Failure–I think that word in most encyclopedias should read see definition Men!  How many women are raising families while men run like little babies? So who is to teach in the family when there is no male?  Women have taken up the slack very nicely and in many cases much better than having a man who is nothing more than an anchor headed to Hell! Are we really that blind in the church and don’t see who is raising many families with respect and dignity? How many women are in church without there husbands and yet stay with them knowing that eternity will have the same consequence? Isn’t pride a wonderful thing we as men don’t need GOD–Beer, football and cheerleaders that will get us to Heaven.
A man who doen’t take care of family as the Bible states  – Is worse than an Unbeliever! How deep is that hole in Hell?
Preach ON my Christian Sisters for I will see you in Heaven!
I am a Man and  challenge to all Men — Look Up  and then get on your knees and pray for Wisdom from God’s Word!

as we run a small house church the woman are as importat as men and we take it in turn for us to teach as we belive that women in partnership with man also , advancing the great commission also .we have the book “Women in the Kingdom” by Faith & Rodger Forster at bessing and would highly reccomend it to others

To this day, there are Missionary Baptist preachers,(men), who insists on adding “uh” to every other word which is so distracting, their sermon is more agitating than inspiring and I have to stay away.
Is there a subtle, tactful way to tell members who invite me to these churches why I don’t want to go?
An example; Jesus uh came upuh out of the wateruh and Goduh said uh, Thisuh is myuh beloveduh Sonuh.

Very nicely written. Perhaps the best case I’ve read for egalitarianism in the New Testament. But, how much of the New Testament do we dismiss as culturally irrelevant for our times? And, what passages of Scripture do we pick and choose to suit our own personal agendas? For some, it seems our socio-political beliefs effect our hermeneutics. I’ve seen this done with such socio-political issues as: homosexuality, female ordination, violence, war, etc. I believe there is some ambiguity in Scripture resulting in some room for interpretation. But not much. The Bible, in most part, is pretty black and white… cut and dry. And, Paul seems to make it clear not only in Corinthians, but other epistles as well that there is a proper role for men and women both in and outside of the church.

Paul talks about everybody in the family being equal, and he talks about the equality of husband and wife specifically in writings previous to the “women be silent” scripture. There is also some evidence that the whole “women be silent” issue was just an addition that doesn’t appear to fit the original/oldest text before or after it. There is speculation as to whether this part was even written by Paul. My opinion is that it was added in order to maintain control of women…possibly because the surrounding pagans (country folk) were just beginning to leave behind the last vestiges of goddess worship. One of the things I look for in a church is whether they worship Paul over Jesus. Those who worship Paul seem to take the “women be
silent” literally.

I don’t think I buy this apologetic. I have heard it before…But if Paul was teaching general orderliness in church, then wouldn’t he say something a little more broad? Like, ‘Everyone, please refrain from speaking during the service?” Or if it was generally women doing the talking perhaps, ‘hey, ladies, it’s OK to have questions, but please ask them later”…But he doesn’t do that…He specifically says ‘it is disgraceful (not ‘disruptive, DisGRACEFUL) for a woman (not just the women in this particular congregation – but ‘a woman’ which I would take to be ‘any woman’) to speak in church’…I think that Paul sees women as un-equal like most of the men in his time. But to his credit, his admonishment to men to love their wives was pretty bold since women at that time were seen as little more than property. One step at a time.

I think that it’s OK to say that Paul meant what he said…That doesn’t mean that I have to follow it or live by it. Paul is not my God. He was an apostle, a teacher, a church planter. And a pretty good one. God Bless him for his work in the early church. We can learn a lot from him…

But nowhere does Jesus say ‘take up your cross and follow Paul’.

LightByGrace, A lot of things in your comment resonate with me; however, I do believe that Paul regarded women as equal.  Paul was no snob.  He reached out to, and even befriended, all sorts of people.  Several women are mentioned in the New Testament who Paul regarded as valued co-workers in the gospel.

I’ve written about 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 here: http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/interpretations-applications-1-cor-14_34-35/

John Bristow addresses this question masterfully in “What Paul Really Said About Women”. Here, taking the cultural context and the whole counsel of Scripture into account is crucial. Paul clearly ministered alongside many women who led churches, and in this cultural context, married women were cloistered at home and did not understand the etiquette of a public teaching situation. The context of order in which the verse is presented is key to interpreting this passage.

I just wrote a piece on Michelle Bachmann’s response to the question about “submitting to her husband” in the presidential debate: http://morganguyton.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/michelle-bachmann-on-submitting-to-her-husband/. My suspicion is that gender hierarchy will quietly disappear from conservative evangelicalism in the next few years the same way that segregationism quietly disappeared as a viable ideology in the early 1970′s.

My own interpretation of Paul and Peter’s admonitions about women is that it was a PR concern of the early church that had to pick its battles in a hostile Roman culture that was intensely patriarchal. Christians were already accused of cannibalism (for eating Eucharist) and atheism (for not worshiping Caesar). Having wild women who spoke freely in church would have been too much. I take the verse, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female…” as the theological norm, since the other verses which contradict it concern very specific pastoral situations.

This is a great example WHY Paul wrote what he did. Thanks.

I hope your right, Morgan; but I see many churches and denominations strengthening their policies and practises that exclude women from leadership minsitries.

Comments like these are great examples WHY Paul wrote what he did. Thanks.

The women would have been much less educated on matters of scripture than the men, so they would have been the ones more likely to have the questions, hence Paul’s focus on women. I also think it’s not surprising that Paul appeals to honor and shame, rather than simply disruption. In an honor and shame culture like theirs, it would have been a much more powerful motivator.

And it may be beside the point, and a bit circular, but while Jesus doesn’t say, “Take up your cross and follow Paul,” Paul does, on numerous occasions, say, “Follow me as I follow Christ/Copy me.”

I’m no expert on this, but I hope this adds more to the argument for you.

William Webb has a good book that speaks to this topic in part. It’s called “Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis.” I’ve only read an article in a different collection by him regarding this, but I found it pretty compelling: http://www.amazon.com/Slaves-Women-Homosexuals-Exploring-Hermeneutics/dp/0830815619

I just wrote about this on my own blog.  This has been such an important issue for me over the years.  I think we (the church) suffer from forcing Paul into a mold where he could only speak directly to us from his time and culture, in a way that could be understood Verbatim. How could he have possibly known how his words would be interpreted today, when he wrote his letter to the Corinthians? I seriously doubt that our Verbatim interpretation is what he would say if he were to visit our churches today.  I think that instead, he would talk about “Radical Freedom” for women.

http://graceemerges.blogspot.com/2011/08/paul-on-stage-about-women.html

Wow. Which ones? I’m Methodist so this is a moot point for us.

Agree with your perspective.  Women have much to much to offer the Church to be silenced by a continued literal application of these words of Paul’s for all times, all Church situations, and for ever, and Amen.  That some of us struggle with this seems farcical, though I know many serious followers of Christ who impose this on their wives and some women who feel it their duty to fade to the background.  My prayer for the Church is that it will ultimately embrace women as total equals to their brothers.  The reality is that Paul’s words, when applied traditionally throughout church history, have created a class of second rate citizens.  I will not believe that it was God’s intent to subjugate women in this way.  Some pastors have written that this issue is the most critical to the future of the church.  If women are seen as equal to men then the Church will die.  Traditional roles are everything.  Hogwash.  It is just the opposite.  If the Church continues to subjugate women, as it has historically done, then the Church will become irrelevant and the Gospel light will fade.  The voices of women in the church must be heard and appreciated.  This change is taking some time, but it is coming, and it is good.  Keep talking ladies.

Your article makes a confusing passage very clear. Why have I never before heard it explained this way? Thank you.

Your article makes a confusing passage very clear. Why have I never before heard it explained this way? Thank you.

I’m in Australia, so the churches I am personally aquainted with are the Sydney Anglicans and the EV churches on the Central Coast (NSW).  These take a very hard line against women in leadership ministry in the church.

And of course there are the churches who are part of the Southern Baptist Convention in the US.

http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/6626/53/

I submit to you that if we did it God’s way (as recorded by Paul), we’d all be better off.  When we compromise His word to fit our ‘desires’ our faith suffers; just look around.

I submit to you that if we did it God’s way (as recorded by Paul), we’d all be better off.  When we compromise His word to fit our ‘desires’ our faith suffers; just look around.

Wow there is such an incredible misunderstanding of the Word of God today! Headship is a biblical directive, it is not saying or implying that men are superior to women, in fact men are to serve their wives like Christ served the Church.  Men and women are equals. The greater accountability to God will be men who have not led scripturally with love. Also are you saying the writings of Paul in scripture your throwing out!!? So your picking and choosing which scripture “you” consider valid?

What are you talking about.  Do you live in the hills of West Virginia (Sorry West Virginians!) Who talks like that.  I don’t attend Church because people say “uh”?

Amen Gary ~ we cannot pick and choose what we like in the Bible as it were a Chinese menu.

I don’t buy this either.  I’m not sure of the best way to interpret it, but I think this is a stretch.  I doubt that Paul would say today that women should not say anything in church, but like some other passages of scripture, I’m unable to rationalize.  If someone told me something that was a little more believable than this, I’d consider it.

[...] “Women Should Remain Silent?” – I think the gender debate will continue to be one of the biggest issues within Evangelicalism, and this article helps bring this hot-button topic into perspective. [...]

how many people have even read 1 cor 1:11 considering that it is the one thing that paul indicates sparked the entire correction and its fortunate numbering 1,1,11 you would think it would be remembered and quoted often.  if you haven’t a bible handy here is the NASB;
For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you.

think about it

I think there is a difference between “biblical” and “Paul”. The universally accepted writings of Paul include Romans, Corinthians I and II, Thessalonians I, Philippians, Galatians, and Philemon. The passage in Corinthians 14 is also disputed. There are many arguments, such as, why is it inserted between two lengthy passages dealing with the Holy Spirit (breaking up the flow)? Why is it in direct opposition to what Paul says in Corinthians 11? Why is it generally in opposition to everything Paul ever wrote about women? Galatians 3:28 “There is neither Jew nor Gentile… nor is there male and female….” Romans 16:7 “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was”. Here Paul identifies Junia as a female apostle, essentially greater than himself. If Junia can be an outstanding apostle, then women can  be pretty much anything according to Paul. Paul mentions women almost as  much as he mentions men. Priscilla. Phoebe, Typhena, Persis, Mary, Hermas, Julia, and Olympas all referred to in this Romans passage as workers in Christ.
     If one wished to discuss the role of women in the church from a general biblical perspective, well, there are other points of view.  The disputed Corinthian 14 passage and  Timothy for starters. If you limit your view of Paul to the undisputed letters written by him, then I am of the opinion that Paul clearly wrote and acted as if women were on equal ground. Personally, I am with Paul on this one.

Well you bottom line kind of made sense but before that you blew me out of the water?  You either accept the whole bible or you don’t.  If you don’t, you should call yourself something other then a “Christian”.  Your the Danites, or whatever you want to be, because really you are your own God at that point, you decide want you believe or don’t believe.  The whole bible is the inspired word of God.  You do have it right though, Paul speaking for God, would call Women and Men equal, as well as equally loved.  We do have different roles however.  In any case the point here is that you can’t throw out the books Paul wrote.  If you don’t accept them, then throw out the bible and start your own religion.

My apologies, Gary. I do respect your point of view. It is entirely valid. There are different ways of thinking. One way of looking at is is this: some Christians believe the bible is inspired and infallible, some Christians believe the bible is inspired. I absolutely believe the bible is inspired. I don’t believe Paul wrote Timothy or Corinthians 14:34, for example (I could easily be wrong about both). But, I do believe it is still the inspired word of God.
    So, if we are talking about what Paul thought, that is one thing. If we are talking about what is basic Christian doctrine based on the inspired word of God (penned by whoever) then that is another thing.
    I think your point goes down to a pretty basic level, way beyond this discussion about women in the church. We are probably not going to agree about who wrote Timothy anytime soon. We are certainly not going to work this out now, in this limited forum.
    But, I believe we both agree that Jesus is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit, is our lord and savior, that he died for our sins on a cross, that he was resurrected, that the Holy Spirit lives in each of us and that we are both going to end up in heaven. We also both believe the Bible is filled with truth about how to have a special relationship with God.
   In terms of the role of women, I believe that Paul clearly believed that women not only could speak in church, but could lead the church. Junia (a woman Paul calls an Apostle) – she had to be leading, preaching, sermonizing, evangelizing, doing it all. She managed to land herself in jail, that says a lot. Priscilla – her name comes first in 5 out of 7 references, very respectful. She has to be a big shot. Chloe – sending her people from her church which she sponsored in her home to report to Paul.
    My personal thought is that the early church was probably based out people’s homes. Back then the Greek cultural ideal was that the women ran the home, the men were out in the public. They did politics and business (This was only the ideal, to be sure. Most people probably could not afford to live that way. But, it was the ideal, and probably reasonably accurate for rich families, at least).
    If the earliest church was home based, that would necessarily give the women of the Greek cultural world all the power. 20 years later I believe the church started making it out of homes and into buildings. That is where the men started taking over, as it was now in their territory. I believe that is when the idea of keeping women quiet in church started also.

well women do like to talk things out and tendency to gossip from my experience…

Nice try.So are we to believe that men didn’t ask questions.Perhaps your typing should remain silent till you get a better understanding,

Who says women were less educated.Its all about obedience.
Eve sinned first and then adam as the scriptures say.So that the woman should not speak nor teach over men in scripture or so called church.Paul was saying it for biblically what it is a shameLevitacal priests couldn’t make offerings if they were dwarfs,blind or had blemishes.Does that sound fair.All all inclusive everyone gets a ballon and a trophy society hates this line of thinking but those who disagree have an issue with the creator.

I hope your right Meg but I see men being emasculated and women masculated both in movies with the endless parade of women Rambos kicking tail movies and so called women pastors and the so called church following to fit in and win converts, being the tail and not the head getting lead into the pit.Remember it is obedience and not sacrifice that is pleasing to the creator.The devil always leads the blind since eve in the garden, to do the exact opposite of what the creator intended,

Speaking of failure, although you are correctly stating the failure of men.Because men are not being men most women aren’t succeeding either.Husband and wife are both needed.These men you speek of are brats probably raised by a woman without a husband or just a gutless coward.So 195112 instead of trying to get along speak the truth both in and out of season.Women should remain silent in the churches so says the apostle Paul.Please interpet scripture as it is written in context and not waxing speculative of what Paul meant.

Brad surely you jest so words are like silly putty.Radical freedom Brad?Whats next christian bra burning at the sunday school.If paul came into one of these so called churches he would probably imitate Christ and chase the people out with a whip.Thats why the church is dead it looks so much like the world.Brad silly me I should say nice soothing words to all those itchy ears out there.Yes rebel ladies it worked out so well for eve.

Bliamkratky what they have to offer isn’t what its about.Everything is not for your or my or their “benefit”.Its not about equal its about the creators order and our obedience.You use wordly, fleshy, devilish advice.The roles the Creator assigns are everything and the hogwash is wordly conventional widsom so called. Yes its all about self esteem the opposite of humilty what a coinidence.The exact opposite of scripture. 

Yes isn’t it great when some man writes a book and tells us what to think and we don’t have the spirit teach us.Yes Faith and Rodger Forster was the 14 th or 15th apostles.Its a blessing because it agrees with our preconceived highly celebral thoughts AND not those silly out dated interpetations that conflict with current worldly thoughts. 

Amen sister.Men gossip to but not as much…But seriously if the creator says it so we do it not really complicated folks. 

Dan your almost reaching as much as MImi Hadad.But at least you have a better understanding of the scriptures. Dennis Preato whom you are parroting does not prove any such thing as Junia is an apostle.They were great members of the body of Christ but apostles nectt.Again Dan we are not saying who is better that is for the creator to judge.We are saying women should kep silent in church and not teach over men nor be pastors/Paul is about as plain as he can be here.Its not saying women are inferior its about obedience to the creator not our perceptions on what should be. 

Dan nice post but it fails in the last few sentances          when you seem to want to please the ladies by saying the evil men wanted the women under their thumbs.How can you say what Paul believed when you know by scripture what he says.The greeks are also notorious pagans and equally notorious alternate lifestyle culture.Remember when they were calling Paul as hermes and Barnabas as Zeus.There was a very good exposition on the Junia-Junias translation by a David Jones under the heading a female apostle.But we are not saying men are better then woman.The scriptures say eve was deceived first and then Adam.Its part of the punishment for following the serpent.Yes the messiah died for our sins but we still die physically and the devil wreaks havoc.When the Messiah returns then the womans role in church will be different but not yet. 

Well said dwells

Greg thank you brother.The truth will set us free.Its nice to see purity in the word.

Its all about pride.Able gets mad at Cain because the creator corrected him.Eve sinned first and because of it women are told by Paul what they are to do and some like eve still rebel. Like a woman could be controlled except by the spirit of god.Rules are the lifeblood of rebels.Its amazing how lies are so elaborate maybe the butler killed the scripture with the candlestick.Maybe the ancient grey aleins made a change here and there from the mothership .Maybe just maybe Paul said what he said and meant it.I didn’t see anything about Paul winking in a footnote in scolfield.Remember the scriptures said the world would wax worse and worse,so should the church follow the world so we are all hip.The world laughes at the church because it is whoring after the world like a drunkard at last call.

Julie its not about who or what a women is compared to a man but what they are supposed to be doing.I say you sound like a modern day liberal.Woman who stay home are dumb from churning to much butter you appear to say.So they went to the gatherings and were to dumb to figure out how to act.The key to the scripture is not to twist in into submission of what we want it to say.Keep quiet from all historical account stills seems to have maintained its definitional integrity still meaning not to talk in the context of asking questions and other writings include teaching men or being pastors.John Bristow needs more fancy book learning as those dumb corinthian housewifes at least as he calls them might say thru their one tooth.

I only commented on this because not one else did,It seems William Webb has created a intellectual tangled web thru the non  Hermeneutical study of culture.See grace in those days they didn’t believe the lie that to win people we have to become like them like churchianity does.They were killed because they stayed the course.Thus the weak ineffective church of today with christian mosh pits, fish symbols and christian break dancing.They were led by the spirit and not by worldly trends.I think this writing by webby is compelling someone to vomit the luke warmness of it out of their conscience.

No, Gary. Men and women are not equal. No matter how many times women are told that, they don’t truly believe it. Not in their hearts. How can they? In most Christian churches God is imagined as male. God is perfect…and male; therefore, that which is not male is inferior. Not Godlike. Message received.

Tom, right on! You tell ‘em. Shut those women up! I know, I know: some of us just can’t keep silent in the church. We’re just sooo darn weak. I’m thinking of wearing a face muzzle myself, perhaps in a soft, feminine pink leather, the next time I attend service. It’s the only way to ensure that I won’t emit a thought or idea that might disrupt the sermon. You know how gossipy and evil we women can be. All daughters of Eve…every last one of us.  

Maybe the face muzzle will start a trend in certain circles. We can only hope!

No, no, of course not. Not saying women are inferior; just saying that they should keep silent in the church.
 
It’s obedience to the creator…that’s all.

What was that you said? Why don’t we obey the creator when directed to do so in other scripture?

Such as “Don’t wear clothes made of more than one fabric,” Leviticus 19;19 or (Leviticus 19:19) or People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)Well, those are Old Testament teachings. We don’t follow them anymore due to the new covenant with Jesus Christ. Uhhm, aren’t the Ten Commandments Old Testament teachings? They still seem to be pretty popular. …Alright, you found us out. We do pick and choose. And, regarding Paul’s directive that women should keep silent in the church, we chose that one because we liked it. We like our women mute. That’s all. Again, not saying that they’re inferior or anything. Uh Huh.  
People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)

Well, those are Old Testament teachings. We don’t follow them anymore due to the new covenant with Jesus Christ.

Uhhm, aren’t the Ten Commandments Old Testament teachings? They still seem to be pretty popular.

…Alright, you found us out. We do pick and choose. And, regarding Paul’s directive that women should keep silent in the church, we chose that one because we liked it. We like our women mute. That’s all. Again, not saying that they’re inferior or anything.

Uh Huh.  

“But we are not saying men are better then woman.” 

No…we’re just saying that due to her inferior nature, Eve was deceived first; then Adam, who succumbed later because of his superior nature. See, women are not allowed to speak in the church because they proved untrustworthy in the Garden; that was part of their punishment.

But, we’re not saying they’re inferior or anything.

Uh huh.