Women Aren't Allowed To Speak In Church. - Page 3

LadyDay · (#51 (**permalink**))

athaba wrote:

Quote:

I had read the bible from Genesis to Revelation, (wordfor word),and been filled with the Holy Ghost. I read the King James version as well as the Good News bible, (mainly for clarification).

When I read it, I believed that the bible did not contradict itself.

People really do have to read things in their context.

That is the only wayone would have a better understanding of what's being said.

blktypeBtw - the bible also says that women's head should be covered, that women should not wear men's clothing and vice versa, (that was interpreted in my church, that women were not allowed to wear trousers at all),women shouldcover their armsand that any adornment was vanity.

[line]
athaba...i have read many pages in the bible but not the whole book but i have read in the bible....that a womans covering is her hair and this is stated in corinthians.

JuneBelle · (#52 (**permalink**))

People should read what is given to them.
Sorry to intrude on the discussion. I'm pretty busy on another forum; but I came across this one during a search.
I found it to be interesting. So I decided to stop on by and drop in something to the mix.

That was a great link from LeaderU that was posted before.
If only people had the actual nerve to read it.
It goes through all of the explanations for this verse and takes them apart one by one.
One of the explanations that was taken apart was the one about women being noisy in church and was discarded.

First, I will post the context of these two verses.

Quote:

26 How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. 28 But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. 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 F46 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.

36 Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you only that it reached? 37 If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant. F47 39 Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues. 40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

This is to understand where LeaderU's explanation is coming from when he refers to the seeming intrusion in giving instructions on prophesying.

Next I am going to insert 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 to enable you to see what he means when he refers to it.
This verse permits women to prophesy and occurs in the exact same letter from Paul as 14:33-34 creating a seeming contradiction.

Quote:

1 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. 12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God. 13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her F32 for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

Now for the explanation:

Quote:

IV. An Interpretation Constrained by the Context

Another interpretation has been set out by various writers and meets the objections put to it. The view has been ably defended elsewhere;{42} I can merely sketch it here. Paul has just been requiring that the church in Corinth carefully weigh the prophecies presented to it. Women, of course, may participate in such prophesying; that was established in chapter 11. Paul's point here, however, is that they may not participate in the oral weighing of such prophecies. That is not permitted in any of the churches. In that connection, they are not allowed to speak---"as the law says." Apparently in sympathy with the view that makes this appeal to "law" a feature of the Corinthian position, Evans suggests that to take this as Paul's appeal to law sounds "strangely unlike" him.{43} That is a rather strange assessment, since Paul in this chapter has already appealed once to "the law" (cf. 14:28), by which he means the Old Testament Scriptures. By this clause, Paul is probably not referring to Genesis 3:16, as many suggest,{44} but to the creation order in Genesis 2:20b-24,{45} for it is to that Scripture that Paul explicitly turns on two other occasions when he discusses female roles (1 Corinthians 11:8, 9; 2 Timothy 2:13). The passage from Genesis 2 does not enjoin silence, of course, but it does suggest that because man was made first and woman was made for man, some kind of pattern has been laid down regarding the roles the two play. Paul understands from this creation order that woman is to be subject to man-or at least that wife is to be subject to husband. In the context of the Corinthian weighing of prophecies, such submission could not be preserved if the wives participated: the first husband who uttered a prophecy would precipitate the problem.

More broadly, a strong case can be made for the view that Paul refused to permit any woman to enjoy a church-recognized teaching authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11ff.),{46} and the careful weighing of prophecies falls under that magisterial function. This does not mean that women should not learn: let them ask their husbands about various aspects of these prophecies, once they return home. Why should the Corinthians buck not only the practice of all the churches (verse 33b) but also the Scriptures themselves (verse 36)? Are they so enamored with the revelations that they have received that they dare to pit them against the authentic deposit found in Scripture and in the apostolic tradition? And if they feel they are merely interpreting that tradition under the promptings of the Spirit, are they not troubled to see that all the churches have translated the same texts, and the same Gospel, into quite different ecclesiastical practices? Are you the only people the word of God has reached (cf. verse 36b)?{47}

Several final observations on this interpretation may prove helpful. First, this interpretation fits the flow of chapter 14. Although the focus in the second part of the chapter is still on tongues and prophecy, it is still more closely related to the order the church must maintain in the enjoyment of those grace gifts. Verses 33b-36 fall happily under the description. The immediately preceding verses deal with the evaluation of prophets; these verses (verses 33b-36) further refine that discussion. The general topic of 1 Corinthians 12-14 has not been abandoned, as the closing verses of chapter 14 demonstrate. There is no other interpretation of these disputed verses that so neatly fits the flow of the argument.

Second, this interpretation makes sense not only of the flow but also of the structure of the passage. Chapter 14 is dominated by a discussion of the relative places of tongues and prophecy. Most of the chapter does not here concern us. Verses 26 and following, however, clearly deal with practical guidelines for the ordering of these two gifts in the assembly. Verse 26 is fairly general. Verses 27-28 deal with practical constraints on tongues speakers. In verse 29, Paul turns to prophecy and writes, "Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said." The two parts of this verse are then separately expanded upon: the first part ("Two or three prophets should speak") is treated in verses 30-33a, where constraints are imposed on the uttering of prophecies; the second part ( and the others should weigh carefully what is said ) is treated in verses 33b-36, where constraints are imposed on the evaluation of prophecies.{48}

Third, the major objection that has been set against it is that it seems inconsistent for Paul to permit women to prophesy and then to forbid them to weigh prophecies. But the objection carries little weight provided that such prophecy does not have the same authority status that the great writing prophets of the Old Testament enjoyed (whether or not such authority was immediately recognized). Elsewhere I have argued at length that "prophecy" in the New Testament is an extraordinarily broad category, extending all the way from the product of the pagan Muse (Titus 1:12) to Old Testament canonical prophecy. In common church life, it was recognized to be Spirit-prompted utterance, but with no guarantee of divine authority in every detail, and therefore not only in need of evaluation (1 Corinthians 14:29) but necessarily inferior in authority to the deposit of truth represented by the Apostle Paul (14:37-38).{49} In certain respects, then, it is perfectly proper for Paul to elevate teaching above prophecy, especially if the teaching is considered part of the non-negotiable apostolic deposit that serves in part as one of the touchstones enabling the congregation to weigh the prophecies that are granted to the church, and especially if the prophecies themselves, unlike the apostolic deposit, are subject to ecclesiastical appraisal. It does not mean, of course, that the utterances of any particular teacher need not be verified; I am not saying that prophecy must be evaluated, but teaching need not be. The New Testament includes too many passages that encourage the church to take responsibility for evaluating teachers and teaching (1 Timothy 1:3; 6:3-5; Titus 1:9-14; Hebrews 13:9; 2 Peter 2:1, etc.). But it does mean that prophecy cannot escape such evaluation, and it presupposes that there is a deposit of apostolic teaching, a given content, that is non-negotiable and that can serve as the criterion both of further teaching and of prophecy.

Fourth, this is not all that the Bible has to say about relationships between men and women in Christ. I have said nothing, for instance, about the command for men to love their wives even as Christ loved the church-an exquisitely high standard characterized by unqualified self-giving. Nor have I listed the many things Paul expects Christian women to do. Above all, I have not devoted space to the fact that in a Greek ekklesia, i.e., a public meeting, women were not allowed to speak at all.{50} By contrast, women in the Christian ekklesia, borne along by the Spirit, were encouraged to do so. In that sense, Paul was not trapped by the social customs of Corinth: the gospel, in his view, truly freed women from certain cultural restrictions. But that does not mean that all distinctions in roles are thereby abolished. I would be prepared to argue, on broader New Testament grounds, that the distinctive roles that remain are in Paul's view part and parcel of living in this created order, in the tension between the "already" and the "not yet"---in the period between the bestowal of the eschatological Spirit and the consummation of all things, when there is neither marriage nor giving in marriage.

And fifth, if this interpretation is correct, and there are some role distinctions between men and women to be observed, it is essential to recognize that this teaching is for our good, not for our enslavement. That is a theme I would dearly love to enlarge upon; but I shall pass it by.

Acts 2:16 - 17
2:16But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

2:17'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams.

JuneBelle

P.S.
For further analysis on 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 go here:
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cbmw/rbmw/chapter5.html

Quote:

First Corinthians 11:2-16 has some features that make it one of the most difficult and controversial passages in the Bible.{1} For instance: How does verse 2 relate to verses 3-16? What does Paul mean by the word head in verse 3? Can we identify the custom regarding the adornment of women in the passage? In what sense is woman the glory of man (verse 7)? What does Paul mean when he says that the woman is to have authority on her head (verse 10)? Can we comprehend the reason why a woman is to have authority on her head, namely, because of the angels (verse 10)? And finally, what does the word nature mean in verse 14?

Quote:

In favor of the view that Paul is speaking against women wearing their hair loose and falling down the back are the following arguments:{2} (1) There is no extant evidence that full veiling, familiar in Islam, was current in Paul's time. Therefore, the custom described cannot be veiling. (2) The same Greek word that describes the practice of the Corinthian women in 11:5 (akatakalyptos) ["unveiled," according to RSV] is used in Leviticus 13:45 (LXX){3} about a leper's hair, which is to hang unloosed. The problem with the Corinthian women, then, is that they were wearing their hair loose and flowing down their backs. (3) The word apokalypto, which is somewhat related to akatakalyptos, is used in Numbers 5:18, where a woman suspected of adultery had to unbind her hair and wear it loosely. The wearing of long, loose hair by an adulteress would support the idea that wearing one's hair loose was considered shameful. (4) Respectable women in Paul's time did not appear in public with their hair long and flowing down their backs. They wore their hair piled up on their heads in a bun. Paul wants the Corinthian women to adhere to this custom.

For the article in it's entirety, go to the article.

Lexi · (#53 (**permalink**))

Why is it that when it comes to the bible people love to pick out a few verses and expect to get the full context.Obviously you can't.

So because some people took a few verses out of context and don't seem to understand that you will not comprehend and get the entirity of what was meant with out asking a few vital questions

At least find out who the corithians were

A group of early christians(new to the faith)

Ask yourself who wrote corinthians?

Mainly Paul theapostle of Jesus.

The corinthians were confused out the message and some other things about the attributes of the holy spirit and the effecs it has on people.

So in response to the dilemma to this particular church paul wrote a letter back to them

Gifts of Prophecy and Tongues
1[/suP]Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

2[/suP]For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.

3[/suP]But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 4[/suP]He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.

5[/suP]I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues,unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

6[/suP]Now, brothers, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? [/suP]
[suP]7[/suP]Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the flute or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes?
8[/suP]Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?
9[/suP]So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.
10[/suP]Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning.
11[/suP]If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and he is a foreigner to me.
12[/suP]So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church.
13[/suP]For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.
14[/suP]For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
15[/suP]So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
16[/suP]If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say â€œAmenâ€? to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?
17[/suP]You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.
18[/suP]I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.
19[/suP]But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.
20[/suP]Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults.

21[/suP]In the Law it is written: â€œThrough men of strange tongues
and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people,
but even then they will not listen to me,â€? says the Lord.

22[/suP]Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers.
23[/suP]So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?
24[/suP]But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand[suP] [/suP]comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, [/suP]
[suP]25[/suP]and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, â€œGod is really among you!â€?
Orderly Worship
26[/suP]What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

27[/suP]If anyone speaks in a tongue, twoâ€“or at the most threeâ€“should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret.

28[/suP]If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

29[/suP]Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.
30[/suP]And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop.
31[/suP]For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged.
32[/suP]The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. [/suP]
[suP]33[/suP]For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints,
34[/suP]women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.
35[/suP]If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
36[/suP]Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?
37[/suP]If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command.
38[/suP]If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.
39[/suP]Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

40[/suP]But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Paul responed to that particular churches needs.He was talking to the women in that particular church. Now today if we have any confusion on the spirit then we can look back on wht paul had wrote and take from it what applies to us. If it doesnt apply to you then don't use it.

The women (Not all in general)in that particular church were contributing to the confusion for whatever reasons.

Nasima · (#54 (**permalink**))

Sooofresh wrote:

Quote:

really?

so do they mean preach.......or just generally speaking in the church ie darling pass me the Bible.

If Men are present in the Chruch we are not permitted to preach ,for it is not God's intent for women to lead over man but Man over Women. Some Chruches have failed to acknowledge such practices but GOD IS CLEAR ......

Quote:

Now in respects to speaking in Chruch that is permissable but naturally it's understood of course it would be disrespectful if it were during the sermon. That's just proper place and mannerism.

Well Said Lexi niceone.gif, During that time the Women were indeedadding to the confusion in the Chruch ( Not so diffrent from today actually ), and some were gossiping etc. and of course that was definetly unfitting forChristian Women particular if the example is proverbs 31 ( Wife ). How dishonorable that would lookfor the Husband as the (Leader), And indeed i understand Paul's Mindset , It would be the Husbands Place to teach , lead , protect and Guide his family to heaven and that can't be done if that women was not setting a good example in or out of thehome.

Quote:

Nasima. guyflag

Lexi · (#55 (**permalink**))

I mean if we want to pick out verses we could always look out

AL-BAQARA (THE COW)

17: Their similitude is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in utter darkness.

So they could not see. Their likeness is as the likeness of one who kindleth fire, and when it sheddeth its light around him Allah taketh away their light and leaveth them in darkness, where they cannot see,

why would allah want to purposely blind people? what just because they don't believe?

Their parable is like the parable of one who kindled a fire but when it had illumined all around him, Allah took away their light, and left them in utter darkness-- they do not see.

Why woul allah the merciful do such a cruel thing?

191:Andkill them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you,kill them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

Andkill them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, thenkill them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

193: Andkill them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.

And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers. And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.

Why so much repeatition for violent action words?

It seems like the verses are just repeating themselves over an over again..why?

Ifeel something is trying to be evoked here

Remember muslim claim that the quran is the unchanged word of allah,so why would allah the merciful want muslims to kill unbelievers,surely we are all equal in his sight..are we? to save sons and daughters murdering other sons and daughters of allah is it not better to try and teach or at least show compassion.

This is one of the many parts of the quran that some mulims justify the extrem actions of murder to others who simply dont believe what they do....what a shame

http://www.knowislam.info/drupal/slavery

WHERE DID MANY OF THE MUSLIM'S SLAVES COME FROM?

Although Muslims took slaves from all over the lands they conquered, many of the Muslim slaves were black Africans. There were forced to do the harshest labor.

There was a famous black slave revolt in Iraq where thousands of black slaves revolted and killed tens of thousands of Arabs in Basrah. There slaves were forced to work in the large Muslim saltpeter mines.

During their revolt, they conquered the city of Basrah, in Iraq. They conquered city after city, and they couldn't be stopped. Their uprising and drive for freedom lasted for about 11 years. ("The History of Islam", Robert Payne, p.185.)

As the Muslim armies continued to conquer land, they acquired many slaves. Bernard Lewis in "The Arabs in History" writes: "polytheists and idolaters were seen primarily as sources of slaves."

In the early years of the Arab conquests, vast numbers of slave were acquired by capture. C.E. Bosworth in "The Islamic Dynasties" writes: "the use of this labor enabled the Arabs to live on the conquered land as a renter class and to exploit some of the economic potential of the rich Fertile Crescent."

Ibn Warraq writes: "Arabs were deeply involved in the vast network of slave trading - they scoured the slave markets of China, India and Southeast Asia. There were Turkish slaves from Central Asia, slaves from the Byzantine Empire, white slave from Central and East Europe, and Black slaves from West and East Africa. Every city in the Islamic world had its slave market."

wilton · (#56 (**permalink**))

Ahmaad wrote:

Quote:

I got it right here blkpg so don't try to deny it!

1 Corinthians: chapter 14

34"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. 35 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"

blkwonderWonder who inspired that verse...IceBerg Slims?

It was written just after Jesus when back up to haven. And Christianity was new and in that time woman were educated and didn't have as much knowledge about it. So He was witting it to say they woman at this time should not take in the church as to the men their knowledge was small.
But as for in modern time in most counters woman are equal so the have the knowledge and are able to talk in churches.