If women shouldn't speak at all in church....

JustaUser · Mar 20, 2015

If women shouldn't speak at all in church, not even to sing as the logical conclusion would be since singing is a fancy way of talking, nor should they even so much as ask for clarification on a topic of discussion, why should women even be so much as bodily present in the church, period?

Since they cannot interact during services (if Paul's words are to be taken at face value and literally without trying to make them say something different so as not to offend modern feminist opinions), they are really a distant presence there anyway, like furniture.

The church then is really only a place for men to interact in, not women. If women cannot even understand what is being taught, why are they even there to begin with? If the husband can teach doctrine at home, what is the point of women wasting pew space? They aren't really wanted there even by the logical implication of Paul's (and God's) own words.

Other than taking communion, I see no compelling reason why I as a woman should be required to attend church at all then (in fact I am being more obedient in not polluting it by interacting with it at all under the logical implication of this doctrine, as women will drag down the assembly due to being more prone to deception and usurping the authority of men, even by merely speaking any idea at all, which could easily come from Satan like with Eve. By not being there, I cannot possibly destroy the church ever with my naturally evil female tendencies if I simply stay at home and learn doctrine from a man outside the assembly entirely).

Some website online (I don't have the source now, sorry) argued that the word for ecclessica or assembly is male-only, and the church is indeed really only for men, and women aren't meant to have any influence there at all. Not to speak and not to vote, and of course, not to teach or hold any kind of position of authority.

Women speaking is shameful, and therefore, women being an active presence there is shameful too. If they *must* come, they should act like they don't exist while sitting there, taking God's Word logically, honestly, and literally. So, why should women be there at all? After all, they are more prone to deception and false teaching, and could be tempted to usurp the rightful authority of men even just by sitting there with their mere presence....I really ask this question for those who DON'T believe women should speak in church, ever, like Steve Anderson. However, other opinions are welcome...

7angels · Mar 20, 2015

are you asking if women do have a right to be in church and in leadership positions or are you just looking to discuss your view point? i await your answer.

God bless

JustaUser · Mar 20, 2015

It is an honest question. I am a fundamentalist Christian. Would my efforts as a woman for God be better served outside the church setting? That, to me, is the logical implication of "it is shameful for women to speak in church." That women shouldn't really be there at all. That women are better serving God outside the church setting on Sunday while men worship and teach each other free of women's influence. If the Holy Ghost is guiding you (or any of you for that matter), He should be able to answer my questions.

1watchman · Mar 20, 2015

No, it is not a repudiation of women or rejection of them in church assembly. The Bible is speaking of teaching both formally and by speaking out in the gathering. They should not teach or assert their ideas, and should be there even like many men who do not minister, to learn from Bible readings, worship God in singing, silent prayers, and encourage all after the meeting ends. The woman is viewed by God as a picture of the church in subjection to God, and the man is as the OT priest going into the holy place. One should see the whole of the verses on this subject.

Write me at pm if you wish to discuss this in detail, sister. Look up always!

JustaUser · Mar 20, 2015

Thanks for replying. I may PM you later.

7angels · Mar 20, 2015

i will use red since i don't know how to split the quotes.

JustaUser said:
If women shouldn't speak at all in church, not even to sing as the logical conclusion would be since singing is a fancy way of talking, nor should they even so much as ask for clarification on a topic of discussion, why should women even be so much as bodily present in the church, period?

this is all unscriptural. the women should not talk in church 1 cor 14:34 is referring the church of corenith and not to every church. if you study the history of corenith you will find that at the time of the church beginning that women had almost no status until the church was established. because of that women were considered unlearned and were considered lower than dogs. so with the establishment of the church women were finally allowed to learn the gospel which before had been almost unheard of. thus women had a bunch of questions for paul that he was having trouble teaching because of all their questions. thus paul told women to be silent in church and to ask their husbands the questions they had and if the husband could not answer the question then that question was brought before paul. it was not meant for women to be quiet in church but man's interpretation of that verse is how that tradition got spread about.

Since they cannot interact during services (if Paul's words are to be taken at face value and literally without trying to make them say something different so as not to offend modern feminist opinions), they are really a distant presence there anyway, like furniture.

i addressed this above

The church then is really only a place for men to interact in, not women. If women cannot even understand what is being taught, why are they even there to begin with? If the husband can teach doctrine at home, what is the point of women wasting pew space? They aren't really wanted there even by the logical implication of Paul's (and God's) own words.

if you believe this then why are women mentioned in the new and old testament in positions of leadership if God was against it. why would God bless women in ministry if it was wrong? God does not reward us for sin according to scripture. as i said before much of the doctrine of women not allowed in church and in ministry is just a tradition man created.

Other than taking communion, I see no compelling reason why I as a woman should be required to attend church at all then (in fact I am being more obedient in not polluting it by interacting with it at all under the logical implication of this doctrine, as women will drag down the assembly due to being more prone to deception and usurping the authority of men, even by merely speaking any idea at all, which could easily come from Satan like with Eve. By not being there, I cannot possibly destroy the church ever with my naturally evil female tendencies if I simply stay at home and learn doctrine from a man outside the assembly entirely).

let me ask you a question. why is what adam did in the garden of any less sinful than what eve did? adam sinned intentionally where eve was only deceived. why didn't adam say anything to eve? until adam and eve sinned there was no status difference between the two. when jesus died for us He set things back up the way things should of been like from the beginning. just as adam had all authority until he sinned, now Jesus has all authority that he gave to us to use for God's glory.

Some website online (I don't have the source now, sorry) argued that the word for ecclessica or assembly is male-only, and the church is indeed really only for men, and women aren't meant to have any influence there at all. Not to speak and not to vote, and of course, not to teach or hold any kind of position of authority.

Women speaking is shameful, and therefore, women being an active presence there is shameful too. If they *must* come, they should act like they don't exist while sitting there, taking God's Word logically, honestly, and literally. So, why should women be there at all? After all, they are more prone to deception and false teaching, and could be tempted to usurp the rightful authority of men even just by sitting there with their mere presence....I really ask this question for those who DON'T believe women should speak in church, ever, like Steve Anderson. However, other opinions are welcome...

if you really want scriptural proof that what you believe is wrong then please tell me. everything you say is a twist on scripture that someone whether through ignorance, pride, domination or whatever became a tradition that stuck. this is why there are so many different denominations because every time a new concept come up the church ends up splitting over it. it is happening over hyper grace issue and once saved always saved concept.

also God said his yoke was easy and the burden light. if you ask me your concerns do not sound easy or burden free. thus when scripture starts to contradict itself then that should tell you that somewhere the true meaning is being twisted. because scripture does not contradict but everything flows together.

so i encourage you not worry but search the scriptures for truth. don't take other peoples word for anything but check scripture to see if what they say is correct. remember the Word says what it means and means what it says. don't get caught up in traditions of it has always been like that. no one is perfect but God.

God bless

agua · Mar 20, 2015

JustaUser said:
If women shouldn't speak at all in church, not even to sing as the logical conclusion would be since singing is a fancy way of talking, nor should they even so much as ask for clarification on a topic of discussion, why should women even be so much as bodily present in the church, period?

Since they cannot interact during services (if Paul's words are to be taken at face value and literally without trying to make them say something different so as not to offend modern feminist opinions), they are really a distant presence there anyway, like furniture.

The church then is really only a place for men to interact in, not women. If women cannot even understand what is being taught, why are they even there to begin with? If the husband can teach doctrine at home, what is the point of women wasting pew space? They aren't really wanted there even by the logical implication of Paul's (and God's) own words.

Other than taking communion, I see no compelling reason why I as a woman should be required to attend church at all then (in fact I am being more obedient in not polluting it by interacting with it at all under the logical implication of this doctrine, as women will drag down the assembly due to being more prone to deception and usurping the authority of men, even by merely speaking any idea at all, which could easily come from Satan like with Eve. By not being there, I cannot possibly destroy the church ever with my naturally evil female tendencies if I simply stay at home and learn doctrine from a man outside the assembly entirely).

Some website online (I don't have the source now, sorry) argued that the word for ecclessica or assembly is male-only, and the church is indeed really only for men, and women aren't meant to have any influence there at all. Not to speak and not to vote, and of course, not to teach or hold any kind of position of authority.

Women speaking is shameful, and therefore, women being an active presence there is shameful too. If they *must* come, they should act like they don't exist while sitting there, taking God's Word logically, honestly, and literally. So, why should women be there at all? After all, they are more prone to deception and false teaching, and could be tempted to usurp the rightful authority of men even just by sitting there with their mere presence....I really ask this question for those who DON'T believe women should speak in church, ever, like Steve Anderson. However, other opinions are welcome...

Paul indicated that women prayed and prophecied ( whatever this meant ) in Church and so the silence isn't total. I find it interesting though that we dismiss the head covering order so easiliy when it seems to be important.

1Co 11:5 KJV But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

JustaUser · Mar 21, 2015

Thanks for all your replies. I am considering your words and I know I could be wrong. I have wondered about the head covering idea, too, but I have understood that passage to mean that women shouldn't have short hair, but others online have contested that interpretation as well. However, I don't want to stray off the subject of women speaking in church, either.

I have another question, though, for those who think women are permitted to speak in church. How do you know that Paul was only approving of women praying or prophesying while OUTSIDE the assembly, rather than within it?

It would seem to me that if Paul's words of women remaining silent are to be taken at face value, this passage should provide the greater context in which the location of women prophesying/praying-out-loud should be interpreted. In other words, according to this view, it should be understood that these women would NOT be performing these activities during church time, but only outside the assembly to make Paul's instruction work. Some reformed theologians, especially in old articles (like from the 19th century), have promoted this view.

What do you make of this?

agua · Mar 21, 2015

JustaUser said:
Thanks for all your replies. I am considering your words and I know I could be wrong. I have wondered about the head covering idea, too, but I have understood that passage to mean that women shouldn't have short hair, but others online have contested that interpretation as well. However, I don't want to stray off the subject of women speaking in church, either.

I have another question, though, for those who think women are permitted to speak in church. How do you know that Paul was only approving of women praying or prophesying while OUTSIDE the assembly, rather than within it?

It would seem to me that if Paul's words of women remaining silent are to be taken at face value, this passage should provide the greater context in which the location of women prophesying/praying-out-loud should be interpreted. In other words, according to this view, it should be understood that these women would NOT be performing these activities during church time, but only outside the assembly to make Paul's instruction work. Some reformed theologians, especially in old articles (like from the 19th century), have promoted this view.

What do you make of this?

I think it's possible; however the context of 1 Cor 11 seems to indicate when the Body gathers together imo, and I believe the "because of the Angels" clause is indicative of this ie. the Angels are watching the Chuirch, which is Christ's repesentative on Earth, to see how we recognize, accept, and submit to the headship issue. ( Angels also have an order of authority/headship which many ( 1/3 ?) failed to submit to ). I accept it could also follow that the Angels observe Christians outside of Church gathering to see if the headship arrangement is kept, but it seems more likely that the Body, when gathered together, would display the ordered message of headship and use the symbolic head covering.

1watchman · Mar 21, 2015

Certainly one needs to be careful about reasoning instead of what Scripture says. Our reasoning is often faulty. When we compare Scripture with Scripture by "rightly dividing the Word of Truth", as God enjoins us, we can see the truth of it.

Saricharity · Mar 21, 2015

7angels · Mar 21, 2015

JustaUser said:
Thanks for all your replies. I am considering your words and I know I could be wrong. I have wondered about the head covering idea, too, but I have understood that passage to mean that women shouldn't have short hair, but others online have contested that interpretation as well. However, I don't want to stray off the subject of women speaking in church, either.

according to 1 for 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. ok i have not checked the greek meaning of this verse but according to what is says, hair is a covering. it does not state that you must have long hair or short hair but hair in general is women's head covering. but is also says long hair is counted as a credit to her.

I have another question, though, for those who think women are permitted to speak in church. How do you know that Paul was only approving of women praying or prophesying while OUTSIDE the assembly, rather than within it?

any who believe this please post scripture because there are scriptures to show that women have taught men in the NT. if God allows it once then God would allow it again because God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. in other words God's beliefs do not change with time.

It would seem to me that if Paul's words of women remaining silent are to be taken at face value, this passage should provide the greater context in which the location of women prophesying/praying-out-loud should be interpreted. In other words, according to this view, it should be understood that these women would NOT be performing these activities during church time, but only outside the assembly to make Paul's instruction work. Some reformed theologians, especially in old articles (like from the 19th century), have promoted this view.

please show me scripture to say women cannot perform these activities in church? paul was referring to women staying silent in reference to not disturbing the teaching. it says nothing about ministry, and ect. actually instead of worrying about what paul or timothy say why not look at what Jesus told us to do. Jesus made no distinction between male or female. Jesus did not criticize women even though others did. Jesus said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. Jesus is talking to all believers and not just men. Jesus did not make any conditions or limitations on anyone. so to limit women from doing what Jesus himself demands from us is wrong.

What do you make of this?

God bless

cubanito · Mar 23, 2015

The last time I attempted to type on this subject my time grew short due to work problems and I had to exit the forum for a long while. At this time I am again not prepared to lay out a methodical case either. So this is something of a drive by posting; as the subject would take quite some time to do it justice.

1- So here's my drive by: look at the Greek please. While I have NEVER studied Greek, being a layman, I find much use for Strong's numbers. I "STRONGLY" suggest anyone serious about Bible stury get aquainted with Strong's numbers.

In 1Cor 14:34 the word for "speak" is G2980, "laleo" which is basically a prolongued non-systamatic babbling. It is an onomatopeia word similar to "yada-yada-yada"

This is in contrast to teaching, which is G1321 "didacho" from where we get the English "didactic" and that is also prohibited in 1 Timothy 2:11. Now this is a FORMAL teaching discourse, as oposed to:

G3004 which is a systematic, coherent development or exposition of a position but WITHOUT the formal implication of a teaching position and this is in contrast to

G2036 which is to express one's personal opinion which is not the same as

G4483 which is a general term to make noise, any noise, such as singing or burping.

2- Please note the 2 forms of speech which are prohibited for women: babling on and on (and like it or not ladies, you are far more prone to this than men, that is a FACT of biology evudent to anyone with ears) AND a FORMAL didactic position, such as Pastor.

3- Please also note WHERE such a restriction applies: at the Ecclesia, the formal gathering for worship. Nothing here said prohibits even the above from occuring outside the formal worship time.

Now, this is only a drive by, but rather than going on and on in "laleo land", I suggest you ladies actually study the Word of God carefully and systematically. Or get a man to explain it to you, as I have begun to do. Each gender has it's strengths and weaknesses, and CERTAINLY there are exceptions to the rules. Yet usually, it is the ladies who will harrangue and go on babling with all manner of emotional content at the slightest provocation.

I am something of an exception, BTW, in that as my wife and daughters can attest, I can babble like a teenage girl after way too much cofee. If a man's typical daily word output is 2K and a woman's 5K, mine is about 12K.

JR, or as my daughters often comment to me "dad, you're so gay."

Job8 · Mar 24, 2015

JustaUser said:
It is an honest question. I am a fundamentalist Christian. Would my efforts as a woman for God be better served outside the church setting? That, to me, is the logical implication of "it is shameful for women to speak in church." That women shouldn't really be there at all. That women are better serving God outside the church setting on Sunday while men worship and teach each other free of women's influence. If the Holy Ghost is guiding you (or any of you for that matter), He should be able to answer my questions.

I believe you have misunderstood the Scripture regarding the silence of women, and it certainly does not lead to the erroneous conclusion that women should be absent from church gatherings.

That teaching (which is from God, not man) makes it crystal clear that women are not permitted to take spiritual authority within the church or within the home. They are not to preach or teach men or the church in general. That does not stop them from teaching women and children. But when it comes to the whole assembly and corporate worship women are to remain silent (particularly as regards speaking in tongues). They cannot take the office of elder or deacon either. Men and women were created for different purposes, but modern societies and feminism have tried to confuse their roles. This does not mean that women are less important, but their importance lies elsewhere.

JustaUser · Mar 27, 2015

Just to be clear: are Job8 and 1watchman against women speaking in church, while everyone else who has responded here thinks its fine with God?

JustaUser · Mar 27, 2015

I am about to get really difficult here, so be warned. I am struggling with the issue of whether God even likes women at all, to be blunt. If I told black people that they should remain silent in church and that for them to so much as utter a word is "shameful," while only white people were permitted to speak at all, how welcome in the assembly do you honestly think most black people would feel??? I know I sure wouldn't feel truly welcome there if I were black, even if the words were spoken by God Himself!

Why shouldn't women then just have a picnic outside the church building while the men are meeting inside and then encourage others after church services are over? Why should they be forced to be present in a place where they cannot even interact with anyone, by the implication of God's own Words? Why can't submission mean NOT being present in what should be meaningfully the affairs of men only, then?

The passage from Paul about males and females being equal seems to only apply once they have shed their earthy bodies and are actually in heaven, where people may not even have sexual organs at all once transformed and resurrected. Otherwise, women seem to be considered as definitively inferior and even dangerous by God while still living in their sinful female bodies. It may even be a temporary curse of God to even be a woman, until I get to heaven and shed this bodily distinction.

God has not answered me definitively on this issue, but I hope someone here has the Spirit of God in them who would be willing to answer me (whether they realize it or not). Also, I don't want to make people fall by what I am asking, but I do think such an idea needs to be confronted in a way that actually makes sense, especially by saved Christians lead of God. I hope I am wrong about God's mindset here, but the way in which God wrote the Bible makes me wonder...

Please bear with me.

brixken7 · Mar 27, 2015

JustaUser said:
It is an honest question. I am a fundamentalist Christian. Would my efforts as a woman for God be better served outside the church setting? That, to me, is the logical implication of "it is shameful for women to speak in church." That women shouldn't really be there at all. That women are better serving God outside the church setting on Sunday while men worship and teach each other free of women's influence. If the Holy Ghost is guiding you (or any of you for that matter), He should be able to answer my questions.

..................................................

"Would my efforts as a woman for God be better served outside the church setting?" -- JustaUser

YES...in the home!
This is why God has given a wife "authority OVER her head" (I Corinthians 11:10; Concordant version), her spiritual "head" being her husband (verse 3)!

And with this God-given authority a wife is to "rule the household" (I Timothy 5:14; RSV). Or as Weymouth in his "New Testament in Modern Speech" has paraphrased this verse, wives are to...

"...rule in domestic matters."

JustaUser · Mar 27, 2015

So, brixken7, you agree with my point that women shouldn't be required to attend church at all then if my interpretation of Paul's/God's Words is correct? Do you agree that women shouldn't at all speak during church services if they should happen to be there, or perhaps even within the church building itself? I just need more clarification on your position, please.

brixken7 · Mar 27, 2015

JustaUser said:
I am struggling with the issue of whether God even likes women at all, to be blunt.

So, brixken7, you agree with my point that women shouldn't be required to attend church at all then if my interpretation of Paul's/God's Words is correct? Do you agree that women shouldn't at all speak during church services if they should happen to be there, or perhaps even within the church building itself? I just need more clarification on your position, please.

.................................

To my knowledge there is no scripture that would absolutely require WOMEN to attend church, though I Timothy 2:9-12 and I Corinthians 14:34-35 does imply that women are in the church services. But I would think the duties of motherhood would at times take precedence.

And I agree that women should NOT be allowed "to teach" the Scriptures in church -- but I emphasize in church. That is the apostle Paul's message in I Timothy 2:11-12 (where the context is church worship). And Paul gives his reasons in verses 13 and 14.

But I'm really puzzled as to why you should be uncertain as to whether God loves women or not -- or "at all" -- as you said. This seems very strange in light of the fact that God has given married women domestic authority over their husbands (I Corinthians 11:10; original Greek), given them talents that the male sex does not have, given them a role as a mother which is the most important role a human being can have, and made them to be the most beautiful of all of His creatures (not to mention a promise of a new body with eternal life).

All of that does not endear you to God? You feel you must have a leadership position in church as well? Please explain.

JustaUser · Mar 27, 2015

Thanks for your answer, Brixken7. I agree that it appears that women cannot teach men with authority, especially not in the church setting. However, you didn't seem to answer my question about whether or not you think women should remain totally silent during church services, but it appears you agree too. Am I correct?

I do not care anywhere near as much if I am Biblically permitted to have a leadership role within the church. The part about women speaking at all during church being described as "shameful" is what bothers me much more.

I understand that not everyone has the ability to be the best possible leader, and some people (including some men) shouldn't hold such a position. Otherwise, the Bible wouldn't have any qualifications for church leadership at all when it comes even to men. I am fine with having standards, especially for leadership. Perhaps women have been disqualified for this due to the fall compared to men. I can more easily reconcile this with God not hating women, but simply giving the church the strongest leaders possible.

However, why is it so "shameful" for a woman even to so much as speak? Just because she says something, doesn't necessarily mean she is trying to usurp the authority of men and lawful leadership. It could be said with a submissive spirit rather than a noisy, demanding one. Of course, the pastor's speaking shouldn't be needlessly interrupted during his sermon, and to me, that holds true even for the men in attendance. This concept was taught to most people (both boys and girls) even in elementary school.

I don't think being a mother is the only possible role for women (not that you necessarily meant this), but I agree too that being a good mother is extremely important. I don't think all women could possibly make good mothers. However, that doesn't mean they couldn't help children in other ways, or serve God in other appropriate venues (like assisting in missionary work), if they choose never to marry.

Marriage is not a requirement, and even Paul said it is better to remain single if you are able. I have never been married nor ever been with another human being, myself. You may not agree, but some of this is my opinion/interpretation, and Paul's words are purely Biblical.

The problem I am having is that, like with Black people, if I was Black, and I was told I shouldn't even so much as speak when White people are present, how would that NOT make me feel less loved and valued as a Black person? I know I replaced the sexes with races instead, but I did this to try and make my feelings more clear.

I understand not having the qualities necessary to be a leader (like people having standards for being a surgeon, such as not being physically disabled), but not even being able to utter so much as a single word in order to be a meaningful presence (even in a non-leadership and submissive role) within the church makes me question my value to God as a woman, especially in light of the fact that He used the term "shameful" to describe any of my words. I know I am asking a difficult question. Thanks for your time.

If women shouldn't speak at all in church....

Active Member

Newbie

Active Member

Overseer

Active Member

Newbie

Newbie

Active Member

Newbie

Overseer

Follower of Christ

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Active Member

Active Member

Newbie

Active Member

Newbie

Active Member

Similar threads