For more information on this topic, the single teaching by Bob Yandian entitled "Husbands and Wives" is included in the series 1 Timothy Part 2

Yes, we are to take First Corinthians, and all other sections of the Bible, as literal for today. But, they must be taken in their proper context, in the light of their meaning to those who received them, and in regard to what they are teaching the believer. God’s instructions to the people of Israel during the time in the wilderness may contain lessons we can learn, but the literal application of those instructions do not apply to believers today (the Manna, their clothing, the sacrificial and dietary laws, etc.).

So also, some of the instruction in the New Testament must be “interpreted” in light of what they were teaching, not just literally applied. There were many directions given to the believers in the first century of the church that may serve as lessons for us, but not “orders” to be enacted for all time.

Take, for example, the directions given by the apostles in Acts 4:32–37. This was in regard to the believers having all their goods in common so as to share with the poor. This set up the situation leading to the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1–11), and the conflict over the distribution to the widows leading to the choosing of deacons (Acts 6:1–7). Both of these were “honored” by God, yet were not repeated as instruction to any other church, nor practiced in any other city throughout the New Testament record. HOWEVER, the principle of believers giving to the poor, and seeing to the care of widows and orphans is taught in many other books of the New Testament.

There are other examples of this, but let me get to the issues regarding your question.

Command or Opinion?

In 1 Corinthians 11:4–16, Paul gives instruction regarding the issue of women praying / prophesying in the Church. His instruction includes the woman having her head covered, while the man is to have his uncovered. Paul gives a “spiritual” support for the custom, but concludes with the following:

1 Corinthians 11:16:
But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the churches of God.

What Paul is saying here is that there is no general instruction on this issue throughout all the churches. We know that the basic operation, even design of the churches in the early centuries was very closely patterned after the Jewish synagogues. The Jewish rabbis, leaders, etc always prayed and taught with the shawl covering the head. What this shows us is that although the Word of God (Bible) is not to be subjected to our opinions, there may be local customs / rituals / traditions for which we can find “spiritual” meaning. These are not to be seen as general “rules” for all, but are to be followed by those who would attend that “assembly.”

We follow these same rules today. If we attend an assembly of a certain denomination, we will “politely” follow the customs of that group. We don’t need to change our own customs, but we will not be “contentious” while in their place of worship. In the same way, as I have traveled to other nations, I must adjust my own appearance, manner, even language and expressions, so as not to offend their customs. Paul wrote, just prior to this discussion of women and covering:

1 Corinthians 10:32–33:
Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; 33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.

The point, of course, is that we do all we can so as to not offend, even if we don’t agree with their “application” of a custom.

So, what about your question? Notice, Paul did not forbid the women to “pray or prophesy” in the assembly. If they were not to teach / speak at all—the question could have been easily settled by ruling against it. In fact, in 1 Corinthians 14:26 Paul encourages everyone in the assembly to participate, orderly:

Then how is it, brothers? When you come together, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be for building up.

The previous regulation (Chapter 11) simply directed that the woman must have her head covered in order to participate (in the city of Corinth, that is). I know the next verse says, “If any man speaks…”, but the word “man” is an addition. The language on says, “If any speaks….” Women were not forbidden, yet they were to be regulated by certain customs and courtesies.

What About the Silence Issue?

1 Corinthians 14:34,35:
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.

[35] If 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.

Okay, there it is! Pretty strong isn’t it? But, what is the lesson Paul was teaching? Without getting too technical, it is necessary to relate this passage to the actual situation in first century Corinth, and to analyze some of the language.

As stated earlier, the early church was patterned after the Jewish synagogue. In this arrangement, the men were seated in the central floor, and were often invited to enter into the discussion or “dialogue” (especially those who had been trained in rabbinic school). The women and children were seated on benches located around the perimeter of the hall. In the synagogue, it was forbidden for them to enter into the discussion, dialogue, or teaching.

While it is clear from some of the scriptures and historical records that some of these “customs” were adopted by the Church, others were not. The first prophesy delivered to the Church on the Day of Pentecost indicated women would be used in “prophetic” utterance. This was in direct conflict with the role of women in the synagogues, where they were not allowed to participate at all. Women began to receive a significant reception in areas of speaking, teaching, and supportive roles within the Church. Granted, these were not as complete as we see today, but they were “revolutionary” at the time.

Paul, specifically, makes numerous references to women, as he writes his closing remarks to the churches. Notice especially Romans 16, where he mentions eight women—seven of them by name. Included are: Phoebe, a teacher and assistant in ministry; Priscilla, to whom Paul sent Apollos for proper training; Junia (not Junias), an apostle with her husband; two sisters who are “laborers in the Lord,” a faithful “sister”; and one whom Paul considered as a “mother” in ministry. That’s pretty significant!

All of that to say, the meaning of this passage is not as simple as it appears. If Paul meant that all women had to be silent at all times in church, it would be in direct conflict with what is presented in other passages of the New Testament.

Let’s analyze this section of scripture:

The women are to remain silent—not allowed to speak—must be in submission—they are to inquire / ask their own husbands—they are not to speak.

• remain silent: sigao
  This word indicates more than vocal silence. It refers to absence of activity that disturbs silence. Of course this can be “speaking / talking,” but that is only determined by the context.
  
• are not allowed to speak: lalein
  This is the general word for speaking. But, what type of speaking? We have already seen that they are allowed to prophesy or pray (even in Corinth). This issue is settled by Paul’s reference in the next verse. (vs. 35)
  
• must be in submission: hupotasse
  This word means to maintain proper rank, here in reference to their husband as leader in the home. Whatever the speaking was, it was violating the order of the home. That is what the “Law” established. (The Synagogues did not come into existence until the time of Israel’s captivity in Babylon.)

So, what were these women doing that was “disturbing” the proper order?

• to inquire: manthano
  The word for methodical learning / to disciple. The women wanted to be instructed, as the men commonly were. Many women in Greek society were not educated, and it is entirely possible that they had very little foundation for understanding some of the teaching that was being done in the service.

They wanted to understand so…

• should ask...own husbands: eperatao
  This is a specific word for intense questioning / to interrogate / ask over and over / to demand an answer. This is what was causing the disturbance. The “wives” would interrogate their husbands, or any man that was close. This was interrupting the service. With all the “troubling issues” in Corinth, it is no wonder they were confused. They wanted answers—help. But, this was not the proper way to conduct themselves, and was only bringing more trouble to the church. They should seek this kind of education from their own husbands—at home.
  
• to speak: lalein
  We are back to the same word. This is the speaking Paul is “limiting” as implied by the context, and other references.

Another question remains. Could “men interrogate”—was their “silence” required at times? Of course it was. And, it was also limited and regulated by order and by decency. See verses 28, 30, 37, 40.

There is much more that could be written, but I trust this has helped you. The Word of God is the foundation of all truth, and we are always right to hold our lives and our beliefs to it. But, we must “Study to show thyself [ourselves] approved unto God… [as one who] rightly divides the Word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

Geof W. Jackson,
Director of the Grace School of Ministry/Director of Pastoral Care