We pick up where we left off in Part 3, studying the Apostle Paul’s instructions to the church in Corinth . We have looked at the conditions Paul was working in, the Jewish legalism attempting to make inroads into some of the Gentile churches he had established, and the effect it was having on local believers. The context of that legalism is described in Part 2.
This post concludes the study of 1 Corinthians.
We have reached the end of Paul’s letter to the Corinthian church and examined his broad series of corrections and clarifications to them. His final topic is the church’s segregation, or distinctions, between men and women in spiritual matters.
Throughout this entire passage, Paul repeatedly contrasts a correct doctrine with the incorrect version some of them were subscribing to.
Are the gifts of the Spirit diverse? Absolutely. Are different people given different gifts and assigned different tasks by the Spirit? Absolutely. “But one and the same Spirit works all these things” (1 Cor. 12:11a). Despite the incredible diversity, there is no basis for schisms because we are all one Body. The unity is central to our identity, the diversity is just a feature.
Are spiritual gifts powerful and necessary? Absolutely. Are good works commendable before God and men? Absolutely. But without love behind it all, “It profits me nothing” (1 Cor. 13:2,3).
Is speaking in tongues powerful? Absolutely. Should everyone speak in tongues? Absolutely. Should everyone seek to prophecy? Of course! But these gifts are not self-serving, so “since you are zealous for spiritual gifts, let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel” (1 Cor. 14:12).
Does each person have something to bring when you assemble together? Yes! Is each person gifted? Certainly! Some have a spiritual song, others have a teaching, still others have revelation to bring, so take turns. The focus here is always to edify the Body, not self-aggrandizement. “For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged” (1. Cor. 14:26-33).
Paul takes care, like a good parent, to correct their behavior without discouraging their zeal. He emphasizes spiritual unity, repeatedly using the word “all” and rejecting the divisions that had developed among them as a result of their immaturity and carnality.
At the end of the passage Paul makes one final contrast. He addresses a doctrine of division specifically between men and women in the assembly. Like his previous contrasts, he first looks at what certain Corinthians were believing or saying, and then he corrects it.
“Let the women in the churches be silent. It is not permitted for them to speak but to be in submission as also the law says. However, if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church assembly” (1 Cor. 14:34,35). The language here is plural. It is “churches,” meant to include not only the Corinthian church but a universal statement for all women in every church in every city. The Greek word “silent” literally means to keep silent; hold your tongue; don’t speak. It is the same word used earlier when Paul says, in regards to giving messages in tongues, “But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in the church” (I Cor. 14:28). And the Greek word used here for “shameful” means sordid or filthy.
So what “law” is Paul referencing here? Not the Torah or Old Testament (in which he was a trained expert from his former life) because there is none. Some Roman civil law? If so, why would he bring that into the Church? Paul doesn’t do that anywhere else in his letters. God’s Law is always held up as the ultimate standard for governmental law, never the other way around. No, Paul is almost certainly referring to Jewish rabbinical law in this passage. In some English translations, the translators actually use the words “Jewish law” or “oral law” here to reflect this. Paul is quoting the Corinthians’ own beliefs (or at least some who considered themselves “prophets” there) back to them.
The relevant rabbinical law is as follows. When giving the account of a woman who approached a well-known rabbi with her questions on matters of religion, the rabbi rather sternly sent her away. The rabbinical opinion in Yoma 66b:13 records the reason for this as, “It is unbefitting for a woman to concern herself with such questions,” and she was rebuked. The Mishnah declares that a woman’s singing voice in public assembly is shameful, it is exposing herself (literally “erotic” or “nakedness”), and she should remain silent, not speaking in the service (Berahkot 24a, 17).
Centuries later, Orthodox Jewish rabbis in different schools of thought still debate over whether this prohibition is only against women speaking during specific parts of service or if the prohibition is against women speaking at all. Amazingly enough, many Christian churches are still having the same debate! Should women be allowed to teach Sunday school? Can a woman lead a Bible study with men in it? What if it is a women-only Bible study? Is it OK for a woman to lead the singing? Can she run the children’s program? Exactly how much can she do and still qualify as “silent”?
To this imported rabbinical “law” of women keeping silent in the assemblies and remaining in collective subjection, Paul replies with, “What?! Came the word of God out from you or came it unto you only?” (I Cor. 14:36, KJV). Or, to liberally paraphrase Paul’s words, “Who died and made you chief?! You say women are to stay quiet during assembly, just like those persistant Judiazers teach. You believe that all the churches should be following this rule, that this is God’s ‘proper order.’ Did this special ‘revelation’ somehow come only to you and only by you unto all the rest of us peons? Are you now God’s divine mouthpiece to all the churches?!”
As one commenter shared, the closest English equivalent to this Greek exclamation of “What?!” is the derisive “Pffft!” It isn’t so much a word as an inflection. Remember, there was no punctuation in koine Greek. The translation depends on context and scholars disagree on the best choice here. Although the translators of the King James Bible translated it into an exclamatory “What?,” many more modern translators have chosen to go with the quieter word “Or” which does not carry quite the same connotation to English-speaking ears. Taking the entire context of the letter, and the pattern of Paul’s battle against the leaven of the Judiazers into account, the King James translators relay the most accurate sense of Paul’s thoughts on the matter.
Paul concludes this entire section of corrections by taking aim at the self-appointed experts in Corinth who were insinuating themselves into these matters. Referring to these individuals, he openly tells the church that, “If anyone considers himself a prophet or spiritual person, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. But if anyone ignores this, he himself will be ignored” (1 Cor. 14:37,38). He then immediately reinforces his original position, again saying that everyone (men and women) should earnestly desire to publicly prophesy, “and do not forbid [men or women] to speak with tongues” (1 Cor. 14:39,40).
In Chapter 15 Paul closes the letter by summarizing the one true Gospel – that he preaches – and in the process also corrects a miscellaneous idea that some among them were beginning to listen to which says there is no physical resurrection from the dead. This was a known doctrine of the Sadducee Jews, one of the sects who had also clashed with Jesus. It must have been part of this package of traditions now creeping into the Corinthian church. Paul then says his goodbyes in Chapter 16 and gives some final housekeeping instructions. He concludes these instructions by urging the church to submit to the approved workers with him, whose doctrine is sound (I Cor. 16:13-18).
It would no doubt be incredibly frustrating to Paul to realize that two thousand years later, many are using his words against manmade traditions to instead support them.
