I would like to see the WT article about it. Thanks!
What does the WT say about 1 Cor 14:34?
by asilentone 10 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
allelsefails
They pretend it is not there. Basically. I'll look for an article, but it is amazing how they can build an entire idea of modern organization from the mispplied parable of Matt 24:45-46 FDS - but refuse to follow this scriptural command because it would be embarrassing to do it.
-
Psychotic Parrot
They're not allowed to teach, i think that's the way they interpret that scripture. That's why when women give talks they have to do it in pairs, facing eachother, so that they are not actually facing the congregation & teaching them.
Yup, pretty fucked up!
-
allelsefails
Questions From Readers What did the apostle Paul mean when he stated that women should “keep silent in the congregations”? Paul wrote to the Christian congregation in Corinth: “As in all the congregations of the holy ones, let the women keep silent in the congregations, for it is not permitted for them to speak.” (1 Corinthians 14:33, 34) In order for us to understand this correctly, it is helpful to consider the context of Paul’s counsel. In 1 Corinthians chapter 14, Paul discussed matters relating to meetings of the Christian congregation. He described what should be discussed at such meetings and recommended how they should be conducted. (1 Corinthians 14:1-6, 26-34) Further, he stressed the objective of Christian meetings—“that the congregation may receive upbuilding.”—1 Corinthians 14:4, 5, 12, 26. Paul’s instruction to “keep silent” appears three times in 1 Corinthians chapter 14. Each time, it is addressed to a different group in the congregation, but in all instances, it is given for the same reason—that “all things take place decently and by arrangement.”—1 Corinthians 14:40. First, Paul said: “If someone speaks in a tongue, let it be limited to two or three at the most, and in turns; and let someone translate. But if there be no translator, let him keep silent in the congregation and speak to himself and to God.” (1 Corinthians 14:27, 28) That did not mean that such a person was never to speak at meetings but that there were times when he should be silent. After all, the objective of the meetings—to upbuild one another—would not be attained if he spoke in a language no one understood. Second, Paul stated: “Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others discern the meaning. But if there is a revelation to another one while sitting there, let the first one keep silent.” This meant, not that the first prophet was to refrain from speaking at meetings, but that he had to be silent at times. Then the one having the miraculous revelation could address the congregation, and the objective of the meeting—that “all be encouraged”—would be achieved.—1 Corinthians 14:26, 29-31. Third, Paul addressed Christian women only, stating: “Let the women keep silent in the congregations, for it is not permitted for them to speak, but let them be in subjection.” (1 Corinthians 14:34) Why did Paul give this command to sisters? To preserve order in the congregation. He says: “If, then, they want to learn something, let them question their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in a congregation.”—1 Corinthians 14:35. Perhaps some sisters were challenging what was said in the congregation. Paul’s counsel helped sisters to shun such a disorderly spirit and humbly accept their position within Jehovah’s headship arrangement, particularly with regard to their husbands. (1 Corinthians 11:3) In addition, by keeping silent, sisters would show that they did not aspire to be teachers in the congregation. When he wrote to Timothy, Paul showed that it would be improper for a woman to assume the role of teacher: “I do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence.”—1 Timothy 2:12. Does that mean that a Christian woman must never speak during a congregation meeting? No. In Paul’s day, there were occasions when Christian women, perhaps impelled by holy spirit, prayed or prophesied in the congregation. On such occasions, they acknowledged their position by wearing a head covering. (1 Corinthians 11:5) Further, in Paul’s day and today, sisters along with brothers are urged to make a public declaration of their hope. (Hebrews 10:23-25) Besides doing this in the field ministry, sisters declare their hope and encourage others during congregation meetings by giving well-thought-out comments when invited to do so and by accepting assignments to share in demonstrations or student talks. Hence, Christian women “keep silent” by refraining from trying to assume the role of a male and instruct the congregation. They do not raise argumentative questions that could challenge the authority of those who teach. By fulfilling their proper role in the congregation, Christian sisters greatly contribute toward an atmosphere of peace in which “all things [at congregation meetings] take place for upbuilding.”—1 Corinthians 14:26, 33. [Footnote] In modern times, mature sisters follow that example when, because of circumstances, they have to substitute for a baptized man in a congregation setting.—See The Watchtower, July 15, 2002, page 26. ........
-
allelsefails
The QFR is from w06 3/1 28-29. Basically Paul didn't mean what he said there. Use the scriptures in this article to ask a JW why sisters are not allowed to pray in the congregation in front of men. The article clearly shows they did in the first century but with a "head covering". ........... They will never recognize that the masoginistic crap in Paul's writing was added later or should disqualify the writings as being in the canon. Jesus never taught such nonsense - He rejected those traditional Jewish ideas that Paul seems to relish in.
-
truthsetsonefree
I think they water down Paul's words because they know the sisters would never stand for that crap. In Paul's alleged writings he seems to have just wanted them shut. Period. Such rules are not in the writings accredited to Jesus. That of course doesn't mean he wouldn't have endorsed it or maybe said it at some point. But it's amazing how WT can build a whole explanation that really rests on very thin ice.
-
JosephMalik
asilentone,
The real question should be why did the apostle Paul include this comment in his letter? We all know that the Watchtower does not understand it. But does anyone else understand it and did Paul say this to the church in Corinth? The answer is no! Paul did not make this comment. It is the Corinthians that made this comment to Paul in the letter that they sent him 1 Cor 7:1 and now Paul would quote from their letter and straighten them out. The comment reads:
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Paul did not keep the law, but they did as did thousands in Jerusalem who followed James, and they were trying to get Paul to keep it as well. And this is just one of the things that they were teaching that Paul would put down in his letter. Consistently throughout 1 Cor. Paul refuted what they were teaching and Paul often quoted or alluded to their doctrines as he followed their letter the way we would a thread here on JWD. The personal pronoun "I" does not always mean Paul when he is quoting from their work. "I" in that case means them or the Corinthian writer of the document they sent him. How can anyone think that Paul did this to the church when he said to such ignorant men:
36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Paul was tough on them and did not pull any punches when it came to such teachings. But if we are not aware of what is happening and just read the text without thinking it through then yes Paul will get blamed for something that he was really against and this is the way most see it. What Paul taught to men and women alike in Corinth was:
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40 Let all things be done decently and in order.
Joseph
-
allelsefails
In fact most research I've read shows that these passages were not part of the original writings of Paul, but JWs won't even recognize that possibility. They claim the scrips have changed many times over, but they won't recognize this. Paul had no legimate claim to authority over the agnostics of the 2nd century. It was his visit to the 3rd Heaven that taught him everything he needed to know.
-
JosephMalik
allelsefails,
Well, Paul was a Jew and knew the law so he could have known that it would end someday without any revelations of any sort. Other Jews came to that conclusion without him. This is what being born again meant to them. And since it was not lawful for him to reveal what he heard and had other visions and sources of information I would not use that source. But Paul did reveal the letter as source of his information in this case and many scholars came to recognize it. After discussing one such issue that appeared in their letter in chapter seven notice how this discussion continued into subsequent chapters:
Introduction to 1st Corinthians Chapter 8 from Barns commentary
IN this chapter another subject is discussed, which had been proposed by the church at Corinth for the decision of the apostle:
INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 8 from Matthew Henry's full Commentary
The apostle, in this chapter, answers another case proposed to him by some of the Corinthians, about eating those things that had been sacrificed to idols.
And Paul went on and on like this to the end of 1 Cor. so that how we read it makes a big difference. We can see their doctrines and read their letter if we are looking carefully. We can also see how Paul refuted it so we know his methods. It is not just the words that Paul had penned, but what Paul was doing with them that makes the big difference. He also did things like this in other letters of his on similar subjects that go unnoticed. This was part of a doctrinal war for most of this Apostles life and included Apostles like Peter and John for a long time years in fact. Thousands of Jews including James were on the wrong side of the arguments. Not the nice and supposedly Holy Spirit perfection that many like the WT try to make out of such times. That is why the book of Hebrews had to be written as it finally put a stop to such lawkeepers and changed the mind of men like James and John.
Joseph
-
Narkissos
In fact most research I've read shows that these passages were not part of the original writings of Paul
Indeed.
V. 34-35 are set after v. 40 in a number of (mostly Western) mss. In the majoritary location they disrupt the exposition about practical instructions on the exercise of "prophecy". In any case they formally contradict chapter 11 which describes how women should "pray" or "prophesy" in the church (which is meaningless if they have to remain silent). Otoh they are in perfect agreement with the teaching of the Pastorals (Timothy-Titus) which opposes Gnostic (not agnostic :)) gender equalitarianism... So there are, indeed, very strong reason to think that they reflect a much later stage of (pseudepigraphical) "Paulinism" which has little to do with the core of 1 Corinthians.
N.B.: This changes nothing to their "canonical" character which is a matter of church reception, not text redaction.