42 Should Women Keep Silent in Church? (1 Corinthians 14:26-40)

Krisan Marotta: Welcome to the Wednesday in the Word Podcast. I'm Krisan Marotta, and this is the podcast where we explain not only what scripture means, but how we figure it out. We are studying 1 Corinthians chapter 14 verses 26 through 40 today. This is the 42nd talk in my series on 1 Corinthians. Lecture notes for today's talk are on the link below this podcast so you don't have to worry about taking notes. Or you can find those notes on my website. Just go to wednesdayintheword.com slash 1 Corinthians 42. And while you're there, take a moment to browse the website. There's no charge, no spam, no ads, no clickbait, only Bible study. Thanks for listening today. While we're wrapping up Paul's discussion of speaking in tongues as we finish 1 Corinthians chapter 14 today, let me remind you where we are in the letter. Starting in chapter 12, Paul began addressing the problem of tongues in the Corinthian church, and he is speaking to a group of believers who are grading and judging each other by this mark of tongues. They think that if a person doesn't speak in tongues, that person is a lesser Christian somehow. First, Paul said that the true mark of the Spirit of God at work in your life is not speaking in tongues, the mark of the Spirit of God at work in your life is that you can say and mean in a profound way that Jesus is Lord. Then Paul argued that while the Spirit gives every believer saving faith, or the ability to say Jesus is Lord, the Spirit gives each believer a different way to serve the kingdom of God, or what we commonly call spiritual gifts, and I argued that we should think of those more as roles and opportunities rather than as talents or abilities. But Paul's main point was you should not expect everyone to have the same gift. God gives everyone a different role to play on purpose, and that's part of his design. At the end of chapter twelve, Paul said we should desire the greater gifts. And then in chapter thirteen, he interrupted himself to say that there is something greater than all the individual gifts, and that is faith, hope, and love. Now in chapter fourteen, he's returning to this idea that there are greater gifts and there are lesser gifts. He is speaking to a group that is already enthusiastic and excited about spiritual things, and he's trying to get them to channel that enthusiasm toward the things that are most important. So he's trying to focus their zeal on the right target. There are greater gifts, the primary example being prophecy, and there are lesser gifts, the premier example being tongues. And he argued in the early part of this chapter, if you're going to be zealous for spiritual things, then be zealous for the greater gifts like prophecy. And he argued that prophecy was greater because it edified the whole church and could build up the community, whereas something like tongues, especially if nobody is there to translate and no one understands what you're saying, that gift can only edify the speaker. And he thought it was more important that the community as a whole be built up. Remember, because he argued in chapter twelve that these gifts are given to us as a way to serve each other. So in the early part of the chapter that we looked at in the last podcast, his main point is that prophesying is greater than speaking in tongues because prophecy edifies the community while tongues only edifies the speaker. Now as we pick up his argument in fourteen twenty six, he is applying this principle that he's been appealing to all along. So he starts this section, what then? What's the outcome? What does it come down to? Essentially he's arguing what's the bottom line? This is first Corinthians fourteen, verse twenty six. What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. That's the bottom line here. Let all things be done for edification. The purpose of our gathering together as a local church is to build each other up in the faith. We're there to remind each other of the truth, to encourage each other to persevere in the faith, and to encourage each other to be courageous in the midst of trials and difficulties. In short, we're to edify each other, to build each other up. In making this point, he gives a list, and we want to be careful that we understand that correctly. So he gives us the list of a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, and an interpretation. Remember the context. Paul is not saying here, this is the list of things that every church must have in every service every time they meet. That is not his intent. He's not trying to say, here's what the best churches do when they gather together. He's saying, here are some things you Corinthians have been doing when you get together, and when you do these things, the point needs to be edification and building each other up. So tongues is on the list because that's been going on in the Corinthian church, but Paul's going to make it clear as he goes on that tongues has very little place in a public gathering. He's going to limit how and when they can speak in tongues. So this is not a checklist of what you need to make sure you put in your worship service. He's saying, Whatever you do, including the things on the list, make sure it's edifying. When you gather together, that should be your goal, to edify the body. He says each one has a psalm. It was their practice to sing the psalms from the Old Testament. Paul speaks of this practice two other places in the New Testament, I think Ephesians 5.19 and Colossians 3.16, and in those places the same theme emerges. Singing the psalm is a way of encouraging each other through the words of the song. Singing is meant to edify. We are speaking to each other with wisdom and teaching when we sing the words of the songs. So we're singing with gratitude toward God, and through song we remind each other of the truth out of thanksgiving and gratitude to God. That should tell us something about the kind of songs we sing. The content should be true and it should be edifying. Likewise, teaching and revelation are meant to edify. When someone says something to the group, the purpose ought to be to build up and encourage the group through the Word of God. Now they didn't have the New Testament yet as Paul was writing this, so I suspect this teaching mostly involved the Old Testament or reminding each other what Jesus had taught, or perhaps reading one of the letters that were circulating around that the apostles had written and would later become the New Testament. So likewise, the purpose of tongues and interpretation is to edify the entire group. You're not to speak in tongues to show off or to demonstrate how spiritual you are, you're not to teach as a way to puff yourself up and show how wise you are. The point is to edify the group. In the verses coming up, Paul's going to address three situations tongues, prophecy, and women, and in each of those situations he tells someone to keep silent. That's the thread that's going to tie this part of the chapter together. He's speaking into the chaos of their worship service and applying this principle, let all things be done for edification. Now we don't know exactly what was going on, but it seems like various people are speaking in tongues which no one understands. As one gets a word of tongues, he stands up and shouts out, even if someone else is speaking. Other people are battling for the floor to speak a word of prophecy, and something's going on with the woman, who knows what? We're going to talk about that when we get there. But the picture we get is that it sounds like everyone's trying to speak at once. And Paul's saying, that's not helpful. Let's sort this out. In your worship service, there's this cacophony of voices competing to be heard, and that needs to stop. So the principle he's going to apply is if you're in a public worship gathering and you want to speak and you don't know if you should speak or not, here's how you can tell. If what you would say and how you would speak does not contribute to or edify the rest of the group, you should keep silent. If your speech does edify the rest of the group, then you need to speak in an orderly fashion waiting for your turn. Okay, first he addresses the tongue speakers in 1427 and 28. If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret. But if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church and let him speak to himself and to God. As I argued in the last podcast, I think when Paul is talking about the gift of tongues, he's talking about the phenomenon we see in Acts, where the speaker is speaking an actual human language that he has not been taught or learned, but that others listening understand. I think the Corinthians are practicing what we would call glossolalia today, this modern phenomenon of ecstatic babbling that no one understands, including the speaker, and the Corinthians are practicing that and calling it the axe gift. But however you understand tongues, I think Paul's main point is clear. If you're going to have this practice of tongues going on, you need to take turns, you need to limit it to two or three, and if there was no one there to interpret, keep silent. So if you're going to have tongue speaking in a public assembly, those are the limitations. Two or three at most, take turns, and if no one can interpret what you just said, then you need to keep silent. So Paul is not forbidding tongues entirely, but he's saying they must have publicly understood content. He doesn't want tongues in the assembly unless they have content that edifies everyone. Someone in the audience or in the congregation must be able to interpret and explain such that the content of the tongues is shared with the entire group. And if nobody can do that, then he says keep silent. If you can't say something that the entire group can profit from, then just speak privately to God. So the key is edification and order. We don't want this chaos of voices. We don't want one person just speaking in a language no one else understands and no one benefits from. We want the voices to take turns one at a time and speak content that everyone present can understand. Now he turns to the prophets. This is fourteen twenty nine through thirty three. Let two or three prophets speak and let the others pass judgment. But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first must keep silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted, and the spirit of the prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. Now, as I argued last week, I think prophecy is the broad concept of speaking for and about God. So it is what we would call teaching today. It includes any kind of exhortation and encouragement, and I think he means the general kind of exhortation and teaching that anyone who understands Scripture can do. Again, Paul is very concerned here with order and edification. He says, Two or three speak, then others sort them out and distinguish between them. Verse thirty is where we get a picture or a little glimpse of what was probably going on in their in their services. If a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. I think what's going on here is someone might be speaking, standing up, speaking, and someone else says, Oh, I've got a word of wisdom, I've got a word of revelation, and he would jump up and start shouting at the same time, and the first one would keep right on talking, and then maybe someone else would stand up and start shouting at the same time, and someone else might be speaking in tongues at the same time, and Paul's saying, Look, it has to be for the edification of all one at a time. The language he uses about passing judgment suggests that when a prophet or a teacher would speak, there were others who had the responsibility to assess whether that person was actually worth listening to or not. Now remember, the Corinthians are very interested in these manifestations of the Spirit. They were interested in tongues because of their pagan background where they were taught that worship looks like ranting and raving and babbling. I suspect that they see prophecy as the same kind of thing. The spirit suddenly takes over control of my mouth and I just start talking. Maybe it's in tongues, maybe it's in my native language, but I just start talking, and then if someone else gets a prophetic utterance and starts talking, the first person thinks, well, you know, I've got to keep talking because the spirit has come upon me, and so you get this chaos of everybody speaking at once. And Paul's saying, No, your speech needs to be orderly. If you're standing up speaking, and someone else who's seated gets a prophetic word and starts speaking, then be quiet, let them speak. Don't keep shouting and competing for the floor. So he gives basically the same rules as he gave for the tongue speakers. Only one person should speak at a time. And then he says someone with some wisdom and discernment needs to be able to judge what has been said and either say amen or no, you've not got that right. I think that's what he means by this language about the spirit of the prophets or subject to the prophets. If you think the spirit of prophecy has come upon you such that you jump up and say, I have a word from the Lord, well you better be prepared to have the other prophets in the church say yes, amen, or no, I don't think you've quite understood it. Because the goal is the edification of the entire body. The goal is mutual encouragement and growth. The goal is not to be a rock star preacher, you should be willing to wait patiently, take turns, and be judged if what you say is lacking. I suspect that the Corinthians think prophecy is a similar kind of out of control experience like tongues, and that if the Spirit inspires you to speak, you jump up and start shouting out your message regardless of what's going on. And Paul is saying, No, it's not like that. The prophets are subject to prophets. The one speaking is in complete control of his speech, he can decide whether or not to speak, he can decide when to speak, you can prophesy one by one, taking turns, and you should be willing to have your message evaluated by others in the group. God is not a god of chaos, he's not working among you in such a way that you have chaos and pandemonium. That's not the way God operates. God does not create confusion, he creates order and peace. There can't be any edification if everyone is shouting at once. No one can learn anything from that. Paul's calling for order so that there can be edification. Imagine that idea of passing judgment in our church services today. One church I attended, and only one, actually tried to apply this, and I think they did it well, in my humble opinion. Here's how they applied it. They had a team of pastors that rotated through the Sunday morning services. So Pastor A might be teaching Corinthians, Pastor B might be teaching Samuel, Pastor C might be teaching the gospel. And before you could teach on Sunday morning to the congregation, you had to teach your passage to the rest of the teachers. Not just one passage, every teacher had to teach through his entire series to all the other teachers, answering their questions and listening to their criticisms. So before he was put in front of the congregation, he had to know the entire book and he had to have taught it to his fellow teachers, revised it to their satisfaction, and when his series was judged good enough or complete, he was scheduled to teach on Sunday mornings. Now he might teach six weeks on his book, and then someone else would teach four or six weeks on their book, and then he might return for another six weeks picking up where he left off and so forth. So they didn't break up a book. One pastor had to teach through the entire book. They didn't like you take two verses here and I'll take two verses there. One person had to know the whole thing. But no one taught on Sunday morning until all the other teachers of the church had heard his content and judged it worthy. I must say that church had the absolute best teaching I was ever privileged to sit under. None of this prepare your sermon on Saturday night stuff. They were prepared so far in advance and they were so excited when they got their shot on Sunday mornings, they just did a great job. And they understood the entire book before they taught verse one, and they had the benefit of all the other teachers of the church giving them suggestions and criticisms. But that practice only works if you have a team of teachers who aren't in it to be rock stars and compete for who's best, which at the time this church was blessed to have, and incidentally, they had no lead pastor. All right, finally, Paul turns to the women. This is 14, 34 through 35. The women are to keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home, for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. This is a really difficult passage, and it seems to come out of the blue. Many scholars have observed that if you take these two verses out, the flow of thought actually works better. It sounds like an interruption, partly because he talks about prophets and two prophets on either side of these verses, and it's not clear what do the women have to do with anything he's been talking about. The flow of thought just seems to work better without these two verses. That has led at least one reputable scholar to conclude that these verses are a textual variant that got added later and were not in Paul's original thought. Gordon Fee takes that stance in his commentary. And I rather like his commentary. I learned a lot from it. Overall, it's really a very good commentary. And overall, I have found Gordon Fee to be a scholar to be reckoned with, and he argues that this is a textual corruption that some eager scribe added later and that Paul didn't write it. As much as I would like to follow him there, I just can't. In my education I had only one class on textual criticism, and I don't mean a course, I mean one two hour class. I read Fee's explanation and he explains it very well, but I just don't feel competent to evaluate or weigh in on his argument. I just don't have the knowledge or background. So I'd encourage you to get hold of his commentary and read his thinking for yourself. On the other hand, DA Carson, another scholar I greatly respect, disagrees with Fee. Carson doesn't find Fee's arguments compelling and he is extremely knowledgeable about textual criticism. In fact, Carson has a very good article on these two verses, which is available online. He gives a great summary of the various ways these verses have been interpreted, including Fee's argument, and he explains why he reaches the conclusions that he does. I'm gonna put a link to his article in the lecture notes. You can find those at Wednesday in the Word.comslash one Corinthians four two. He gives a lot more detail in that article than I'm gonna go into in this podcast. Assuming these two verses are authentic, what is Paul saying? Okay, I'm gonna give you a couple more options and I would point you to Carson's article for more detail because I'm only giving the surface explanation of these views. But as we approach these verses, let's go. Over what we know for sure, or what we can conclude. And I think we can conclude that whatever Paul means here, this is not a universal ban on women speaking in church. Why? Well, first, you'll remember that back in chapter eleven, Paul told married women to keep their heads covered when they prayed or prophesied in the church. He did not forbid women to speak in church there. That would have been a very quick and easy solution to the head covering controversy. If he truly meant to ban all manner of women speaking in public services, he could easily have done so in chapter eleven, but that's not the solution he took. So I think we can conclude from chapter eleven that whatever these verses mean, it's not a universal speaking ban. And that's important because either Paul completely contradicts himself or what he means here is not a universal ban on women speaking in church. Second, even if we didn't have chapter eleven, we know that Paul's primary concern in this section is that everyone learn and be edified. It just makes no sense to me that given that his primary point in this section is everyone needs to be edified, that he would turn around and say, well, if the women are confused, let them stay confused. They can just go home and ask their husbands later. That is contradictory. His whole point in this chapter is everyone needs to be edified in the assembly. If what you're doing in the assembly doesn't edify everyone, then it's not appropriate. So I don't think he means that it's inappropriate for women to ask questions or to speak at all. It has to be tied to some specific situation he's talking about. And third, notice that this is the third in a series of three times that Paul tells someone to keep silent in the church. Neither of the other two cases are universal bans on speech. In each of those other cases, Paul's point was not to entirely ban a class of people from speaking in church. His point was to maintain order and edification. So he wanted the tongue speakers and the prophets to take turns, to limit themselves to two or three, and to make sure that what was being said was for the edification of all. And he told them if you can't work within those limits, then you need to keep silent. So the immediate context of these verses is if your speech, whatever it is, does not edify the entire group, then you should keep silent. When you get together, do everything for edification, not disorder. So don't have multiple tongue speakers speaking all at once without anyone understanding what's being said. Don't have multiple prophets all shouting each other down and speaking at once. And it is into that context that he says, let the women keep silent. Now that suggests to me that Paul knows something specific about the situation he's writing to, and those specifics include a group of women who are creating some kind of chaos or disorder in the service in the same way the tongue speakers and the prophets were. Now we don't know who they are, we don't know what they were doing, but from the context, it seems likely that Paul knows something about their situation that is prompting the same disorder and chaos that the tongue speakers and prophets were guilty of, and he's saying you need to stop too, just like them. Now, as an aside, I think it's always dangerous to build theology on one particular verse, one particular phrase, or one particular word. And I think we make a mistake to attempt to build a theology of the role of women in the church from these verses alone. We have to take Paul's writings as a whole and try to understand everything he says about women in the church and pull it all together. Just like back in chapter 11, I wouldn't build my theology on Paul's use of the word head alone. I am not going to build my theology here on these two verses alone. So from the context, we can deduce that in Corinth there was a particular group of women creating chaos and disorder in the gathering, and that Paul is speaking to this group with basically the same advice he gave the tongue speakers and the prophets, keep silent unless you can edify the entire group. Now, that doesn't explain the more restrictive language put on women. Instead of being told to take turns, he tells them to wait and ask their husbands at home. What's going on there? Well, some scholars have argued that this word is better translated and understood as chatter, and they argue that these women are chattering in church in a way that was disruptive and probably shamed their husbands. Perhaps they were complaining or publicly criticizing their husbands or their speech was in some way disrespectful to the group. And Paul is banning that kind of chattering, complaining, disrespectful speech and telling them you need to work out those disagreements at home. That's one option, and that makes a certain amount of sense in the context. It does take into account the immediate context of chaos in the worship service and the mention of husbands. But at least to my thinking, that option doesn't explain this phrase but are subject themselves just as the law also says. What does Paul mean there? Scholars often rightly point out that the law does not say anywhere that women should be silent in the assembly, and some argue that this is one of the indications that some scribe added these verses later because Paul would know his Old Testament and would know that the law doesn't forbid women to speak in church. While it's true that nowhere in the law are women forbidden to speak in church or in the worship service, Paul could be referring to a different law. He could be referring to the idea that members of a church are subject to the leaders of the church, and that when you join a local body of believers, you place yourself under their authority and subject yourself to their authority. Remember, the immediate context is prophets being judged by other prophets, and I assume those people passing judgment were the leaders in the gathering. He's just told the prophets to take turns and let others pass judgment on what they've just said. So perhaps what the women are doing represents some kind of challenge to the leadership during this time of passing judgment. So in this time when the leaders are evaluating and judging the words that the teacher just spoke, the women are somehow disrupting the process. And Paul is saying, if you've got a problem with the decisions being made, sort that out at home. Talk to your husbands and let him represent your family in this time of judgment or passing judgment. Now remember the context suggests that the way these women are speaking is creating chaos, not order, and that something they're doing is frustrating the goal of order and edification of all. And in this situation, perhaps what they're doing is challenging the judgment of the leaders. And Paul's advice is sort that out at home, not in the midst of the congregation. That's the option I lean toward right now, but I reserve the right to change my mind. It too has some problems and doesn't answer all the questions. And again, I'd refer you to DA Carson's article, which I'll place a link to in the lecture notes, to read some additional options for these verses and more detail and explanation. Paul concludes, and I think this is a conclusion to the whole section that started back in chapter twelve, so this is fourteen thirty six through thirty eight. Was it from you that the Word of God first went forth, or has it come to you only? If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. Now, as we've seen throughout the letter, there are some in the Corinthian church who are fighting Paul. They've been challenging his authority as an apostle and rejecting him. And Paul here, I think, is concluding, look, are you gonna fight me on this issue too? Do you have the market cornered on the Word of God? Are you the only ones who understand it? Remember what I'm writing to you is the Lord's commandment. I, Paul, have been given authority to speak for and about Jesus. If you think you're the spiritual giant, remember which one of us was given apostolic authority? Here's a hint, it wasn't you. You are just one of the many churches that I have proclaimed the Word of God to. If you want to be a prophet, you need to recognize my authority. The things I'm writing to you are not just my Paul's opinion, they are my authoritative understanding as an apostle of Jesus Christ. Ultimately, my understanding comes from the Lord Himself. So if you don't recognize my apostolic authority, then you will not be recognized as a teacher in the church. Because ultimately, Jesus Himself has given me, Paul, my understanding of the gospel, and I'm applying that understanding to your situation. It's not debatable. This is not a case of who's right, the Corinthians or Paul. Paul is right. His understanding carries authority. And he's saying, What I'm telling you is the truth. If you're going to claim to be a prophet and a teacher and presume to teach others the truth, then you must recognize my Paul's authority. If you set yourself up against Paul, you are setting yourself up against the words of Jesus. So that's his conclusion. To be recognized as a prophet, you Corinthians must recognize my authority. Your teaching is subject to my teaching as an apostle. You can claim your speaking for God, but you are not speaking for God if you reject the teaching of one of his apostles. And then he wraps it up in thirty nine and forty. Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, but do not forbid to speak in tongues, but all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner. Again, the goal is edification. If you're going to be excited about spiritual things, then focus your zeal on the things like prophecy which edify everyone. You don't have to forbid speaking in tongues, but everything should be done in order and peace and with the goal of edifying everyone. If what you're doing does not promote order and edification, then you need to keep silent. You're taking the wrong approach. Alright, to close this section, I want to review what I think Paul has said clearly in chapters 12 through 14. There's a lot of debate about what does he mean by tongues, what's he saying to the women, what does he mean by prophecy, what's this section of love doing in here? And there are a lot of interpretive questions which sincere Bible-believing Christians are going to land in different places on. So we're just going to disagree about some of the details in particular about this section. But I want to review the things that most everybody agrees are the main points, and I've got ten of them. And you don't have to write them down. I'm going to put them in the lecture notes for today's talk. So number one, the mark of true spirituality is not having a particular spiritual gift, including speaking in tongues. Two, the mark of true spirituality is to be able to say and mean that Jesus is Lord. Three, Jesus has called us together to belong to each other and to him as his people. Four, through his spirit, God gives each individual believer various opportunities to serve his people and to bring about his kingdom. In other words, every believer has a unique role to play and way to serve the kingdom of God. Five, it is terribly wrong to judge people based on whether they have a particular gift or they serve God in a particular way. Six, the purpose of having these roles or gifts is to build each other up in the faith. Seven, building each other up in the faith is primarily done by clearly communicating with words the content, hope, and promises of the gospel. Eight, tongues are a private thing and have no place in public worship unless they are interpreted so that all may be edified by them. And ten, life now is fundamentally about faith, hope, and love. You've been listening to Wednesday in the Word, my podcast about what the Bible means and how we know. This is serious Bible study applied to real life. If you've been listening, please leave a positive comment wherever you listen to the podcast, and subscribe to the podcast, and most importantly, tell your friends what you learned and where you learned it. Our theme music is graciously provided by Reggie Coast. I invite you to check out his other music on heartfeltmusic.org. Thanks for listening today. I'm Kristen Morata, and I'll meet you here next week at Wednesday in the Word.