Deborah…Unless There’s A Dude (Part 2)
In our last article, Deborah…Unless There’s A Dude (Part 1), we acknowledged that the Scriptures seem to contradict each other when it comes to women in spiritual leadership.
On the one hand, we have 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2 prohibiting women from teaching, leading or speaking in church; but, on the other hand, we saw so many examples of women doing all of those things in the Old Testament and New Testament, and even being commended for doing so.
We then asked, “When we encounter passages in Scripture that seem at odds, that seem to be contradictory, what are our choices?” We identified three:
The Bible is contradictory, or
God is confused, or
That there is something culturally conditioning one side of the equation or the other.
Knowing that God does not violate his moral principles for lack of better options, we concluded that God does not choose Deborahs only when there is no dude.
In this article, we will turn to one of the major passages, 1 Corinthians 14, to see how these Scriptures can be reconciled.
“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. ”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:34-35)
There are five keys to unlocking understanding in this passage.
The first key is understanding this passage in its context.
This chapter wasn’t written in a vacuum. It was written to the church in Corinth – a church that was having a major problem in its gathering, and this chapter was seeking to correct that problem.
So what was the problem?
The verse prior points toward it.
“for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:33)
The problem in the Corinthian church was that chaos and confusion were distracting from the actual purposes of the gathering, which are giving praise to God, getting the message out, and growing together.
But what was the source of the chaos and confusion?
When we read carefully, we understand that there wasn’t just one thing contributing to the chaos and confusion, but three.
The first issue that was negatively impacting the gathering was tongues without interpretation (see 1 Corinthians 14:14-17).
The second issue is how the prophets were sharing prophecies – both the amount of prophecies and the interruption of each other was overwhelming (see 1 Corinthians 14:29-33).
The third issue that was contributing to chaos and confusion in the church was what the wives were saying in the church (see 1 Corinthians 14:34-35).
The first key to unlocking this passage is knowing its context, that the problem it was setting out to correct was chaos in the house of God.
The second key is recognizing an unintended message was being sent through the actions being done.
While the worship gathering is first and foremost vertical (i.e. about what it gives to God and the message it sends to Him), there is no doubt that there is a secondary concern for the message/impact it has on those who attend it.
This is made explicit in this passage.
“Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?” (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:23)
It’s important to understand that the view and role of women in the first century was much different than today.
At that time, women’s modest dress included wearing a head covering.
A woman with a head uncovered traditionally meant, “I am single,” (1) and if a woman was with a man and her head was uncovered, she was his prostitute, not his wife. (2) (Winter, 2003, pp. 82-83) The bottom line is for women to uncover their heads was very disrespectful and dishonoring to their husbands.
Yet, this is what the Corinthian women were doing, confusing their liberation as women as a reason to throw off all restraint, including that which communicated respect to their husbands (through their headcovering).
“But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 11:5)
The head of the wife is the husband, and uncovering her head was dishonoring to her head/husband. That’s why we also read the following just a few verses later in 1 Corinthians 11:16: But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God. (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 11:16)
However, taking off the head covering was not the only contentious thing that was dishonoring to husbands in the gatherings. Wives were also speaking to other men beside their husbands, publicly.
In that culture, it was believed that a woman’s place was in the home. (3) A woman approaching a man would have been seen as a sign of sexual advance, and especially if the woman was married, seen as dishonor to her husband.
In the church in Corinth, women were experiencing and acting upon their newfound freedom in Christ – both removing their head covering and speaking to other men publicly.
These actions would have sent a loud message to others coming in, that this was a place of loose women and a place of dishonor.
Are women free in Christ, valued in Christ and equal in Christ? Yes, they are!
Yet, God, through Paul, is saying, “Not so fast. It is true that you have equal value and worth, but there are other things that are also true.”
Removing a head covering for a married woman is stating, “I’m no longer under the headship of my husband. I am as if not married at all.” And worse, their dress was mimicking the attire for prostitutes.
It’s like if half our women were liberated, and they thought the expression of that was to come to church wearing see-through shirts and daisy dukes. Most would interpret that as us having a religion of loose women and of sexual immorality.
Now, it is hard for us to imagine removing one’s head covering and braiding your hair and wearing gold jewelry or speaking to a man who wasn’t your husband in public as doing that, but imagine a wife in a Muslim country. Imagine that she cuts off her sleeves, throws her head covering off, exposes her skin and neck, and has a conversation with another man while at mosque. How would that b viewed and interpreted in tht culture?
I remember being in Egypt and some of the Christian women were dressing like they were American women. Honestly, their dress was modest to us, but for them scandalous, and for the Muslims, they just look and think of Christians as these sexually promiscuous and dishonoring people. They are not, but if we lack any sensitivity for culture, we can send that message.
For the women in the Corinthian church to take their veils off and braid their hair and wear gold and do all these things signaled looseness, moral laxity and disrespect to their husbands.
I mean these wives’ actions in the public eye would be a repulsion to the Gospel. It could turn others away from hearing the message because of the amount of dishonor to husbands and chaos in the church. Many would be appalled and repelled by it, negatively impacting the mission.
Key two to understanding this passage is understanding how the unintended message that the Corinthian women were sending was compromising the Gospel message getting out.
What is the third key?
It is understanding there is a type of speaking that is in view here.
Some look at these passages and think that what these verses mean is that women aren’t supposed to make a peep in church. Not a word.
But they can’t mean that because of what Paul said before…
“But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.” (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 11:5)
Certainly sound comes out of your mouth when you are praying and when you are prophesying.
The kind of speech that is prohibited in this passage is speech that disrupts and distracts and takes the whole gathering off track.
A few things on this.
First, again, remember the women aren’t the only ones who are told to be silent.
Earlier, we read that someone speaking in tongues with no interpreter should keep silent as well.
“ but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church…”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:28)
And then also we read earlier that someone prophesying in a disruptive disorderly way should do so as well.
“But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:30)
Right after those verses, we read the verse about women.
“The women are to keep silent in the church…”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:34-35)
The point of the chapter is that chaotic chatter – in any form or fashion from anyone – that creates confusion, distraction and disorder is what is prohibited.
All three of those contributing to the chaos problem are told to do the same thing. Be silent.
Paul is not saying no speech ever never. He is saying to have order in speech, and honor in speech, and build up with speech – order that gives praise up to God, gets the message out and grows each other.
To make this practical, picture a house church gathering.
Jane and Joe.
Dave and Donna.
Fred and Fanny.
And many more couples.
Someone gets up to testify.
Then another has a revelation God gave to share.
One had a vision this morning.
One had a dream last night.
Another heard a word in prayer yesterday.
Someone feels stirred in the moment.
Then someone stands up and starts speaking in tongues.
But two others had a reflection from their Bible reading that would be a great teaching they are hoping to share.
But, each prophecy shared needs time to pray and interpret and seek God for application.
What are you getting a picture of?
Chaos.
And what’s driving it isn’t all bad, let’s just acknowledge this.
They desired the gifts.
God gave the gifts.
That’s good.
However, the way they are using them isn’t building up but becoming a blockade – to praise, for proclamation, and for productive growth
That’s one thing about this chatter.
But a second thing is how the women were speaking up.
Remember that women didn’t have access to education the way that men did. Here they are in the worship service, and they are asking because they want to learn, which is made clear:
“The women are to keep silent . . . If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home…”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:34-35)
Speaking to learn is not praying or prophesying but is interjecting.
And the word for speaking used here, lalein, is the word often used of spontaneous speech.
Since it’s about learning speech (not teaching speech), we know that spontaneously speaking, interrupting, asking questions is what was in view – which is why the women are told to be silent here, but are allowed to pray or prophesy three chapters either.
The spontaneous speaking was distracting.
The Spirit-led speech was edifying.
When the women prayed or prophesied, they were doing it in the order of the service that God gave, following the same outlines He gave. It was not a distraction then, it was an edifying and a building into the gathering under those conditions.
So those are the first three keys to understanding 1 Corinthians 14.
Context. A problem is being addressed.
Culture: An unintended message was being sent.
Chatter: The type of talking in view is being targeted.
The fourth key is God’s design for marriage and what they were doing that was actually out of line with it.
What does the Bible teach about God’s design for marriage?
“Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. ”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, Eph. 5:22-24)
Headship and submission are part of God’s design for marriage.
Now, we do not read that the man is head of woman or that the men are the head of women.
We read the husband is head of the wife.
We read that Christ is head of the church.
We, to be clear, do NOT read that men are the head of the church.
What is true in marriage is not true beyond marriage.
Christ is the head of the church.
Man is not the head of the church.
How do we know it’s not all men to all women?
Because it’s singular.
The husband (singular) is the head of the wife (singular).
Don’t make the complementarian picture in marriage a picture beyond marriage. It’s not. It never was.
But, still the design for marriage was at stake.
Wives were to submit to and honor their husbands. To honor, biblically, is to demonstrate an estimation of another’s worth, which means if she was doing something that lowers his worth, that dishonors, that shames, that was not okay.
There are things a wife can do publicly which betray the marriage order and covenant.
There are still things like that today, but far fewer things than then.
The speaking here was dishonoring to do toward one’s husband, because in asking questions during a presentation, they were speaking with one man who was not their husband.
Remember the disciples were surprised to find Jesus speaking to a woman at the well in John 4. Why? He spoke to crowds full of women all the time. But, to speak to one was considered taboo.
When a woman prayed or prophesied she spoke to the whole, and that was okay, if she honored her husband by having her head covering on; however, when she spoke spontaneously (laleho) in order to learn, she was now interacting with a singular man publicly who was not her husband.
Again, you have to understand a wife even speaking to another man was and still is in many parts of the world quite taboo, speaking to another man would have been seen then like someone’s wife going up and flirting with and hanging on another man today.
So the text says it was dishonorable and shaming toward the husband. It was certainly experienced that way, and dishonor is not reflective of God’s design for marriage.
And the fifth key to understanding 1 Corinthians 14?
Who is in view in this text?
Not all women.
Wives.
Now, it’s important for you to know the word for woman is γυνή, and that is the exact same word for wife in common first century Greek.
You only know which, wife or woman, it is by context.
So let’s look at this passage again…
“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. 35 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.”
(New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Cor. 14:34-35)
Is the word γυνή in this passage meant to be translated as women/woman or wives/wife?
If it should be translated wives/wife, there would be something in the context to tell us that and there is.
We don’t have time to go into all the details now.
But the reference to the Law, cannot be about silence, but about the principle of submission of wives to husbands, because there is nothing in the Law about silence – so silence is an application to a principle found in the Law, which was submission in marriage.
Furthermore, the language of submission here is fitting with other scriptures about marriage.
And third, when they are told to “ask their own husbands at home,” well, that is as obvious as it gets. These aren’t women being described, but wives being described.
When English translations choose to translate the word that means either “woman” or “wife” as “woman” (and not wife), the ability to discern what was going on gets lost. And honestly when the context is so clearly about husbands and wives it’s more than biased.
An unmarried woman cannot go ask her husband at home. It’s clear this is about wifes here, not women generally.
Imagine how much easier it would be to reconcile what seems to be contradictory if this passage read:
1 Corinthians 14:34-35: The wives are to be silent in the gatherings; for they are not permitted to spontaneously speak out, but to be submissive, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is dishonorable for a wife to speak spontaneously in church.
What do with all this?
First, women can and should speak in the church today. Why? Because they did then in most cases, but in almost any case today, doing so does not get interpreted as dishonoring one’s husband. Cultural norms for what honors a husband have changed.
Two, we encourage women in leadership in the Church. The husband is head of the wife, but Christ is the head of the church. The complementarian position comes into the church only in relation to the husband/wife relationship.
Three, we do believe that there is headship in the home, in marriage. But, as Scripture tells us the husband’s headship must be fitting with the biblical paradigm, which is to serve as Christ serves. It does not mean domineering, lording it over, controlling or forcing.
Fourth, we are just skimming the surface. The harder passage to reconcile with the rest of Scripture is from 1 Timothy.
“But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”
— (New American Standard Bible, 1995, 1 Tim. 2:12)
Some of you have been challenged by this passage your whole lives – wondering what to do with it and how to apply it faithfully?
If you’d like to read about that, we would invite you to check out the next article, Deborah…Unless There’s A Dude (Part 3).
© 2022 Shane Farmer, Rebekah Layton. All rights reserved.
1 Winter, Bruce W. (2003). Romans Wives, Roman Widows. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
2 Winter, Bruce W. (2003). Romans Wives, Roman Widows. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
3 Ortberg, John. (2014). Who Is This Man? The Unpredictable Impact of the Inescapable Jesus. Zondervan
