He was to instruct the younger men. He was to instruct servants. And he was to instruct the older women. Yes, he was to tell the older women they should instruct the younger women in certain areas of their living. How would Titus do this instruction? Well it certainly could be in sermons, but it certainly could also be in private conversations he would have with the older and younger women, anywhere - after services as they fellowshipped on the Sabbath, in their homes as he visited them during the week, and at other convenient times. There is nothing in Titus to tell us when the older women should teach the younger women these things mentioned. 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2 would rule out that it would be during official church services of teaching and expounding the word of the Lord, where the whole church has come together with men present. And that is what we need to understand, it is when men are present and it is an official whole church coming together into one place to be instructed and edified in the expounding of the word of the Lord, that women are to remain silent in the teaching and expounding of the word section of the service. And if they have any questions about what is taught they are to ask their husbands at home. The older women would not then be teaching the younger women during this part of the service. Now if it was a woman's "retreat" week-end and only women were there (as many churches do hold such week-ends - they also have men only retreat week-ends) then women would teach women. And older women could teach younger women at such retreats. The Lord gives no instructions in His word that prohibits women only retreats for one or more days. Women would then teach women at these times. The most natural times for older women to teach the younger women what Paul wanted them to teach, is of course during more natural times - everyday times - everyday living as the older and younger women of the church would meet and fellowship during the week, outside of the 2 hours or so a week that the church comes together into one place. Remember the phrase "church coming together" is not found in Titus chapter two. The Way: Here is a classic example of a phrase that may have more than one meaning. The only way to really understand what is meant by "in the church" (Greek: en ekklesia) is to look at the context and the sentence structure, and note other occurrences of the phrase. COMMENT: I agree, but remember, the phrase "in the church" is not found in Titus chapter two. The Way: Notice these other examples of "en ekklesia": Acts 7:38: "He (Moses) was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us." I Corinthians 6:4: "There-fore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church!" 1 Corinthians 11:18: "In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it." 1 Corinthians 12:28: "And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues." I Corinthians 14:19: "But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue." I Corinthians 14:28: "If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God." 1 Corinthians 14:35: "If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." Ephesians 3:21: "to him (God) be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen." Colossians 4:16: "After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Leodicea." As you can see, it's sometimes clear what is meant by this phrase, but at other times you can't really be sure if it's referring to the church people or the church gathering -- or both! COMMENT: I agree. It is often the CONTEXT that must tell us how a word is being used and not the mere "lexicon" meaning. But with that said, I submit the context of 1 Cor. 14 tells us plainly how Paul was using the phrase "in the church" or "when you come together into one place." In fact the last phrase is the interpretation of how Paul was viewing "in the church" in his discord correction and instruction he was given them from verse 17 of chapter 11 to the end of chapter 14. Certainly in chapter 12 and 13 there is a broader aspect to include the whole body of believers in Christ everywhere, but there can be no mistaking the much narrower aspect of the local Corinthian assembly when they came together into one place, when we read Paul's instructions and corrections in chapter 11:17-34 and chapter 14. Chapter 11:17-34 is dealing with that local congregation in the city of Corinth meeting to observe the memorial of the death of Christ, on one particular evening of the year at one particular location, as they came together into one place (verse 20). Chapter 14 likewise. Various wordings like that of verse 23, 24, 26-31, make it obvious that Paul was talking about the things that were going on in their individual church assembly at Corinth, when they met as a whole church, when they came into one place. TO BE CONTINUED |
No comments:
Post a Comment