Monday, September 7, 2009

Paul and women.

There are a lot of misconceptions regarding following scripture.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church


The interesting thing about it, is most people read it completely void of historical context. A couple of things to keep in mind when reading this verse.

1. Paul was writing to the Church in Corinth.
2. The early Christians were responsible for elevating the status of women back in that day. Evidence for this can be found here and here
3. This status included women being being able to attend and even participate in church services, which is a far cry from the OT in which the religious services were mostly male.

So if the status of women was elevated and women can attend and participate in church services, then it seems, like all new people eager to learn, were asking tons of questions, after all, they were new correct? this is a first time thing for all of them, so it is only natural if they ask questions, but the men, they've been doing this for centuries, so they have a handle on the whole thing. I think this is a viable option in regards to the meaning of the passage. I don't think Paul condemning all women to speak in church, obviously they could pray and prophesy according to 1 Corinthians 11:5, he recognized Junias as an apostle in Romans 16:7, and recognized Priscilla teaching Apollos the way of God in Acts 18:24-26. So Paul obviously recognized womens ministry, I think the historical data shows that Paul was addressing specific instances happening in the respective places of who and where he was writing.

3 comments:

Aaron said...

Yeah, and in the old testament slavery was just a method for elevating the status of women. You're a class act.

Theological Discourse said...


Yeah, and in the old testament slavery was just a method for elevating the status of women. You're a class act.

Are you going to refute a single word I've said or continue to assert nonsense? changing the topic from Pauls view on women to OT slavery isn't exactly a strong argument against the former, maybe in atheist land, but here in reality it isn't.

I am also still waiting on a rebuttal to my complete and utter refutation of your revamp of the POE.

Aaron said...

I am still waiting for your "complete and utter refutation of my revamp of the POE". I don't recall getting anything of the sort.

If go to that video you will see that 3 other people posted responses and all of them got a response, I actually posted my 5th response video on that subject last night. Maybe if you watch those you will have some of your questions answered.

Your video didn't say anything, sorry but you didn't bother to actually say a single thing about my argument.