Women in Church:

According to the apostle Paul:

Women aren't permitted to speak or to prophesy in Church, they have to let their husbands speak for them.

_________________________________________________________

 ___________________________________

Take note that we have no relation with the following text and address. The source of the following text is from the following address.

Let's read what http://www.keithhunt.com/Woman1.html wrote about Paul disgracing women in churches. 

The following paragraph is a subsection from the the following text on this page.

Let's  consider the  well known verse used to forbid women

to have any vocal part in any teaching taking place on Sabbaths:

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority

over the man, but to be in silence" (1 Timothy 2:12, KJV).

Paul wrote: "Let your women keep silence in

the churches." What did he mean by this?

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."

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.

Paragraph end

---------------------------------------

Let us read what http://www.keithhunt.com/Woman1.html wrote about women in church and what the apostle Paul wrote about them.

---------------------------------------

Text starts:

No 1

THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE CHURCH?

The WAY  magazine (January-February-March edition, 1998)

INTRODUCTION by Keith Hunt:

Among the Sabbath/Festival of God observing Churches,

there has been THREE large important doctrinal debates in

the last 30 years. Two have been over "church government"

and "the calendar." The third debate is over the role of

women in the church. I have written in the past quite

extensively on this topic, yet it is needful for me to comment

on the following points and arguments of the article below

that appeared in The Way publication. This will be a long 

study, but a necessary one as we search the Scriptures for the

truth of the matter. I will comment and expound where I feel it

is needed as we slowly proceed through the following article.

                     Should A Woman Be

                        Allowed to

                    Speak in Services?

                            By

             Dale D. Carmean and Jack M. Lane

The controversy continues about this subject. On the one

hand, there are those who say a woman's place is to keep silent

in the church, and be under subjection, pointing to a number of

scriptures which seem to say so. On the other hand, there are

many people who don't see any problem with allowing women to

fully participate in services, even teaching! Is it true that the

Greek Scriptures say something substantially different than what

the English translations say? Who is right? Can we know?

Part One:

Introduction

 Of the many hot topics being discussed by members of God's

ekklesia today, one of the hottest seems to be the controversy

over exactly what a woman's role during church services might be!

     No one doubts that the female member of the Body of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah)

has many important and valuable functions to perform: help meet

for her husband, mother of her children, friend of others in the

ekklesia, and support functions too numerous to mention.

     The Bible plainly states that women have, in the past,

served as prophets (Luke 2:36; Acts 21:9; 1 Corinthians 11:5),

and even ministers (see next article), helping powerful

evangelists to better learn the Way (Acts 18:24-28).  Women are

also destined to serve again as prophets in the end times (Acts

2:17-18).

     Yet, there is little in the Greek scriptures that would

indicate that any woman ever took on the duties of congregation

leader (pastor or elder) or teacher in any of the New Testament

congregations. From what we see in scriptures, there was

apparently a set role that women were to take in the

congregation, just as there are roles which men must take in the

congregation.

COMMENT (Keith Hunt):

The function of "teacher" of the Scriptures within the Body of

Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), was evident, from the example of Priscilla as recorded in

the book of Acts. So also the example of Philip's four daughters,

who are classified as giving "prophecy" (Acts 21).  Obviously

they did "teach" but it is true as pointed out above that there

is no NT proof these women were ever "ordained" to the Eldership,

that they ever functioned as congregational pastors or elders.

I have covered this situation quite thoroughly in part one of

this study. End comment.

The WAY:

WOMEN IN SOCIETY

     Most of us are aware that the role of women in our society

has changed dramatically over the past hundred years or so. Many

historians and sociologists point to World War I as the turning

point in our western society. The bulk of an entire generation of

young men went to war and never came back. There was such

enormous bloodshed during the Great War of 1914-1918 that

horrified statesmen and men of influence insisted that war must

come to an end. The Great War needed to be the "war to end all

wars!" The League of Nations was formed with the intent of

establishing world peace, but it failed in its task, collapsing

under the looming storm clouds of World War II.

     Let's look at some of the sociological factors that were

involved as a result of this first Great War. With such a large

reduction in the number of men in society during and after World

War 1 more women had to carry the weight of responsibility in

feeding and caring for their families. With women's increased

responsibility and social contact came the desire for increased

interaction as fully functioning members of society, and the

movement supporting women's right to vote became a burning issue

of the day in the United States. With the passage of the Women's

Suffrage Act in 1920, women at last became voting equals with men

as citizens and members of society. At least, that was the ideal.

     During World War II, as another generation of men was

drafted and sent off to war, someone was needed to run the

factories to produce the weapons of war, and again the women

came to the aid of their countries. "Rosie the Riveter," a

fanciful female American steelworker, became the world's ideal

for women getting out there and working hard to support their men

in uniform, so we could win the war.

     Following World War II, when the fighting men and women came

back to their place in the work force, it became difficult for

women to simply disappear back into their traditional mold. It

became apparent that, not only was the world freed from the

terror of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, but our women had also

found that they could, indeed, work as hard as men and produce as

much output, and earn livings right alongside the men. Not only

was the world freed, but our women found that they were also

freed from the old mold!

     During the decades following World War II, massive upheavals

in western civilization took place. Today we see women taking an

increasingly responsible role in running the affairs of business

and government. However, at the same time more and more men are

finding it difficult, if not impossible, to find gainful

employment with enough salary to support a family, thanks in part

to the increased competition for available jobs.

     Today, in our emancipated society, our girls go through

school and on into college right alongside our boys, and our

women go out and compete equally with our men for jobs. At the

same time, we see many of our young women no longer looking

forward to raising a family as a primary goal in their lives, but

rather setting career goals and acquiring material possessions.

     The American ideal, along with the ideals of other Western

nations, is that no person is superior to anyone else because of

their race, religion. or sex. Such is the society in which we

find ourselves today.

     Today, amid this backdrop of social equality, we must

attempt to determine where our women fit into our religious

practices, and how we can utilize the talents they bring to

church services without violating God's commands in the Bible

regarding women in the ekklesia.

DEFINING THE DEBATE

     There are two major viewpoints among church people regarding

the role of women. Both perspectives deal with whether a woman

may participate in church services, or in what way a woman may

participate. Both sides bring in scriptural evidence to support

their claims. The difference is mainly in how people of each

viewpoint read the scriptures.

     The traditional view is that women do not have any role at

all in leading services or in sermonizing, although few people

object to a woman singing along with hymns or performing a

musical offering as a soloist. We might look on this as the

"conservative" point of view.

     The other outlook, which we might think of as being more

"liberal," would allow women to have full participation in

services, including making presentations or leading Bible

studies.

     A more excessive aspect of this second viewpoint would

permit a woman to pastor a congregation. but that's not within

the scope of this article.  We're examining the issue of whether

a woman should be allowed to speak during services, or teach a

lesson. (We might mention in passing, though, that none of our

editors believes that women ought to take on the role of church

pastor or religious leader, although we have seen it done in

extreme circumstances, when it has been necessary.)

COMMENT (Keith Hunt):

I'm not at all sure if by what is stated in this article, the

idea is being taught that women can lead in church services with

"teaching" in sermon type speeches or discords, although they

state above that none of their editors believe that women should

function in the role of pastor or religious leader. Paul nor any

other writer of the NT ever addresses the subject of women being

ordained to the Eldership and pastor ship of congregations. As

other writers on this subject have seen, Paul, in giving Timothy

and Titus instructions as for the qualifications for the

Eldership, so gives some instruction that would only apply to

men.

It would seem that in the NT church, the issue of women ever

becoming part of the Eldership/Pastor function of congregations

and the Church of God, was a "none" issue.

The Jewish mind would naturally not conceive the idea, and

neither Jesus = (Yeshua)  or the Holy Spirit ever led them to think

otherwise. But the subject of whether women could "teach" in a

sermon type discord when the "church was come

together" is addressed by Paul. And is the subject of this

article and my comments. End comment.

The WAY:

CONTRASTING VIEWPOINTS

     Two passages of scripture appear more frequently than any

others in the discussion of this topic. Let's review these

briefly.

     Paul wrote to the Corinthian congregation, "Let your women

keep silence in the churches [Greek ekklesia]: 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 [ekklesia]" (1 Corinthians 14:34-35,

KJV).

     To the evangelist Timothy, Paul wrote, "Let the woman learn

in silence with all subjection. But l suffer not a woman to

teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in

silence" (I Timothy 2:11-12, KJV).

     For many people, that constitutes a clear "Thus saith the

Lord" on the subject.  Women are not to speak during church

services, and are to remain silent.

     But there are some problems involved -- not with Paul, or

with what he wrote, but with our understanding of what Paul

actually wrote, which then leads to misunderstandings about what

he meant.

     One problem arises when husbands accept this "husband as

absolute ruler, woman as subservient" concept, and carry it home

with them, so that the wives are expected to keep silent

at home, as well! Fortunately, that doesn't take place in all

homes. Another problem comes from the idea that women are

inferior, intellectually or otherwise, and have no business

trying to use their brain power in the "man's world" of preaching

and teaching.

COMMENT (Keith Hunt):

Those men or husbands who would take the comment of Paul home

with them, really do have a problem of both reading and vain

authority. Paul was speaking in a "church" context, "when you

come together" (1 Cor.11:18 through to chapt.14:26 and end of

chapter).  We have seen (in part one) that women like Priscilla

did not keep silent and did teach the word to others, even to

men, OUTSIDE of "when you come together."  They did teach outside

of the setting of official church services.

In Paul's mind, the teaching and guidance of the congregation

"when they come together" in official church services was to be

looked upon as pasturing the flock of God, and to him that was

part of the qualifications of those qualified men (not all men

were qualified either, otherwise there would be no need for

having qualifications for Eldership) who had been called and

chosen to pastor ship of the flock of God.  In Paul's mind and

from his clear statement to Timothy, that function of the church

was not given to women, who had been created different than men.

This difference of mind between men and women, has come to notice

in many scientific studies in the last 20 years, and has been

shown on many TV news programs during the 90's. But many still

will not admit to this now proven fact. End comment.

The WAY:

     So we need to ask some specific questions: What does Paul

mean when he says "speak," "silence," "subjection," or  "in the

ekklesia"? Are women to remain absolutely silent, not singing,

not allowed to cough, or to comfort or discipline their children?

Most people would be quick to say, "Well, of course that's not

what it means."

     Then, what does it mean "to speak" -- does Paul mean any act

of vocalization, or does he mean making a  formal,  prepared 

presentation? Where in the law does it say women are to be silent

during church services? Why must they ask their husbands at home

in order to learn anything - did Paul consider women to be too

dense to understand what the teacher is saying when he is saying

it?

     Why would it be a shame for a woman to speak in the

assembly? What does "in the church" mean --during an assembly of

the ekklesia, or every minute of her life after she is

baptized? Does it mean during "formal church services" but not

during Bible studies or open forums? Why should women be

subjected into Silence, and how is vocalizing usurping authority?

     We need to understand that Paul was not violating other

principles he had already established. He had written in another

place that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither

bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all

one in Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) . And if ye be Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah)'s, then are ye Abraham's

seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Galatians 3:28-29). On

another occasion he wrote, "...there is neither Greek nor Jew,

circumcision nor un-circumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor

free: but Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) is all, and in all" (Colossians 3:11). These

passages tend to make it sound as if Paul was actually in favor

of equality among all the members, so that no distinctions were

drawn between Christians from various races or backgrounds, or

from either sex. This doesn't match with the idea that women are

to be treated virtually as inferiors.

     Yet, on the other hand, those who wish to have women

participate fully in services, with no restrictions on speaking

or leading, may in fact be violating  Paul's  apparently  clear

commands quoted earlier. If that's the case, there may he

problems with the more liberal viewpoint, as well.

     As is often the case, the truth of the matter may very well

lie somewhere in the middle. It's possible that both of the

extremes are wrong. We always encourage our readers to examine

all the facts before making up their minds.  With that in mind,

we need to seek a greater understanding of these scriptures, to

help us answer these questions.

     Whichever side of this debate anyone may favor, the most

important thing we can do is to examine our own  motives,  deep

down inside, and determine if we are truly set to accept God's

will on a matter, and do as His word teaches.  If that is not our

true motivation, we may find that we are merely attempting to

further our own agenda, or put our own interpretation of

scripture on an equal footing with what God wants us to do. If

that's the case, we need to stop and make sure our motivation is

pure. If it isn't, this will demonstrate to God that we are still

weak in our human condition. Our main motivation must always be

to serve and please God! Once we have that straight, we can

proceed with our studies, no matter what the subject matter

may be.

COMMENT (Keith Hunt):

To the last sentences I add my Amen.  A love of the truth, a

hunger and thirst after truth and righteousness, a desire to be

willing to be corrected, and to want the Lord to lead us into all

truth through the Spirit, is the heart of the matter. Only with a

respectful fear and trembling before the Word of God will we be

humble enough for the Almighty to lead us into truth, and a

growing in the grace and knowledge of our Savior Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) .

End comment.

The WAY:

A WOMAN'S ROLE IN ANCIENT SOCIETY

     We need to go back still further in time to get a better

overall picture of how women fit into various cultures throughout

history.   "A woman's place" during most of human history has

been a place of subjugation, second class citizen status, or that

of a piece of property which can be bought and owned. The concept

of a woman having any kind of "rights" would be laughable

to men of many past generations. It might be difficult for us to

place ourselves mentally into that type of setting, but doing so

will help us to understand just how it was that this new sect of

Christianity, this new Way of life, differed so radically from

the way people had been accustomed to living.

         The apostle Paul wrote his general epistles to

congregations of believers living in Gentile areas of the Roman

Empire.  The secular Roman/Grecian culture of the day was [Note: Grecia = (Greek) = (Greece)]

strongly influenced by the pagan philosophers, primarily Socrates

(470-399 B.C.), Plato (427-347 B.C.), and Aristotle (38~322

B.C.).  Socrates taught, for example, that in every regard women

were "the weaker sex," and that being a woman was a punishment,

since women were halfway between being animal and human. (It

might be interesting to learn what kind of women were in

Socrates' life --what his mother was like, or his sisters, or his

wife, etc.  for him to have developed such a strong dislike

toward half the human race!)

     In the Greek culture of that time, the men loved to get

together and discuss philosophy, or go to sporting events, while

the women stayed behind, never being allowed to venture out of

the house very far. Social, cultural and educational

opportunities for women were very limited. Aristotle furthered

the notion of sexual inequality with comments such as these:

     "The courage of a man is shown in commanding, of a woman in

obeying."   "The difference between husband and wife is like that

of a man's soul and his body, as the soul is meant to command the

arms and legs."

     Later, the philosopher  Zeno (335-265 B.C.) objected to how

men used women so freely for recreational purposes.  He was not

concerned with the plight of women, but rather that men were in

this way distracted from the more pure and preferred pursuit of

philosophy!

     Zeno's followers became known as the stoa poikite (or

painted colonnade) in the marketplace in Athens, which was

apparently the spot from which Zeno chose to teach. The

Stoics became champions of celibacy and restraint. Women were

considered a distraction and a temptation to men.

     By the time of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), the well-known Jewish philosopher

Philo (15 B.C. - 50 A.D.), a resident of Alexandria, Egypt, was

attempting to bring Jewish thought more in line with the

Hellenistic world in which they lived, and his writings combined

aspects of Plato with biblical subjects. Philo also taught a

disdain of womanhood along the lines of the Greek philosophers'

teachings.  Later, Josephus, the Jewish historian, continued in

the same vein, although the well known Jewish sage Gamaliel, who

appears briefly in the Bible (Acts 5:34; 22:3), apparently did

not concur with the negative view of womanhood.

     An interesting historical note about Philo:  He believed

that God was completely removed from the affairs of men -- an

unknowable God. He postulated a second God, who would be an

intermediary between the unknowable God and His creation. Philo

named this intermediary "Logos." Of course, we know that the

Greek word logos means "word," or "spoken utterance," and

is translated so in John 1:1. However, Philo interpreted this

Logos to be the sum total of the eternal thoughts and ideas, and

the creative power, that had gone into creating the universe. It

looks as if the influence of Philo's writings and teachings

reached into the New Testament church, because Paul confirmed

that it is Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) who is the mediator between God and man (1

Timothy 2:5). John later wrote in the beginning of his gospel

that the Logos was, indeed, the One who had created all things

and had come down from heaven as a human (John 1:1-14).

COMMENT (Keith Hunt):

To think that the NT writers got true theological ideas from

Philo is to me "far out man" just far out. More likely it was

Philo who was influenced by Christianity as he lived until

50 A.D. Then again, there were Jewish concepts of the Godhead

that were not that far removed from the truth, as Christianity

was at first a Jewish religion, I mean Jesus = (Yeshua)  was a Jew from the

tribe of Judah = (Juda), and they did have the sacred OT Scriptures where

the truth of God is proclaimed and recorded. End comment.

The WAY:

     From the first century A.D. forward, there was a tendency

among leaders in the increasingly apostate Christian church to

interpret scripture according to the Greek viewpoint, es-

pecially in the budding Roman Catholic Church, and later in its

Protestant descendants. In the 13th century, for example, Thomas

Aquinas (1225-1274 A.D.) systematized the religious beliefs

of his church and brought them into a closer harmony with ancient

Greek ideals, including the negative view of womanhood.  He and

later theologians thus interpreted Paul's writings according

to this world view.

COMMENT:

All that may well be true to a point, but what Paul wrote is

Scripture, inspired by the Spirit of the Lord, and must be

understood in the light of all Scripture, letting the Bible

interpret itself and putting scripture with scripture. Greek

ideas, viewpoints, philosophy must be discarded.

And what man has to say about what Paul said, must also be taken

with a grain or a bag of salt. End comment.

The WAY:

     Readers of "The WAY" are aware that the King James Version

of the Bible is not the pure and authoritative English

translation we had been led to believe that it was.  Rather, King

James himself, and his politics,  directly  influenced the

translators. History shows that, not only were variant

translations in the margin not allowed by King James, but all

other English translations (Wycliffe, Geneva, Coverdale, the

Great Bible, etc.) were destroyed by fire, along with some of

the people who owned them and refused to give them up!  The

majority of English language thought on the Bible and religious

matters since that time has leaned heavily on the King James

Version.  The KJV was the primary translation of the Worldwide

Church of God under Herbert Armstrong.  Therefore it's only

natural that some of the KJV's biases crept into his religious

thought and, as a result, into ours.

COMMENT:

Mistakes are evident in the KJV, not a few, but no major truth or

doctrine of the Eternal is corrupted by that translation. There

are just too many passages and verses on all of the Lord's

important truths and doctrines in the NT, for any group of

scholars (including those of King James) to try to deliberately

tamper with in order to secretly try to foster their particular

teaching on such as we are studying here. They would have to

re-write the entire NT if not the whole Bible to successfully

attain their clandestine plan. And the KJV scholars never came

close to doing that - rewriting the Bible.  The so-called plot of

King James is in the main a fabrication of some person's mind and

imagination, as they were dreaming some nightmare.

And I well remember articles being published in the early

editions of the Plain Truth (back in the 60's) that showed some

of the errors of the KJV.  Certainly at that time and way before,

Herbert Armstrong and the theology College he founded, had at

their disposal copies of the Greek NT just as other theology

schools had.  Any in-correct teaching on the part of HWA and the

WCG in those days, was not because of the King James Version of

the Bible. End comment.

The WAY:

     This brief tour through history may help us to see how our

own view of womanhood may be skewed because of what came before

us, and even by our own trusted Bibles concealing the truth

rather than revealing it! We're not going to suggest that the KJV

says "black" when it should have said "white," but we need to

come to a deeper understanding of some of these verses by

examining them more closely. When we note that women in the first

century assembly were treated differently than they had been

either in the Jewish synagogue or in Hellenistic society, that

tends to point out the discrepancy in our current understanding.

The women of the ekklesia were apparently treated better than

they were elsewhere, which may also have resulted in the large

number of righteous women mentioned in many scriptures.

COMMENT:

We can see women in the Church of God in the first century were

treated with much more dignity and respect simply by the way

Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Himself treated them. Hence His perfect example would have

been followed and taught by the apostles to everyone, in sermons,

teachings, and in living the example that Jesus = (Yeshua)  set for everyone.

So it should be no secret nor should it be hard to find this

truth in the pages of the NT.  All this still does not negate

the truth of what Paul was inspired to write about the role and

the place of "to teach or not to teach" for women, when the

church was to come together into one place (1 Cor.11:20). End

comment.

The WAY:

A NEW AND DIFFERENT WAY

     Paul and the other apostles and disciples came preaching,

not just about Jesus = (Yeshua)  and salvation, but about a new Way of life! 

Coming into the fellowship meant not only giving up a life of

sin, but also re-thinking the meaning and purpose of life. A wife

was elevated from the status of a slave, an animal, or an

inferior life form, to a fully functioning partner -- a help meet

for her husband, and co-heirs together of the grace of life 

(1 Peter 3:7).

     What is a "help meet"? The term has often been mispronounced

as "help-mate."  This tells part of the story, but a fuller

understanding of the role of the wife is needed, and Paul was

there to teach that new Way.

COMMENT:

The truth of the Eternal had always been there. It was some of

the religious leaders of Judaism that had perverted and twisted

and forgotten it.  Jesus = (Yeshua)  came and swept away the falsehood, and

then the Spirit was given to clean the mind and renew the truth

that was always there in God's word, as to the "why" and the

"role" of the creation of women in the structure of marriage, the

family, the church congregation, and personal salvation. The

truth had always been there as to the liberty that every woman

had in telling others (men and women, and all who would listen)

about the wonderful ways of the Lord and His truths.

This is clearly evident in the Gospels with the examples of the

prophetess Anna, the woman at the well in Samaria, and others we

have discussed fully in part one of this topic. Paul introduced

no new theology, only conformation as to the truth already

understood in Israel as to the role and function that women were

to practice in the church when it "came together into one place."

End comment.

The WAY:

     If we look back to Genesis, we can read the term:  "And the

LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I

will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground

the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of

the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call

them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that

was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to

the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for

Adam there was not found an help meet for him" (Genesis 2:18-

20).

     The word "meet" used in this sense is an obsolete word, no

longer in use in today's English. It means "fitting," or

"appropriate." The phrase "help meet" simply means a suitable or

appropriate helper. The phrase is translated from the Hebrew

'ezer' (Strong's #5828), which in these two verses is translated

"help meet" in the KJV, but the other 19 times it appears in

Scripture it is translated simply as "help." Eve was a suitable,

appropriate help for Adam, in the context that all the other life

forms existed as male and female.

     Paul's writings emphasize that, in Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), there is no need

for the separations that existed between people of various races,

nationalities, status in life, or even the social barriers that

existed between genders. There is no reason, in Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), to "put

down" another member of the assembly because of being a Jew,

slave, barbarian -- or a woman. Christianity brought a new

meaning to the idea of the wife as an appropriate helper. Truly,

this was a new and different Way!

COMMENT:

It was a new and different way only in respect to the false

teachings, customs, and practices of the Pharisees, who in many

ways had rejected the commandments of God as Jesus = (Yeshua)  told

them) to hold to their traditions and man made ideas (many

towards women).  It was a new and different way only in respect

to the wrong false practices and mind-set of the Gentile

nations towards women.  It was not new in respect to how the

Eternal had always, from the beginning, established how women

should function in marriage, in motherhood, in raising

children, in their personal relationship with their God, in

sharing with others the word of their Lord, and in the role they

were to take when the church "comes together." 

What this article is now going to zero in on, amounts to about

ONE to TWO HOURS a week (if the church calls for an official

congregational "come together in one place" Bible study each

week, maybe a total of Three hours, or a little more) and as I

have shown before in part one, this amount of time is very small

indeed when we compare it with all the other hours of the week

that every women has, to freely teach the word of the Lord to

others as led by the Spirit of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah).  Let us try to keep it all

in proper perspective. End comment.

The WAY:

GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGES

     What about the verses we quoted earlier in this article,

indicating that women had little or no part in the life of the

ekklesia? We can derive a greater understanding of the words

quoted in the New Testament scriptures by going back to the Greek

and examining them in more detail.

     We must remember that, no matter which translation of the

Bible we use, it's only a translation! We can often gain more

understanding of what was meant in any given passage by

consulting the original languages. Is it possible that there

might be subtle shades of meaning which have been lost, or at

least concealed, because of the improper translation of the Greek

thought? As we have seen in other word studies, this is exactly

the case!

COMMENT:

Is it really exactly the case? Did the KJV translators try to

hide something so women could be "kept under" and so men would

run the show in church services? Or was it from the beginning

God's intent and directive that men should lead in the "teaching"

during official congregational worship services? End comment.

The WAY:

Part Two:

1 Timothy 2

     Let's  consider the  well known verse used to forbid women

to have any vocal part in any teaching taking place on Sabbaths:

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority

over the man, but to be in silence" (1 Timothy 2:12, KJV).

     Let's begin by defining who is being discussed in this

passage. Notice the context: "First of all, then, I urge that

entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on

behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, in

order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness

and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our

Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the

knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator

also between God and men, the man Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) " (1 Timothy 2:1-5,

NASB).

     Each of the words "man" and "men" emphasized above are

translated from the Greek word anthropos (Strong's #444),  which

primarily means any human being, not just the males. We could

restate this passage to say that prayers could be made on behalf

of everyone, that God desires all people to be saved, and there

is a mediator between God and mankind, the human Jesus = (Yeshua)  Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah).

These would all be satisfactory translations of anthropos.

     A change takes place in the Greek, though, which is lost on

the English language readers.  Notice verse 8: "Therefore I want

the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without

wrath and dissension." This time, "men" is translated from

another Greek word, aner (Strong's #435), which has the meaning,

not just of mankind in general, but more specifically of the

husbands! The word is used to denote the man rather than the

woman, and an adult male rather than a juvenile male.

COMMENT:

The word "aner" is used for the MALE, not just "husband." You can

see this in the Englishman's Greek Concordance, where every place

is listed where it is used in the NT.

Yet, the writers of this article lead you to their thinking by

saying, "but more specifically of the husbands." Is it only the

husbands and not the wives that are to pray lifting up holy

hands? Can the wives(if we are to take this word to mean

husbands) never pray in a family setting at home? No other verse

in the entire Bible comes close to teaching such an idea. 

They will tell you later that when the Greek words for woman and

man used here are in close proximity to each other, we are to

understand them to mean "husband" and "wife."

So, in verses 9-10, is it only wives that this adorning applies

to?  And at home to boot!  Are the single women and widows

excluded!  No! This instruction for women in verses 9 and 10

applies to ALL women, not just wives.  So also the instruction in

verse 8 is for MEN not "husbands" only. And in the context of

all men and all women in congregational worship services, Paul

was instructing Timothy that it was the "men" (married, single,

divorced, widower) who should pray, and that women (married,

single, divorced, widow) should dress modestly (not as if going

to some fancy dress ball with the Queen of England) and

especially with the attitude of good works, true humble

Christianity. End comment.

The WAY:

     But does this mean that only the husbands are to pray? Let's

continue: "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper

clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold

or pearls or costly garments; but rather by means of good works,

as befits women making a claim to godliness. Let a woman quietly

receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not

allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to

remain quiet" (verses 9-12).

     Here, the word "woman" is translated from gune (Strong's

#1135), and can mean "women" in general, but in proximity to the

word aner (husband), it can only mean "wife." "Man" in verse 12

is again translated from aner.

COMMENT:

There it is; the two words when in proximity, then "gune" can

only mean "wife." But who says?  Where is the "thus says the

Lord" on that bit of grammar?  Where is the Bible verse

that tells you that rule of speech - in English or Greek? End

comment.

The WAY:

     A note on language usage: When aner and gune are used in the

same context, the proper translation would not be "man" and

"woman," but rather "husband" and "wife."

COMMENT:

We have seen that the context and LOGIC of verses 8 to 10 would

disprove that idea. Besides that, the Greek language did have

other words for the specific understanding of "husband" - "wife."

Paul could have used those words. Or, He could have said "the

married man" and "the married woman" (such language he used in 1

Cor.7) to make sure Timothy and everyone reading his letter would

have no doubt that he was in this section only referring to the

married. End comment.

The WAY:

     Often, at the end of wedding ceremonies, we can hear the

familiar phrase: "I now pronounce you man and wife." This is a

mixture of definitions.  The preacher might better pronounce them

to be "husband and wife." It's evident that they are a man and a

woman. The preacher would probably never pronounce them to be

"husband and woman." But "man and wife," although incorrect, has

become acceptable in our language.       

 To be Continued

……………………………

No: 2

WOMEN'S ROLE IN THE CHURCH SERVICE....CONTINUED, PART TWO

The Way:

     There is a similar situation in the case of the Greek words

aner and gune. They are understood to mean "husband" and "wife"

when used together, and to translate them as "man" and "woman"

actually conceals the true meaning of the Greek text!

COMMENT:

Who says these two Greek words when found together are always to

be understood as "husband" and "wife"?  Where is such a rule

found in the pages of the Bible?  You need to remember that the

NT was written in "common" Greek, not "classical" Greek of the

Universities, and upper highly educated people.  The NT was

written in everyday down to earth language of the common people,

this is now a known fact.  Then, you need to remember the Bible

does not come with a grammar text rule book, like some computer

programs do.  My WordPerfect program comes with a "spell check"

and "grammar check" built in, the Bible does not. In fact the

original manuscripts of both the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT had

one letter after another, no spaces, no sentences, no paragraphs,

no punctuation whatsoever. In fact the OT Hebrew originally did

not have even any vowels.

You will notice that in their statement above, they do not quote

any book on NT grammar that was written along with the NT books. 

As far as I know no book on NT grammar has been discovered, that

was written in the first century A.D. to explain all the verses

of the NT in grammar form.  So their dogmatic statement is just

human reasoning or conjecture, or at best based upon classical

Greek or modern Greek grammar. Besides all that talk about the

rules of grammar, there is nothing to say the writers of the NT,

using common Greek, had to follow any rules of grammar.  I

personally do not follow all English grammar rules in my

writings, after all, rules of grammar are only the invention of

other humans, and language does change over the process of time,

and so does spelling and so does grammar. The Americans do not

spell all English words as do the British (i.e. color-USA; 

colour-British).

The argument above for the verses under discussion in 1 Tim. 2

can really bear no importance on the matter, as to determining

the truth of Paul's teaching and instruction in this section on

women's "teaching or not teaching in church services" nor also on

the section in 1 Cor 14 regarding the same matter.  It is

especially the context of 1 Cor.14 that gives the truth of the

matter. The two passages go hand in hand, both must be taken

together. Paul was talking about the same topic within the

teaching of different contexts, and gave some different

explanations as to why he said the things he wrote were the

commandments of the Lord (1 Cor.14:37).

The Way:

     The key to understanding this verse is in knowing the proper

translation of the Greek grammar for the verb "to teach." Paul

uses the word didusko  (Strong's #1321),  which Thayer's

Lexicon defines as: "(1) to teach, to hold discourse with others

in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses, to be a

teacher ... (2) to teach one, to impart instruction, instill

doctrine into one..." Paul was indeed referring to women in the

act of instructing!  But that's not the whole story.

COMMENT:

It's not!  Now it would seem to me that it is pretty plain,

especially in 1 Cor.14.  The context and the EMPHASIS of Paul in

this chapter is "instruction" - "edification" - "teaching."  See

verses 4, 5, 6, 12, 17, 19, 24, 25, 31, 35.  The whole idea of

the church coming together into one place was so all may learn,

be taught, be edified, be instructed in the ways of the Lord. 

After Paul had talked about the gifts of the Spirit, the use of

tongues, the prophets and prophesying in the church as it came

together into one place (verse 23), and knowing that these gifts

of the Spirit could be given to women as well as men, he then

answers the logical question:  Can women then in official church

services, use their gifts and teach and preach - expound the word

of the Lord to the congregation?  His answer is clearly given. 

He also answers the comment that would also naturally arise: 

Well I have this gift and the Spirit just led me to preach and

teach before the church, I just could not help myself. 

For Paul, there was no such thing as "I could not help myself,

the Spirit forced me to speak out to teach and preach before the

gathered assembly." For Paul, the Spirit never forces anyone to

do anything. Paul would reply: "And the spirits of the prophets

are subject to the prophets." Everyone can, in Paul's mind,

control themselves and use the gifts of the Spirit as God

directs, and when He directs. It was then after uttering that

statement that he said the women are to keep silent in the

church (when the church comes together in one place, official

services). His context of the whole chapter is to do with

teaching, expounding the word and ways of the Lord, what today we

would call preaching in sermon (short messages) and

sermons (long expounding).

                     BECAUSE OF A COMMA

The Way:

     There was another subtle difference between what the KJV

states and how most modern translations read. Notice again verse

12, from the NASB: "But I do not allow a woman [Greek: gune,

wife] to teach or exercise authority over a man [aner, husband],

but to remain quiet."

     There is a comma added in the KJV text which is not in most

modern translations! Without the additional comma, the sense of

the sentence would be that Paul was not forbidding women to teach

in church services, but rather to both teach, and grasp control

from, their husbands!

     If this is what Paul was saying, then many people have had a

misunderstanding of this verse for a long time. As we will see,

this is indeed what Paul was saying!

COMMENT:

Now how do you teach but not grasp control from your husbands?

Usually the teacher is in control over those being taught.

Usually they lead, they govern the situation, they control

the floor so to speak. Have you ever seen a teacher that does not

or is not able to grasp control of those they are supposed to be

guiding and teaching, be it men or women, or a mixture of both? 

It soon degenerates into confusion and bedlam, certainly

discomposure.

Does the wife keep looking at her husband and somehow with her

eye or hand tell him she has not grasped control from him? Does

she give him some secret sign (only the two of them know about)

now and then to tell him he can take control if he feels she has

grasped control from him?  Does he give her the nod to let her

know she has grasped control from him (as he sits there part of

the group being taught and led by her)?

Do you see some of the problems in executing this idea that the

wife can teach (what about women who are not wives or are widows?)

but not grasp control from her husband? 

                     THE INFINITIVE MOOD

The Way:

     If we look a bit more deeply, we will find that the grammar

Paul used for the phrases "to teach" and "usurp authority" are in

the present tense, active voice and infinitive mood. As we will

see, this changes the whole flavor of the translation and,

consequently, our understanding of the verse.

     The infinitive mood signifies that the action spoken of

"pertains to continuous or repeated action, without any

implications as to when the action takes place" (The Complete

Word Study New Testament, ed. Zodhiates).

COMMENT:

The present tense is continuous action in the present ongoing

time.  The "when" of the action would be determined by the

context.  The context of what Paul is saying to Timothy

regarding women not teaching must be found in other parts of the

NT or other parts of the writings of Paul.  And one major other

part of Paul writing on the same subject is 1 Cor.14 and it's

context is clearly given. It is when the church has come together

into one place for instruction and edification in the word and

ways of the Lord.  The context of the whole NT shows as I have

before proven in part one, that women can OUTSIDE of the church

coming together into one place, speak about, teach about, preach

about, edify about, instruct about, write about, the word and

ways of the Eternal, to anyone, man or woman, teenager or child,

as the Spirit of the Lord leads and directs.

The Way:

     Zodhiates comments on this passage at 1 Timothy 2:9-15: "The

key to understanding what the apostle Paul is teaching is that

woman should not try to appear or act like men. In addition

to this, they should not attempt to usurp the position of their

husbands in the home and in the church.  God has appointed

specific tasks for both women and for men. Childbearing is

reserved for women, just as the role of a husband is set aside

for men.  Paul emphatically states that these were differences

created by God Himself.....

COMMENT:

Where in this section does Paul say that women were trying to be

like men?  Does it say they were trying to "look" like men?  He

talks about them dressing modestly and having good works. Such

could be said concerning men also.  Can a woman not teach her

children, or other children in a grade school? Can she not teach

other people in her skill of secular work? How would she not

usurp and not grasp control over her husband in secular skill

teaching in her work, when her husband could be miles away

working in a different trade and skill?

In these specific verses of 1 Tim. 2 where does the word "church"

and "home" appear?  They do not!  So, we must look elsewhere in

the NT, and/or in the writings of Paul to find if there is any

other specific instruction on women "not teaching" and where that

injunction and command is to be carried out.  We find it again

from Paul in 1 Cor.14 where the context is made very clear and

plain. It is when the church comes together into one place

for edification and instruction in the word and ways of the Lord.

The childbirth here spoken about is open for other

interpretations, as some commentators point out. In the Greek the

word "the" is present - "the childbirth."  And as some point

out Paul could have had in mind THE ONE childbirth that came

through woman - the Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah)!  Hence verse 15 may not be talking

about anything to do with her home life as a wife per se, but

fulfilling her role in life, and knowing when and where to teach

or not to teach, how to outwardly adorn herself with moderation,

putting on good works, continuing in faith, love, holiness, and

self-control (sobriety), then she can be saved through the

childbearing of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) .

The Way:

     "In verse nine, the Greek word sophrosune [Strong's

#4997]... provides the clue for the interpretation of this

difficult passage. This Greek word, translated 'sobriety' [in

KJV], means 'the voluntary limitations of one's freedom of

thought and behavior,' or 'sober mindedness.' The truth

is that in Christianity women became free and equal to their

husbands. Nevertheless, there was always a danger that they might

take this freedom beyond the limitations that God had placed

when He appointed man as head over woman in the marital

relationship. No two people or things can be exactly the same.

The inherent differences in people and things must be recognized

by a sophron, or a 'sober minded' person. This is one who

recognizes his abilities and his limitations, and is mindful of

his behavior in certain given circumstances."

COMMENT:

This sober-mindedness, or self-control as the New KJV renders it,

also contains within it for a Christian, the understanding that

man was to lead in spiritual head of tribes, congregational

worship towards God.  We certainly see this clearly brought to

light starting with Moses and the children of Israel.  God

instituted a religious congregational (when you come before me

together in one place) worship service, and all who did the

teaching (and physical sacrificing of the animals at that time)

under that system were MEN. As they met in one place to worship

the Lord, those responsible for the teaching service were chosen

and/or ordained men.

There are no examples in the entire Bible, that any woman ever

taught or expounded or preached the word or ways of the Eternal,

during the time when the Church of God( in the OT or the NT) came

together into one place in an official worship service. That

expounding and teaching of the word of the Lord was always the

duty of men for the one to three hours a week that such

gatherings of the church were called. 

The Way:

     Zodhiates later comments, "Furthermore, the word for 'teach'

in this verse is the Greek infinitive didaskein (1321).  In this

instance, it means 'to teach continuously.'  The Situation

refers to the home, and assembly, or anywhere the husband and

wife may be interacting together. If this were the case, the

position of the husband as the head would be undermined, and

would not be in accordance with God's ordained order in creation.

A wife should place limitations on her speech. Paul does not want

women to be lacklustre or mute, but to be careful lest they go

beyond the bounds of accepted propriety.

COMMENT:

Oh, so now the wife must not continually speak or teach or preach

or expound the word in the assembly, in case the position of her

husband as the head would be undermined. 

Hummm,  so how much is continual? Do we have to have a

ministerial conference to decide the matter?  Is she to stop

talking for say 5 minutes every so often, so it will not be

continual?  Does she nod at him to tell him she is placing

limitations on her speech and he can take over for a while?  What

if he is out of town for the weekend or for a month on business,

are these limitations of speech then discarded and not effective?

Can she then teach and preach continually without a five minute

break, or without having him take over for a while?

I mean to say, what do we define as "continuously"?  Is a 5

minute expounding of the Scriptures not classified as

"continuously" but a 10 minute preaching or teaching would be

"continuously" hence not allowed, or her husband would have to

chime in with a two minute commercial break?  Or would we

classify that if she takes a drink of water half way through her

sermonette or sermon, that would not be "continuously" and so

permitted?

Now that's just trying to arrange this "not continuously" within

the church, when it comes together into one place, but what about

trying to arrange it at home, when human nature and emotions are

more open and active.  What then is "continuous" talk on the part

of the wife?  Who sets the bounds, and by what standard?  Where

are the examples of all this in the word of the Lord?  Where are

some kind of time laws or rules or examples found to guide us and

the wives in determining what is "not continuously."? I can find

teaching and examples on how a woman of God can dress at times,

under different situations. I can find all kinds of teachings and

examples on the "good works" a woman should have, written in

the pages of the Bible. I can find examples of women teaching the

word of God to others (even to men) outside of the context of the

church coming together into one place, written in the pages of

the Bible. But, can I find anything about women "not

continuously" talking so to usurp authority over her husband, not

one word as to guide me on what is continuous talk for a woman,

hence wrong or sin for her.

The Way:

     "Moreover, the word translated 'to usurp authority over' is

the Greek word authentein (831). Essentially, a wife's private or

public life should be beyond reproach and never undermine the

position that her husband has been given by God. Also, a wife

should never encroach upon the role of her husband."

COMMENT:

Ah, now finally we are down to "role" - the role of men and

women.  As far as Salvation, a Child of God - being able to study

and understand the word of the Lord, having a reward in the

Kingdom based upon what you did with what you were given from the

Father, then there is no male or female, there is no Jew or

Gentile, all are fully equal. But that does not mean I as a male

can produce babies from my body in childbirth. No! Only women can

still do that.  God did make male and female, and technically the

male was created first, and later the woman. The Lord intended

from the beginning to have certain functions or roles within

certain contexts, for both the male and the female. One of those

roles or functions was who would be responsible for the

"teaching, preaching, expounding" of the word and ways of the

Father and Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), in the setting, context, of the church coming

together into one place.

Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi has written a whole book on this very

subject of the roles of men and women in the Church. I recommend

to the reader and those who want to study this subject in depth,

his book.

The Way:    

     Then, what Paul was saying in 1 Timothy 2:12 is: 'I do not

allow a wife to continuously teach, or to continually exercise

authority over, her husband"!

COMMENT:

That is what man says Paul was saying, but it just is not so,

just is not so at all my friends.

With what is stated that Paul was supposedly stating, we are back

to the problems of "continuously."  So Paul, we could argue, did

not allow a woman to teach in services EVERY Sabbath, for that

would be "continuously." So Paul only allowed her to teach or

preach or expound the Scripture, once a month.  Then he only

allowed a woman to teach in the congregational service under 10

minutes, otherwise it was "continuously" and so exercising

authority over her husband.  

On and on we could go with our ideas of interpreting how to put

into practice the above explanation of what Paul was supposed to

have been teaching. And the ministerial conferences on the matter

would be endless and subject to change as new ideas were

presented.

The Way:

     The husband is to teach the wife. The wife should not be

teaching the husband.  For a husband to be asking his wife about

the scriptures (especially in those days when women were not

formally educated at all) is not appropriate, and does not fit

into the universal family concept found throughout all nations

and cultures, where the husband is the head of the household.

     In  today's society,  there might be one exception to this

principle.  If a wife has been attending church services for

years, as a member of the ekklesia, and then her husband is

called and comes into the assembly, the wife may likely have more

Bible knowledge than the husband. In this case, the husband might

not be able to answer the wife's questions because of a lack of

skill in the Word. A loving wife would want to bring her newly

baptized husband along in the faith by teaching him what she

knows, and there should be no problem involved with her sharing

her knowledge under these circumstances.  However, the husband is

still the head of the family. The wife is still not allowed to

dominate, even if she has superior Bible knowledge.

COMMENT:

While in the main I agree with what is said above, the Bible is

speaking in GENERAL terms that the head of the wife and the

family is the husband. As pointed out above, there could be

individual situations where the wife takes the leading if she

knows more. That would be the husband loving his wife in the

right manner, and having enough common sense and wisdom, together

with humility, to know she should take the lead in that

circumstance. But now, give me a break with that last sentence. 

Outside the setting of the church coming together into one place,

and the wife or the woman having more knowledge of the Bible

than the husband or the man, there IS NO RULE, there is no LAW

from God saying, "well it must be this way" or "it must be that

way." We are not told who had the most Bible knowledge between

Priscilla and Aquila when they instructed Apollos.  It may well

have been the wife for all we know.  We are just not told!  In

those situations of expounding the truths of God to others

outside of church services, it is open floor, full freedom, as

the Spirit leads, and as the gifts of the Spirit have been given

to each individual.  Naturally, a husband and wife will work as a

team with the love and respect and with the knowledge of each

others abilities(Eph.5:21-33; 1 Peter 3:7), to the best edifying

of those they are called to teach. And it could be the woman will

have more gifts and more ability to expound and

put into words the truths of the Lord than the man, and hence be

used more, and do more of the talking. This does not mean she is

usurping his authority as head.  It means the head has enough

sense and enough love to know the best way to get the job done.

Before we continue let me say this about the idea that we should

understand 1 Tim. 2  to read "wife" and "husband."  I have two of

the most popular Greek/English translations on the market today -

one by Green and the other by Berry. Both men would be classified

as Greek scholars. Neither of them translate 1 Tim 2 as "wife" -

"husband."  Both men render the Greek into the English very

similar to the KJV.  The reader may want to find as many

translations as possible from various Greek scholars (some as

individuals and some as groups of scholars who worked on

translating the Greek into English) and see how many of them

translate 1 Tim. 2 as "wife and "husband."  I think you will be

hard pressed to find even a few from all there is out there.  I

personally have looked at these following translations: RSV;

Living Bible; NEB; Phillips; Jerusalem Bible; NIV; Good News

Bible; Lamsa Holy Bible; Fenton Translation; The Everyday Bible;

New Living Translation; NKJV; and the KJV.  All of them are

basically the same as the KJV.

                     USURPING AUTHORITY

The Way:

     As we saw earlier, the phrase "usurp authority over" is

translated from the single Greek word authenteo (Strong's #831).

This is an unusual word. It only occurs this one time in the

Greek scriptures. Strong defines it to mean "to act of oneself,

i.e., (fig.) dominate." However, Thayer's Lexicon goes on to

define the word to mean, "(I) one who with his own hands kills

another or himself; (2) one who acts on his own authority,

autocratic; (3) an absolute master; (4) to govern, exercise

dominion over one."

     Well! We can just see Paul telling Timothy, " I don't allow

a wife to instruct her husband or to take his life"!

COMMENT:

This is the interpretation of the writers based upon their faulty

idea that Paul is talking about only husbands and wives here.

What they are doing is picking the definition of the word that

fits best their theory.  Certainly the word of the Lord clearly

states that murder is wrong for anyone to commit, including a

wife towards her husband, but a wife "instructing" her husband,

to go along with their argument for the sake of argument,  that

is another matter altogether, and one that outside of the church

coming together into one place,  is very doubtful as being from

the Scriptures. I know of no Bible verse that says a wife CANNOT

instruct her husband.  The truth is she may be much better

qualified in certain areas to do just that - instruct her husband

where he needs to be instructed, including Biblical instruction. 

Sure when all things are equal, the man should be the head

and the leader in the home of Biblical knowledge, that's why Paul

spoke with a GENERAL statement in 1 Cor.14 when saying if the

woman, when in church services wanted to learn anything

(concerning what the men may be saying in their teaching of the

way of the Lord) she should "ask her husband at home."  That was

a general statement from Paul, when all things are basically

equal between husband and wife. He gave that general statement

without going into all the exceptions there may be to that

general and ideal way of life for husband and wife. All things

being equal, God wants the man to be leader and head of his

wife in spiritual knowledge, so he can answer her questions at

home, when she hears and learns things from the men in church

services, that trigger questions in her mind that she is not sure

what the answer is.

The Way:

     Yet, Zodhiates verifies that this is a correct definition.

He defines authenteo as "A self-appointed killer with one's own

hands, one acting by his own authority or power. Governing a

genitive, to use or exercise authority or power over as an

autocrat, to domineer (1 Tim. 2: 12)"

(The Complete Word Study Dictionary, New Testament).

     Zodhiates also notes that, in Greek, a verb in the

infinitive form "has many more uses than it does in English, most

of which are idiomatic and difficult to translate properly." This

may well be one of those places!

COMMENT:

And it may well be that it is not one of those places.  But an

additional place that goes together like hand and glove with the

instruction Paul gave on this same matter over in 1 Cor.14.

It is very possible that some are making this passage in Timothy

and the one in 1 Cor.14 to be much more complicated than they

are.  I think Paul's reader (the brethren at Corinth, and the

minister Timothy) had no trouble in understanding Paul in his

directives here as he instructed them concerning the role women

were to practice in the "teaching, preaching, expounding" of the

ways of the Lord in official church services, when the church

came together into one place.

When we understand the context Paul is speaking in for uttering

this commandment, which he claimed to the Corinthians, was from

the Lord, then it really does not take a rocket scientist or a

Greek scholar to interpret it for you.  You simply read it for

what it says and believe it for what it says. Paul was saying

that during the "teaching, preaching, expounding" of the word and

ways of the Lord, part of the coming together into one place,

the women were to remain in silence, listening and learning,

taking notes if you like, thinking about what was being said and

taught, and if there arose any questions about what she heard,

she was to take them home with her and ask her husband at home

for the answers. And that is it, pure and simple to understand. I

mean even a child can understand it.  Paul did, for the sake of

those theologians in the church, give some reasons as to why

the Lord said it was to be this way during the instructional part

of the church service. 

These verses are;  1 Cor. 14: 34, 35; and 1 Tim. 2:13, 14. They

have been thoroughly elaborated upon in such works as "Man and

Woman in Biblical Perspective" by James B. Hurley (Zondervan

Publishing House) and "Women in the Church - A Biblical Study on

the Role of Women in the Church" by Samuele Bacchiocchi (Biblical

Perspectives, 4569 Lisa Lane, Berrien Springs, Michigan 49103).

The Way:

     Unquestionably, though, the overall sense of these two

verses is a clarification on how wives should submit to their

husbands (Ephesians 5:22). 

COMMENT:

That is their understanding based upon the comments by Zodhiates,

which are rejected by nearly all other Bible commentators and

Greek scholars.

The Way:

     In fact, with this new understanding of what Paul was

saying, we might better translate verses 11 and 12 along these

lines: "Let a wife learn in peace, fully subordinate; and I do

not permit a wife to be continuously teaching or domineering over

her husband; rather she is to remain at peace. I do not allow a

wife to continually teach or continually dominate her husband."

COMMENT:

Again, if we are to understand that this is what Paul said to

Timothy, then we are back to having to determine just what

constitutes "teach continually" and "continually dominate

her husband" which could lead to many arguments, differences of

opinion, and many ministerial conferences, with each church

finally doing its own thing. Some no doubt believing that full

sermons by women would not be "dominating her husband" or

"teaching continually."

The Way:

     Notice how Zodhiates addresses these issues: "These verses

(1 Timothy 2:9-15) indicate that women were full and active

members in the early church. ... From an examination of 1

Corinthians 11:2-16, it is also clear that both wives and

husbands could pray and prophecy in the worship service. ... In

all this discussion, Paul's chief concern is that no woman would

be of immoral character" (Zodhiates).

COMMENT:

This is Zodhiates idea and you will notice he uses the word

"indicates" for it is obvious from the rest of the NT that it may

not have been so at all, and he wants to cover his butt. 

Now to the often quoted section of Scripture in 1 Cor. 11:2-16. 

Please read this section. 

Try to find the word "church" or "assembly" or "congregation" in

this section.  Try to find the phrase "when you meet" or "in the

church assembly" or "when the church comes together" or "when you

come together into one place."  Try to find ANYTHING like those

words or phrases in that section of Scripture.  You will not, for

one simple and plain reason.....THEY ARE NOT THERE!!

This section of inspired Scripture has NOTHING to do with church

services, or when the church assembly came to gather into one

place for official worship services.  It has to do with ANYTIME

BUT that time of the church "coming together."  It has to do with

men and women praying and speaking forth the words of the Lord in

their day to day lives APART FROM the church coming together!

Notice it!  It is not until Paul starts another thought with more

instruction and correction on another subject that he introduces

the phrase "come together" and "come together in the church"

verses 17,18. His mind now goes to the many problems he knew they

were having at and in the church assembly when they did come

together into one place.  The first problem and first correction

he delivers to them is that of HOW to observe the symbols of

the death of Jesus = (Yeshua)  correctly.  Notice how many times he uses this

phrase "come together" or "come together into one place" from

chapter 11:17 to the end of chapter 14.  In that whole section

Paul addresses many problems he saw that they were having in and

during official church services.  Before this section - starting

in chapter 11:17 - he was addressing problems on a general basis

of everyday life. The one exception is the man guilty of sexual

immorality in chapter 5. Paul there does say they should act on

this situation "when you are gathered together" (verse 4).  He

does not come back to "assembly" problems again until chapter

11:17.

The Way:

     What about verse 11? "Let the woman (wife) learn in silence

with all subjection" (KJV). Contrast that with the NASB: "Let a

woman [wife] quietly receive instruction with entire

submissiveness." Which is correct?

     Zodhiates comments on the phrase "in silence with all

subjection":

     "The subsequent term to consider is hesuchia (Strong's

#22711), translated 'silence.' In the NT it occurs numerous times

referring to tranquillity or the state of being undisturbed. This

should be the understanding in this verse. One must bear in mind

here that during the era of time when Paul was writing, it was

usually men who were the ones to receive an education. If this

word meant 'complete silence,' women would never have the

opportunity to ask questions or increase her knowledge of the

Scriptures. Simply speaking, the wife ought to be displaying a

tranquil spirit in her attempt to learn. The final word of key

importance in understanding the 'silence' mentioned in this verse

is hupotage (Strong's #5292), translated 'subjection' in KJV,

meaning 'to place in proper order.' ... Paul wanted to express

the idea that in the wife's desire to learn, she should respect

her husband's position over her in Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) (cf. 1 Cor. 11:3)."

COMMENT:

None of these words explained above give forth any proof that the

case Zodhiates wants his readers to believe is the truth of the

matter (trying to say Paul is talking about wives and

husbands in the marriage relationship).  His comment and idea

about if this did mean "complete silence" women would never "have

the opportunity to ask questions or increase her knowledge of the

Scriptures" is blown to shreds by Paul's words in verse 35 of 1

Cor.14.  It would seem Zodhiates does not want you to see that

verse, or he himself cannot see it (what you call trying to proof

text your ideas by selecting only certain verses while completely

ignoring others on the same subject), or has conveniently

forgotten it is there.

For Paul it was quite simple, women during the "teaching,

preaching, instructional" part of the church service, were to

remain silent. They learned from what was being instructed

just like everyone else sitting in the congregation, thus being

edified in the Scriptures. If questions came to their minds

concerning anything being taught, they were to note it, and

"ask their husbands at home."  

You will notice Paul did not say they were to run to the elders

after services and ask them.

Paul was indeed upholding the marriage and the family structure

as given by the Lord from the beginning. The head of the woman is

the man (1 Cor.11:3).  The women with husbands were to first try

and have their husbands answer their questions concerning

spiritual matters they may have heard in services and had

questions on.  How many in the church of God follow that

instruction today?  In a lot of cases and in a lot of churches it

has been forgotten or has been neglected to be taught.

The Way:

Part Three:

1 Corinthians 14

     We have seen that Paul was not, after all, forbidding women

to teach during the assembly.

COMMENT:

I submit we have not seen that at all proved by anything so far

said from the above authors of this article or from Zodhiates.

The Way:

     Setting aside that portion of the discussion for now, we

next need to consider the other passage of scripture most often

used in reference to women speaking in church.

     In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV), Paul says, "Let your women

keep silence in the churches [ekklesia]: 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 [ekklesia]."

     Was  Paul  lamenting  the shame of seeing a woman getting up

to address the assembled group, and saying it was not permitted

for them to do so? Many people read it that way. But let's

see if we may not have read more into this verse than is actually

there.  We might ask a fellow church member, "Who will be

speaking at services this week?". When we ask this, we are asking

who will stand up in front of the congregation and deliver a

message or lead a bible study. This is how we define the word

"speak" in a church setting. But is this what Paul meant when he

said women should not "speak" in the assembly?

     Let's read  1 Corinthians chapter 14. Paul is giving lengthy

instructions about speaking in tongues and proper decorum in the

assembly. Notice how often he mentions speaking in this

passage: "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual

gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 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.  But

everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening,

encouragement and comfort.  He who speaks in a tongue edifies

himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 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.

     "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?... 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.

     "Undoubtedly  there are all sorts of languages in the world,

yet none of them is without meaning. 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. So it is with you.  Since

you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that

build up the church. For this reason anyone who speaks in a

tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. For if I

pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful....

     "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 

But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to

instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. Brothers,

stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in

your thinking be adults.........

     "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?

But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in

while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that

he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of his

heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God,

exclaiming, 'God is really among you!'

     "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. If anyone speaks in a tongue,

two -- or at the most three -- should speak, one at a time, and

someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker

should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God. Two

or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh

carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone

who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can

all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and

encouraged. The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of

prophets. For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in

all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent

in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in

sub-mission, as the Law says. 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. Did the word of

God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has

reached?  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. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

Therefore, my brothers, he eager to prophesy, and do not forbid

speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting

and orderly way" (I Corinthians 14, NIV).

                         TO TALK OR SPEAK?

     The words emphasized above have something in common: They

are all translated from the Greek word laleo (Strong's #2980). 

This word does not mean getting up to deliver a prepared

message.   Rather, laleo means primarily to utter sounds with the

voice, to use the faculty of speech. "Talk" would be a better

translation than "speak."

COMMENT:

Of course not. We can see from the context Paul is not really

talking about people preparing messages a week in advance. The

church at Corinth had many "spiritual gifts" which Paul knew very

well. That congregation had many who would speak the words of the

Lord, who would have revelations from the Lord, who could expound

the word of the Lord, right on the spot, there and then, without

doing any preparing ahead of time. So much so was this fact, that

there was no order in their services, and Paul was correcting and

instructing them concerning it.  The fact remains people were

speaking with their mouths, call it "talk" or "speech" or

"instruction."  Paul wanted "edification" for all present to be

the mark of the day, when the church came together into one

place.

TO BE CONTINUED

……………………………………..

No: 3

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 = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) 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 = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) -- 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 = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua)  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 = (Laodicea) and that

you in turn read the letter from Leodicea." [Note: Laodicea = (Laodiceans)]

     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 = (Mashiach) = (Messiah)

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 = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), 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: 4

WOMEN'S ROLE IN THE CHURCH SERVICE......CONTINUED, PART FOUR

                  PAUL'S FEMALE ASSISTANTS

The Way:

     One thing we can know for certain, though: Paul did not look

on women as inferior creatures, as did so many men of that day,

and even some today.  Notice his instructions to a fellow

servant: "Yes, and I ask you, loyal yoke-fellow, help these women

who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel along

with Clement and the rest of my fellow-workers, whose names are

in the book of life" (Philippians 4:3).  Paul is asking a male, a

loyal yoke-fellow, to aid and assist the women who fought at his

side. He didn't tell the man to take the women's jobs from them

and make them go sit down. Paul asked the man to help them!

COMMENT:

Certainly! No problem. I have already commented that Paul had

women who worked with him in the gospel. Priscilla was one of

them. But we cannot find anywhere that Priscilla ever taught,

preached, expounded the word of the Lord in official church

services, when the church came together as a whole congregation

into one place. I have commented in depth in part one of this

study, that outside those official church gatherings (which may

only total a few hours a week) women have the God giving right to

spread the gospel in whatever way they are led by the Spirit of

God to so spread and teach the gospel,  as much as it is the

duty of the men to do.

                        DOES "SILENT"

                        MEAN SILENT?

The Way:

     Let's return to I Corinthians 14 for a moment, and consider

another aspect of this passage: 

     "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not

allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says"

(verse 34).  What about remaining silent?  What exactly does

that mean?

     "Remain silent" (NIV), or "keep silence" (KJV) is translated

from the Greek word sigao(Strong's #4601), which means to keep

silent by holding one's peace. It suggests silence as a

result of a sense of fearing God (out of respect, not out of

terror), or of awe.  There is another word, siopao (Strong's

#4623), which has the more traditional meaning of physically

abstaining from speech. That's what we usually tend to think this

passage means -- women should just shut their mouths and be

silent (siopao). But that's not the word Paul used here. It isn't

a matter of saying to the women, "Shuddup!", as much as it means

"Peace, and be still."

COMMENT:

Of course, Paul was using a polite word because he was a polite

man (unless he got angry with false preachers and really

stiff-necked individuals, then he could be not so polite, just

as Jesus = (Yeshua)  was not so polite at times with certain people), and the

topic was one of politeness, instructional, answering problems

and questions. The question being: can women use their spiritual

gifts to teach and preach in congregational services? He was not

answering the problem of women just chit-chat-ing, having

out-bursts of various kinds, or just generally causing confusion.

He was answering a legitimate concern and question and putting a

STOP to something that had been taking place in that Corinth

congregation, and he did it with politeness, as he thought highly

of the women in the body of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah).

The fact remains that, in the context of this whole chapter, and

from 1 Tim. 2 we can see that Paul was instructing not only that

particular congregation but every congregation in the whole body

of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah), for all time, including us today, that during the

teaching, edifying, preaching, expounding of the word of the

Lord, part of the official service of the church, the women were

to be still, not participate in a vocal manner in that teaching,

and to be under peace in attitude of mind and disposition. They

were to listen and learn, and if they had any questions about

what was taught they were still to hold their peace and ask their

questions to their husbands at home. He backed all this up with

examples and with the general teaching from the whole law of the

Lord, and then finally told them that what he said was the

commandments of God.

                       TWO MORE THINGS

The Way:

     Wives must also "be in sub-mission" to their husbands.  This

phrase is translated from the Greek hupotasso (Strong's #5293),

which means to arrange under, to submit to someone's control, or

to yield to someone's admonition or advice. Militarily, the word

was used in reference to arranging troop divisions. The

non-military application of this word referred to giving in,

cooperating, and assuming a responsibility.

     Finally, remember that we learned, in our study of I Timothy

2:12, about the infinitive mood of the verb.  When Paul used the

terms "teach" and "have authority," these were written in the

infinitive mood, showing a continuous or repeated action.  We

find the same infinitive mood being used here in the verb "speak"

in verses 34 and 35.

COMMENT:

It is the present tense infinitive, continuous or repeated action

in the present.  Hence it is still a commandment of the Lord (as

Paul said he spoke the commandments of the Lord), and still in

effect to this day.  The women of the body of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) are to

willingly co-operate, to be willing to give in,  assuming and

taking the responsibility that they will come under and be in

sub-mission to the men in this regard, during the teaching and

preaching service, when the church comes together into one place.

That they will sub-mit to the law of the Lord and be peacefully

silent, as they listen and learn from the men during this

relatively short span of time (when compared to the rest of the

hours in the week when they had the right to do as much or more

than the men in teaching and spreading the word of truth),

taking note of their questions and asking their husbands at home.

The Way:

                    A BETTER TRANSLATION

     Shall we put it all together? Let's see how these verses

might be better translated, knowing what we now know about the

Greek. The following is a suggested translation of 

1 Corinthians 14:34,35:  "Your wives must be at peace in the

assembly. It isn't permitted for them to be continuously talking

or chatting, but rather be responsible and yield themselves to

whatever is taking place, as it shows throughout the scriptures.

And if there is something they want to question their husbands

about, let them ask their husbands later: For it is disgraceful

for wives to be continuously making a disturbance which distracts

the assembly" (1 Corinthians 14:34-35, authors' paraphrase).

     We can see that Paul is not referring to women addressing

the congregation in this passage, but rather to wives asking

their husbands a question -- not at all the same thing!

COMMENT:

A paraphrase it is indeed.  And a paraphrase that is not what we

know from the Greek.  The Greek and its literal rendering is what

we find in the Greek/English Interlinears by Green and Berry. 

And they translate very closely to what the scholars of the KJV

translated.  The context of 1 Cor. 14 gives the answer to this

"women be silent" issue.  And the simple clear instructions to

Timothy in 1 Timothy 2, also gives the truth of the matter.

Putting those two sections of Scripture together (line upon line,

here a little there a little), it is I submit quite simple for

anyone who can read English, without any degree in Hebrew

or Greek, to understand that Paul's instructions (which he called

commandments of the Lord)  were that when a church came together

into one place for edification, teaching, expounding of the word

of the Lord, that section of the service was the duty of the men,

and women were to peacefully and submittingly, not to teach but

to remain silent, even to the point of asking no questions during

that time, but keeping them to ask their husbands at home.

The Way:

                                EDIFICATION

     Remember that I Corinthians 14 is speaking about doing those

things that edify the assembly. "Let all things be done unto

edifying" (verse 26). Paul's purpose in writing was to see

that the congregation was edified. (See, for example, verses 5,

12, and 26.) The word "edify" comes from the Greek oikodome

(Strong's #3619), and means to build up or improve others, to

aid in their growth as Christians.

     Let's consider verse 26 for a moment.  We might consider

this verse to be a description of how services might be run. Paul

wrote: "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every

one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a

revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto

edifying" (verse 26, KJV).

     Notice how Paul spoke of "you" and "every one of you." This

verse doesn't separate the congregation into male and female!

Even in the KJV, women or wives are not excluded in this verse!

All of the members had a contribution to make!

COMMENT:

But wait a minute, hold your horses, Paul has not yet finished! 

He is telling them that was the way it was WITH THEM!  They were

full of the gifts of the Spirit, yes, and that included women as

well as men.  They all wanted to "do something" in their service

meeting. They were all participating - both men and women -

participating in a very un-organized manner,  interrupting each

other, speaking in a language none could understand, and just

having a good old time confusing everyone, so that some person

off the street who would walk in to their congregational meeting

would think they were all a bunch of "nuts" from mental

institutions. It was AFTER  verse 26 that Paul THEN started to

lay down the rules of ORDER and HOW MANY of the prophets and

those with the gift of tongues, could  speak.  It was AFTER verse

26  that Paul then instructed whether women (who obviously

had up to the point of him writing and correcting and

instructing) could participate in the teaching, preaching, and

expounding of the word of the Lord,  during that part of the

edifying portion of the service. What was being done in their

services PRIOR to his corrections and instructions is besides the

point. Many things were being done in their services that were

INCORRECT prior to Paul being told about them and then writing to

them to give corrections and instructions as to HOW IT SHOULD BE,

which he then told them were the commandments of the Lord. 

The Way:

     Throughout time, and in many places today, many wives, with

their husbands' permission, have had many edifying things to say

in the assembly based on their own personal Bible studies,

and others have appreciated their contributions. Actual

edification took place, the very thing that Paul was the most

concerned about in this chapter. This is why Paul said at the end

of his discourse on decorum in the assembly, "Let all things be

done decently and in order."

COMMENT:

What has been done to edify under whatever situation is not the

point. That is not the issue, as to whether a woman can edify at

any time.  The issue is purely to ascertain what the WILL of the

Lord is, what the INSTRUCTION of the Lord is, concerning the

teaching, preaching, expounding of the word of God, during that

part of the service, when all the church comes together into one

place.  The issue involves HOW that part of the service

should be conducted (basis outline) and whether women should or

can, as far as GOD is concerned and as far as HE has decreed,

participate in that teaching and expounding of the word of the

Lord to the rest of the congregation gathered into one place.

The Way:

     God intended wives, from the days of creation, to be

partners with their husbands, and to contribute to the

edification process that leads to salvation in the Kingdom of

God.

     If Paul had been "trashing" women in this chapter, as many

have thought he was doing, then the "order" of a male-dominated

society was indeed being reinforced. However, the "decently"

seems to have fallen by the wayside in that scenario.

COMMENT:

Come on now, give me a break, we are only talking about a few

hours A WEEK FOR PITY SAKE.  I have spent much time in part one

to try and show we need to keep all this in proper perspective. 

Men and women, Jew and Gentile, are on equal ground when it comes

to Salvation and Rewards. Outside of official church service all

are equal in having freedom to teach and spread the word of the

Lord. I have spent many pages in my book on "church government"

to prove that from the Scriptures.  But, all that said, God has

never taken away or cast off the ROLES and FUNCTIONS in certain

aspects of this physical life on earth and in the Church, that He

has always intended and even created from the beginning

(women are still the only ones to bear children, even in the

church). A part of this issue is "ROLES" - what role does a woman

or a man have from God, under this or that situation and

circumstance?  The issue is not "trashing" women, or putting them

down. It is: What is their role during the official church

gathering together into one place, and that part of the service

set aside for teaching and preaching to the congregation the word

of the Lord?

The Way:

     But we have come to understand that Paul was concerned with

true edification of all the members of the ekklesia, male and

female. When we stop to realize that even women who have

not had the educational opportunities others have had can still

make valuable contributions to the benefit and edification of the

ekklesia, within the context of the Christian family, then we can

begin to proceed decently, and in order, with each member of the

assembly taking his or her rightful place, in Sabbath services

and at home, as a member of the Family of God.

COMMENT:

I agree, no problem, as long as we remember to seek the WILL of

God, as to what He has instructed and directed in each phase of

Sabbath services, Festival observance, Home life, and every part

of a Christian's life from day to day.  We are not to seek our

will, nor to think our thoughts, but we are seek and desire and

prove what is the WILL of God in all things (Romans 12:2;

Eph.5:17; 6:6; Phil.2:12; Col.4:12; Heb.13:21; 1 Pet.4:2; 2 Pet.

1:21; 1 Jn. 2:17) and then to OBEY it.  Those that so do shall

have Eternal life through Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) .  So it is written, so

shall it be.

The Way:

Part Four:

Putting It Together

     "Then Jesus = (Yeshua)  said to those Jews who believed on Him, If you

continue in My word, you are My disciples indeed; and you shall

know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John

8:31-32).

     We have learned some "new truth" in this study. Of course,

it isn't the truth that's new, but our under-standing of it that

has been made new. Perhaps we can now realize that we had

been reading something into these scriptures, rather than truly

getting all we could out of them.

COMMENT:

It may not be new truth at all but false deception that was

prophesied to rise at the end time to such heights, that IF it

was possible even the elect would be deceived. So said Jesus = (Yeshua),

and so it will be.

The Way:

     It had always seemed a shame that women were prevented from

bringing us the benefits of their Bible study, merely because

they were women. It was also a shame, on many occasions, for some

men to hold forth from the pulpit, not because they had anything

of value to say, but because they were men!  There have been some

men who should never have been in a position to teach others,

while many women, who are natural teachers and self-made

scholars, have had to sit idly by and have their time wasted

because a man had to do the speaking.

COMMENT:

You must have been in the wrong organization that possibly did

put women down and did not give them the chance to use the Spirit

of God in them. But those churches and Elders who know the truth

of what I have written in both parts of this study, will say with

me that women have every right to use the gifts of the Spirit,

including teaching, and expounding the word of the Lord to ANYONE

- Male or Female, young or old, OUTSIDE OF THE OFFICIAL

GATHERINGS OF THE CHURCH COMING TOGETHER INTO ONE PLACE - which

only amounts to about one and a half hours a week at the most,

for the average Church of God Sabbath meeting.  Again, it may

well be true in some organizations, that there was "politics"

before Christianity being displayed and some men given positions

of teaching others that should never have had those positions.

Yet, that fact does not change the word and truth of God on this

issue. Men and organizations may falter and fall and go astray in

certain areas, but God and His word and what He has decreed in

His word on this subject and others, will still remain true. And

He will still want His true children to be obedient to His true

word.

Again, we need to remember to keep this in proper perspective. We

are only talking about a very very small portion of the whole

time of the week, in this study.  Where we really need to put the

emphasis is on all the HUGE AMOUNT OF TIME in the week that women

can, and are allowed by God, to "do their own thing for the Lord"

as the Spirit moves them.  

The Way:

                      A TIME TO CHANGE

     This article may have brought some of our readers to a

crossroads in their lives.  We should all evaluate how we have

fit women in general, and our wives in particular, into the

model we have had for Sabbath services and worshipping our

Creator. Perhaps some of us have needed to view our wives in a

different light. Perhaps now we can.

COMMENT:

I have endeavored in this two part study to help you broaden your

understanding of the woman's role in the Church and Family of

God.  I have tried to show you from the Scriptures that there is

a role for both men and women to fulfil WHEN the church comes

TOGETHER INTO ONE PLACE. I have tried to show you what the simple

plain truth really is on that matter. And at the same time help

you understand that OUTSIDE that relatively short span of time on

the Sabbath, God's word shows that women have as much freedom

within the law and word of God to "send forth the Gospel" in a

personal way, as do the men in the church.  And believe me, when

it comes to personal evangelism,  many women can run circles

around many a man.

The Way:

     If any wives who have been unduly subjugated by overbearing

husbands can come to a fuller under-standing of what God expects

in a marriage relationship, then the truth can indeed set them

free. if there are husbands who have held to a wrong belief, who

can now see a need to treat their wives with greater respect and

admiration for what they can bring to the worship of God, in and

out of services, then the truth can set these men free, as well.

     This was not intended to be an article about marriage.

However, it would be difficult for some couples to change how

they both participate in worship without finding it necessary to

first reevaluate their relationship with each other in light of

new scriptural understanding.

     As it is with any "new wine skins" situation, where

something new doesn't fit easily within something old (Matthew

9:17), there will need to be some adjustments made, some re-

thinking, and perhaps some changes in direction. We need to

examine our old ways, and husbands and wives will need to have

earnest discussions to sort it all out and fit the pieces into

place.

COMMENT:

There will be many who will need to apply what has just been said

above, to what I have written in part one and in this part two,

for I know that many men have been taught and have felt that ALL

the work of teaching and spreading the Gospel, at ALL times, was

just the responsibility of men. Nothing could be further from the

truth! And I hope all men, and all women(who may also have

thought the same) can now see that except for a few hours

or less a week on the Sabbath, women have a very LARGE role in

spreading the word of the Lord.

The Way:

                       HOW TO APPROACH

                      NEW UNDERSTANDING

     For those who have been taught that the Bible forbade women

from making any contributions to worship services or Bible

studies, this new understanding may represent a radical

departure from orthodoxy. Because it is such a great shift away

from what many of us have believed in the past, some of our

readers may feel uncomfortable about changing the way they

do things.  We certainly can't fault someone for not wishing to

make rapid changes in their understanding until they "prove it

for themselves."

     If some readers personally feel that women should not

participate in worship, yet see that the scriptures really don't

support that belief, they may wish to ask themselves why they

believe what they believe. If the subjugating of women was

biblical, then it could be justified. But if we now see that the

concept is not biblical after all, why would there be any

reluctance to make a correction in our lives?

COMMENT:

Once more the authors psychologically instill in the reader that

to believe women should remain silent in the official teaching

part of the divine worship service as the church gathers

together, is "subjugating."  Such language is designed to leave a

"dirty" taste in the mouth, a type of "racist" attitude is then

portrayed on the part of those who so believe.  The subjugating

of women (as the authors use the term) has never been a part of

the will of the Eternal.  But the design and will of the Lord has

been from the beginning, that men and women, should fulfil the

roles they were to practice in the home, in the church, and in

society,  under various times and situations.  One of those times

and situations we have been particularly looking at in this study

- namely those few hours a week when the church gathers together

into one place, and even more specifically - that part of the

service that is devoted to teaching, preaching, and expounding

the word of the Lord, to all the congregation for their

edification.

The Way:

     Many times, we believe what we believe out of habit, because

that's what we learned many years ago. If this is the case, then

breaking the habit will take time, and concerted effort,

to erase the old habit and install a new one.

     If the reader now sees from the Bible that it is permissible

for a woman to participate in worship, but still believes women

are to be subjugated, perhaps the reader should examine his

or her deepest thoughts and motivations to see where those

feelings originate.

     And, of course, if anyone continues to feel that the Bible

does teach that women are to sit silently through services, then

others must respect this sincere belief.

COMMENT:

Again, it is not a case of women being "subjugated" but being

under "subjection" as Paul put it, during this specific time in

worship service, to the men, but more importantly, to the

Almighty God, as He directs.  The church as it comes together is

like one large family, and the Eternal has called for the head of

that family (so to speak) to lead in the teaching and

instructing of that family. And in such a situation, the head of

that family at such times, is the man, under Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua), who is

also portrayed in the Scriptures as male.

Respecting others beliefs has its place, where freedom is given

within the law of God, such as being a meat eater or not being a

meat eater, but in this case, such is not the case, and must give

way to ascertaining the truth of the matter. For what Paul

instructed the church at Corinth was not his ideas,  or "do as

you please" but it was the commandments of the Lord.

The Way:  

     It seems evident that we have not fully understood these and

other verses regarding a woman's role in the ekklesia. In the

past, if we had any questions about how something ought to be

done, we would simply wait for our pastor to tell us what to do

and what to think. Decision-making was much simpler then.

COMMENT:

It would seem today that just about EVERYTHING that was

understood as "truth" in the past, is now coming under attack and

being questioned, even the weekly Sabbath, the Feasts

of God, and even God Himself.  Yes, errors have always been

within the Church of God, and we must always move on to grow in

grace and knowledge of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) Jesus = (Yeshua) . Yet I have found over the

years that the errors were usually only relatively small (I am

not talking about when ministers were led astray and became

corrupted, then many large errors were evident). The Church of

God (the true elect who remained faithful from corruption) has

been pretty solid and accurate on the large important doctrines

and teachings of our Father in heaven. Jesus = (Yeshua), as head of His

Church has guided well His people down through the centuries. 

And I believe the core of this issue - the teaching part of

congregational services - the Church of God has observed

correctly from the beginning, from the time of Moses. 

The Way:

     Today, many readers of "The WAY" are people who have broken

away from the old "corporate church" way of doing things, because

they have seen that often the old way simply did not work. There

may have been order and discipline, but it often was not in

accordance with what the Bible teaches.

COMMENT:

Maybe it did not work in the organization "they" were in. Maybe

it did not work because "that" organization was or became

"cultic" in its mind set, and not only put down women, but put

down men also, until they had to be robotic machines in a "big

brother is watching" you system.

Yet, there have been and still are, organizations like the Church

of God 7th Day, the Seventh Day Adventist church, and others,

that have survived very nicely thank you, by following what Paul

instructed as the commandments of the Lord, in their divine

worship service as they gather together into one place.

The Way:

     We have also seen that, as we grow and progress, some people

are not as far along in their understanding as we might be, while

others are ahead of where we are at this time! What should we do?

We shouldn't be impatient for others to catch up to us

immediately, and we hope that those who are ahead of us in

knowledge will wait patiently for us to catch up to them! Each

one of us is at his or her own place along the path that leads to

eternal life.

     Paul taught a great many principles of human relations.  One

time he wrote that, even if doing something was perfectly all

right, not against any law of God, and totally innocent, he

would refrain from doing it if it offended a brother or sister in

the elkiesia. (See I Corinthians chapters 8 and 10.) We should

consider practicing this kind of love toward one another, so as

not to cause offense.

COMMENT:

On an individual basis over certain matters, such as what Paul

gave examples on, where we can apply his teaching on a one to one

situation, that is all true, BUT that is not possible when we are

dealing with the WHOLE congregation coming together.  Under the

issue we are studying, for each to apply what they considered the

truth of the matter on this subject of men and women

participating in the divine teaching section of the church

service, we would again just end up with utter confusion.  The

matter must be studied, the truth ascertained, and the leaders of

the church together with the whole congregation must then

declare and practice the truth.  The freedom the individual has

regarding this issue is that they can disagree and move to

another group of people where they believe the truth on the

matter before us is being practiced.

The Way:

     How can we apply this principle in our own groups?

     If there is a group of people meeting together for Sabbaths,

and no one objects to women taking a leadership role in the

meeting, or giving a message, or leading a Bible study, as long

as she is not exerting dominance or authority over her husband,

there is no scripture which condemns this action, as we have

seen. The woman should be able to make her presentation.

COMMENT:

No we have not seen is my submission!  We have seen (in part one

and in this study) I submit that women are to remain silent in

the teaching, preaching, expounding of the word of the Lord, part

of the divine service, and if any questions arise while they

listen they are to also remain silent and ask their husbands at

home.  We have seen that to interpret and figure out what it

means to "not exert dominance or authority over her husband" if

she should not remain silent but be allowed to teach and preach,

is just about impossible to ascertain, and would lead to constant

disagreements, endless re-adjustments, and many ministerial

conferences, and probably more congregational splits because some

would not agree with others about where to draw the line (some

would be more liberal or conservative than others on the issue). 

The Way:

     If another group meets for the Sabbath, but the people in

that group object to women speaking or leading a discussion, the

women should not try to force themselves on the group.

COMMENT:

Of course that should be true.  And I suppose those husbands and

wives who would strongly object  would move along to another

group where women are allowed to preach and expound the word

during congregational services.

The Way:

     Suppose several people, from several independent groups,

come together at the Feast of Tabernacles. Should a woman be

scheduled to speak? That may very well depend on whether the

people who are there have already studied the issue and come to

an understanding of the subject, as we have in this article,

before they came to the Feast. It would probably be best not to

schedule any women speakers, at least until it has been

determined if anyone there would be offended if a woman spoke. Or

perhaps fair warning could be given so that anyone who would

be offended could simply skip that session.

COMMENT:

Maybe fair warning would be given way before the Feast began

(that women would be preaching during divine services.  I'm not

talking about  "workshops" that have nothing to do with the whole

congregation coming together into one place)  so those who

disagree with such practice could choose to not attend period.

There are now dozens upon dozens of Feast of Tabernacle sites in

North America and around the world.

The Way:

     Once again, we should all remember not to think negatively

about a member of the ekklesia who may have a different outlook

on this issue than we might have. We should not be afraid to

discuss our beliefs with others, but we must not come from the

position that "I'm right and you're wrong, no matter what!"

Rather, our approach should he gentle and loving: "I used

to feel that way, too. But here's what I've found, and here's

what I believe."

COMMENT:

And of course now we have written material such as these two

studies for people to use as they search the Scriptures for the

truth on this matter.  There IS A TRUTH, one way is wrong and the

other way is correct. There can be no middle ground! Either women

ARE allowed to teach, preach, and expound the word of the Lord

during divine church worship services, or they are NOT.  It is

one or the other, as simple as that.  The child of God has

the responsibility to prove from the word of the Lord what God

has decreed and commanded on this issue and on this part of the

church service.

The Way:

     Local culture may play a large part in the decision whether

or not to have women speak at services or share their thoughts in

open forum. In the larger cities of the United States, where

most men find themselves working alongside or under college

educated women in the workplace, the idea of a woman presenting a

message at services might be more acceptable.  In other parts

of the world, having a woman address the assembly might go

against the strong male dominant social mold in that area. Each

area is unique, as is each assembly. Wise guidance is required in

order to steer the assembly toward all truth and away from

potential problems.

COMMENT:

This issue transcends all nationalities, races, color, social

class, education, work situations, and whatever else the mind of

man can conjure up.  The instructions of Paul which were

the commands of the Lord, on this matter, is for ALL the Church

of God, EVERYWHERE, and for ALL generations, in ALL ages.  Paul

gave no instructions that each area of the world or each

individual church congregation could decide for themselves how it

would govern this issue.

The Way:

     This is a very emotional issue for a great many people. If

you read this article and don't agree with everything we have

said on first reading, that's fine. You might try a second

reading later on. As we pointed out, neither of the extreme

viewpoints is totally correct, but rather there is a high road

down the middle.

COMMENT:

This topic does not have to be emotional at all. If the Spirit of

God dwells in the heart and mind, if the individual loves the

truth, hungers and thirsts after it, wants the truth above

anything else, searches the Scriptures daily to find the will of

the Eternal on this matter and others, is willing to put all the

verses on this topic and any topic together from one end of

the Bible to the other, then as Jesus = (Yeshua)  has promised the Spirit

will lead you into all truth. 

The middle road the authors talk about, is simply the road of the

truth, and as Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah) said the truth shall indeed set you free

(set you free from error and deception, which in the last

days will be so great only the elect will not be deceived).

The Way:

     If we continue on the high road, with the difficult path

that leads to the narrow gate, and if we manage to stay out of

the ditch, and avoid those who would lead us into either ditch,

our voyage along this Way of life will end where we want it to

end - at the doorstep of eternity!

     It takes all of us -- male and female, young and old -- to

make up the Body of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah). We each have our part to play in the

function of the Body. What we have explained here may

help the entire Body to function better!

tw

COMMENT:

It is indeed the straight and narrow road that leads to Eternal

life, and only a few (relatively speaking) will find it in this

age, so said Jesus = (Yeshua) . 

We all do have our part to play in the Church which is the body

of Christ = (Mashiach) = (Messiah).  We all have a ROLE, designed and given as the Spirit

distributes, and that role must be acted upon and practiced

within the laws and commandments and bounds which our Father has

set.  By finding His WILL on this and other roles of men and

women which God designed from the beginning, we shall find not

only fulfillment in our physical lives, but we shall also find

peace and joy and love, as we endeavor to understand and put into

practice His will for our personal lives within those roles.  And

from it all will come respect and unity for all members of the

Church of God, which is the Family of God.

           ......................................

Written May 1998

source http://www.keithhunt.com/Woman1.html 

Text ends:

Warning: all the names including the name of the beast 666, or any religious and individuals' names, politicians, politic groups, and any predictions in this site are examples and personal thoughts only. These predictions and names have no connection with reality and authentic events unless it is mentioned so with references and proper sources.

The names of individuals and countries have nothing to do with the beast's number 666 or with any wars, invasions, violence, organizations, or with any religious or politic group. Some religious and violent texts are mentioned according to biblical and quranical "quran" records and to authentic events that are announced through the news or the web with sources. Otherwise, those texts are considered unreliable information.

We aren't responsible for any unreliable information in this site that is given by individuals or through the web. The predictions and the information that are written by us aren't positive until these predictions are fulfilled.