The idea for this post comes from a discussion on the Landmark Baptist forum on the use of the word "church" in Ephesians 5:22-33. First of all, one cannot take a position that Christ will "present...to himself a glorious church" will be made up of all the saved (called the Glory Bride), and that it is local and visible now made up of those who have been saved, received Scriptural baptism, and become a member of a true, New Testament church. The "it" that is the glorious church in verse 27 has as its antecedent the church in verse 24 that "is" subject unto Christ, and the church in verse 23 whose head "is" Christ.
I don't know if it will clarify the meaning for anyone any better, but I have found an instance where the word "church" is used both in the plural form and singular form in the same context: the plural referring to the plurality of local assemblies and the singular form referring to churches in the institutional sense, with equal application to EACH AND EVERY LOCAL CHURCH ALIKE and not one, universal church as a universal church cannot assemble as is the clear import of the word "ekkleseia" from which our English word "church" is translated. This passage perhaps in its primary application has little relevance to our churches today in that we no longer prophesy or speak in tongues in our churches today with the completion of the Bible, but perhaps it will help someone to change their view on or become stronger in their conviction about the nature of the Lord's church.
"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." (1 Corinthians 14:34,35)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Church = Assembly. End of discussion.
ReplyDeleteSince it's end of discussion...do we accept it literally that those women are to be quiet in church? :)
ReplyDeleteNew topic = new discussion.
ReplyDeleteAs long as we accept it literally that the "sons and daughters" prophesied in Acts 2. As long as we take it literally that the servants AND handmaidens declared the wonderful works of God in the church sitting in Acts 2. As long as we take it literally that Paul said it was a shame for women to speak in churches with their head UNCOVERED, but OK so long as it is covered. As long as we take it literally that "all" members spoke in 1 Corinthians 11, 12, and 14. So long as we take it literally that Philip's daughters did indeed prophesy. So long as we take it literally that the first gospel message was sung by a woman, and the first resurrection message was where God sent a woman to proclaim (preach) the resurrection to the church. If we remove those two "women-limiting" texts, would we ever assume they aren't supposed to talk in church?
So since the majority of verses about women in the Bible show them both speaking, and preaching in the church setting (as well as witnessing), we will try to understand how there is no contradiction. One says women should be silent "as also says the law." I would therefore assume it isn't referring to some Jewish or Roman law that women aren't supposed to speak in church. What law was there concerning women? That they were to submit to their husbands. Therefore, that passage refers to women disrespecting their husbands in church. That is obviously shameful. Also there seemed to be much about tongues and interpretation there, so that is another good point to make.
The other is in Timothy and is in reference to usurping authority over "the man" in the church. Which "the man" of a church is in reference in Timothy? It is in reference to the elders. It is simply showing these women in the particular church(es) in reference were trying to take authority away from the pastor. Again, their mouths should be stopped.
So yes, literally, these women in 1 Cor and 1 Tim should be quiet in church in reference to what/how they were speaking.
End of discussion.
Congrats on the baby, Brother Snyder. But what's up with this "end of discussion" thing?
ReplyDeleteI was being light-hearted about the women, but thanks for the pedagogy.
One thing, though...
(the first gospel message wasn't sung by a woman...it was demonstrated to Adam by God and of course, an early record was that the "gospel was preached unto Abraham")
End of discussion.
Actually, the post was not about women, or tongues, or prophecy, etc. but about the nature of the church. It just seems many have trouble dealing with the "church" when the word is in the singular form and I found a passage of Scripture where "church" is used in both the plural and singular forms in the same context, proving the singular refers to EACH AND EVERY CHURCH ALIKE.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do not take the extreme position that women but be completely silent in church.
It very clearly says that it is a qualified silence: that women should not take leadership roles over men and should be under obedience. I do not criticize women as song leaders, for Mrs. Melba Smith is one of the humblest, sweetest ladies I have ever met but I'm not sure that it's permitted according to Scripture. I'm not sure either whether a woman should be making motions and seconds in business meeting. As for leading in prayer, it is usually the pastor who calls on the lady to pray so that is not per se taking a leadership position in the church.
Brother Adrian - It's just the end of the discussion. End of discussion. :-P
ReplyDeleteAs to the gospel message, I meant the gospel of the birth during that time.
Brother Landmarker,
Should not take leadership roles over their OWN husbands, and be under obedience? as in submitting themselves to their OWN husbands. Don't make the "man = husband = man" mistake.
As to you not wanting a woman to "take a leadership role", you are contradicting the NUMEROUS verses where God ordained women telling men how to live throughout the Bible. You are also contradicting the verses I mentioned above where God commanded the women to tell his church things.
If Jesus told women to speak in the church setting, and the Holy Spirit empowered them to do so throughout the book of Acts, and if 1 Corinthians 11-14 suggests every church member is to take part in the service actively, then the TWO (only) limiting verses should be considered suspect, not the overwhelming majority. And since there is context in both passages (one being women not usurping authority over their husbands as also says the law) and the other being not usurping authority over the man in context i.e. the pastor) which shows it does not mean women are to be silent when it comes to speaking God's message to the church, praying (as in Acts without a pastor's calling on them) or business meeting, then we should accept that the couple of verses have their explanation. Even if you say "I don't understand" or "I don't know", you can know God approves of women both speaking, and taking authority positions in the church and throughout the Bible as a whole.
Any other interpretation is going to require that person to reexplain the vast majority of verses concerning women in leadership roles and women in the church setting doing the same.
They have not been recorded as being "the pastor", or as "the priest". SO just suffice it to say that God doesn't want them in that particular office, or to speak in a way which usurps authority over the pastor as they were doing in Timothy, or authority over their husband as in Corinthians.