Don Martin - Jeff Smelser - Mark J. Ward Discussion on I Corinthians 14:34,35

The Don Martin - Jeff Smelser - Mark J. Ward Discussion on

I Corinthians 14:34,35

Ward's 8th

The following is brother Mark J. Ward's next in the exchange on the proper meaning and application of I Corinthians 14:34,35 for folks today.

Subject: Re: I Corinthians 14:34,35
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 22:48:50 -0400
From: "Mark J. Ward" <markjward@darientel.net>
To: mars-list@mtsu.edu, dmartin5@concentric.net, jeffsmelser@ntgreek.net, markjward@darientel.net

Mark J. Ward here to Don Martin, Jeff Smelser and the listers:

(post one of three)

At this particular point in our study, brother Don Martin has still not indicated whether or not he believes ~all the situations posed~ in my Question One are "right" or "wrong". We continue to hope and pray he will answer my question one, so we can know his answers and continue in this good discussion. Also, brother Don has indicated that he might not continue the discussion at this time. We hope he will reconsider and proceed as planned. Nevertheless, we have enjoyed the discussion so far and believe that much good has been done to date. I consider brother Don and Jeff to be my friends and good brethren in the Lord, even tho' we all may disagree on some passages of scripture. Thus, the need for continued study, not discontinued.

Don wrote:
Mark, you evidently did not like the way I answered your question one. Here is the problem: You have presented me with a tangled, arbitrarily interspersed, and ill-matched assortment of matters. I know you do not see this in this manner, but I do. Therefore, I cannot simply answer "yes" or "no" to a lot of your ideas.

I have said over and over that I do not believe "keep silence in the churches" in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35 is a simple and general matter of prohibiting women, including the prophetess of chapter eleven, from making a sound. Hence, it is difficult for me to answer questions emanating from your concept of what is happening in the study passage.

Mark here:
Don, all I wanted you to do (and still desire for you to do) is answer whether or not you believe the parts A-L of my Question One are situations that are RIGHT or are WRONG from the Word of God, NOT even necessarily from I Cor. 14:34,35. I clearly pointed that out in the upper portion of the info provided. Whether or not you believe I Cor. 14:34,35 applies to each situation is relevant, but whether you believe the scenarios are RIGHT or WRONG is the essence of the question. I know its not that difficult! Won't you please answer? Thanks.

In his last post, brother Don seems to be wondering if we have lost the ability to "reason" with each other. I think not. We have been "reasoning together" (i.e. come let us reason together) even tho' we are "apart" from the beginning of our discussion. Maybe Don needs time to reconsider the argumentation posed in this discussion. After all, I have only asked my Question One, we still disagree on the subject, and are just beginning to explore and surface "just why" we disagree and "wherein" we disagree. If brethren would lovingly take this approach on ALL matters of disagreement, we would be a lot closer to agreement. Getting to the root of disagreement sometimes involves work, and taking some time to figure out the counter arguments against one's position. For, as brother Don admits, he is not even following some of the argumentation at this time. Let's continue, in efforts to do much good, and no harm. If not, let's not forget to reflect upon the material presented thus far.

REFLECTION - OVERVIEW
Don and I disagree on much of the proper application of three passages of scripture: I Cor. 11:1-16; I Cor. 14:34,35 and I Tim. 2:1-12. While there are areas of agreement, the significant areas of disagreement are:

- Don believes that I Cor. 11:1-16's instruction is for prophets and prophetesses ONLY and that "every man" that would pray could have his head COVERED and "every woman" that would pray could have their head UNCOVERED with God's blessings (except for these prophets/prophetesses and only while they were LEADING and only while they were in the presence of a member the opposite sex who had a like gift). Don also assumes that the reason the covering was to be worn by these prophetesses is due to the meaning of the headdress in the locale of Corinth (what the aliens' custom of the day was). I contend that the passage teaches that every man is to be uncovered and every woman is to be covered at times of praying and that Paul did not base arguments on why this is the case on the local custom of the day. In fact, we have proven (and Don has agreed) that there were Jews AND Gentiles/Greeks who made up the church at Corinth and we don't know "just what" the custom of the day really was!
- Don believes I Cor. 14:34,35 is limited instruction, specific to prophets' wives only, whom he assumes were asking questions in an unbecoming manner in the assembly of the local church. I contend the Bible is teaching ~all women are not to speak or ask questions~, even in a becoming manner, in the assembly of the local church in these verses.
- Don believes I Tim. 2:1-12 is instruction that is specific to the assembly. While Don hedges on this a bit, in my estimation, for he makes some general application, he argues assembly only applications, in the main. I believe Don errs in this regard and that the passage is instruction for all men and all women anywhere and anytime…AND that the passage includes secular as well as spiritual applications (which would prohibit a woman from exercising dominion over man in the secular arena: job and teaching functions included).

Further, as noted in my last post, brother Don has not rebutted the following argumentation which counters his assumptions and assertions…namely:

- UNinspired women are not "inferior", and they have to be silent in the church...why would prophetesses be "inferior" if God instructs them to be silent in the church? (NOTE: Some UNinspired women know LOTS MORE than some men about scripture, yet God prohibits women from speaking in the assembly of the local church, but such does NOT make them inferior, Don argues it does (with regards to the prophetesses, tho he hasn't written that (does Don believe that uninspired women are "inferior" to uninspired men??? For his ~argument~ on inspired men vice inspired women would indicate such IF he is consistent and applies that same "logic??" to them!!!) about uninspired women! Please deal with this argument).

- INSPIRED MEN, like prophets and tongue speakers, had to hold their peace and be silent (at times God designated) and such did NOT make them "inferior", so what's the point that Don is trying to make (such is not valid reasoning) with the "inferior" line of argumentation Don advances?

- Don has ~assumed~ much in this discussion, namely: that the women of I Cor. 14:34,35 (to whom Paul is referring) are: (1st assumption) wives only, (2nd assumption) wives of PROPHETS ONLY, (3rd assumption) who were asking questions IN AN INSUBORDINATE AND DISORDERLY FASHION. Where is the proof of these assumptions?

- JUST LIKE "Eat at home" does NOT exclude the restaurant eating away from the local church assembly...."ask husbands at home" does not preclude women who are not married from asking men questions away from the assembly. Don doesn't deal with this part of the argumentation, unless I missed it. Please deal with this Don. Thanks.

- Prophets were to be silent when something would be revealed" to another prophet in the same assembly, yet Don argues as if the prophets knew everything! IF so, WHY would they have to hold ~their peace~ (if they knew it already???) I think the BIBLE answers this matter for when ~something~ was revealed to another prophet (the first would have to stop, hold his peace and listen to the REVELATION given to the OTHER PROPHET) would have a great bearing on this <G>! Don argues as tho such is absurd. But I read of it happening, in the NT.

(please see post two of three)

In Christian Love,
Mark J. Ward
The Religious Instructor
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/
The Golden Isles church of Christ
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/church
(from MARS-List Digest 4067, April 6, 2003)

Subject: Re: I Corinthians 14:34,35
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 22:50:38 -0400
From: "Mark J. Ward" <markjward@darientel.net>
To: mars-list@mtsu.edu, dmartin5@concentric.net, jeffsmelser@ntgreek.net, markjward@darientel.net

Mark J. Ward to Don Martin, Jeff Smelser and the list:

(post two of three)

Don has not answered my (second attempt at asking him) Question One as to whether he believes the scenarios I presented in A-L were ~right~ or ~wrong~ (except for J & K, see below). Don has a little to say about not understanding my reasoning, which further discussion and posts would certainly not hinder, but would help. Time and digestion, rather than posting too quickly, brother Don, would also help, in my estimation. Clarification of our beliefs and studying together is great. I fear that Don is growing weary of this discussion. I appreciate so much the time and efforts thus far and believe that much good is being done in the presentation of at least two points of view that cannot both be right. God is pleased with our efforts to contend for truth in the proper spirits. I hope Don will not cease this discussion as I have at least 4 more questions to ask of him <g>.

++++++++++++++++
I failed to insert an intended portion of my answer to the G part of my QUESTION ONE, and I will attempt to correct that now (please read below). Jeff, instead of "K" in some of your answers wherein you ask us to look at a previous answer you gave…which "letter" did you mean to type? THANKS. That will help, as well.

Mark here, I should have added the I Tim. 2:11,12 info to answering part G:
I Timothy 2:11,12 teaches that women are not allowed to usurp authority or exercise dominion over men anywhere at anytime. I Tim. 2 prevents women from being insubordinate, but not from merely asking questions in keeping with their God-assigned roles. I Tim. 2 can apply, then, to the assembly, to the simultaneous Bible class arrangement of the church, to Bible classes conducted in the home and elsewhere, and to non-Bible/non-religious settings.

NOTE: I Tim. 2:11,12 is a great passage and must be properly applied in all settings; this passage does NOT prohibit women from asking questions in the assembly ~per se~, it is I Cor. 14:34,35 that does not allow them "to speak" that prohibits them from asking questions. Now, it is always wrong, per I Tim 2 and other passages, for women to be disorderly, insubordinate and out of order! That is NOT what is under consideration in all of the parts to my Question ONE. NOTE FURTHER: I Tim. 2:11,12 is NOT being violated, for example, when women ask questions in "an assembly" like the simultaneous Bible class arrangement of the church. But IF the whole church be come together into one place (THE assembly of the church), like I Cor. 14 is referring to, even if you call it "Bible class", women are not to speak per 14:35b. Consider: as the proper application that would be drawn from I Tim. 2:11,12 for the church arrangement of a simultaneous Bible class wherein women ~CAN ask questions of the male teacher~ (which is NOT THE ASSEMBLY OF THE CHURCH), the "at home" setting is another place that is also NOT THE ASSEMBLY OF THE CHURCH, and I Tim. 2:11,12 applies there, as well. In other words, women are not wrong in asking questions OUTSIDE the assembly of the local church (all else concerning their deportment being in order).

End of Mark's "I Tim. 2:11-12 G portion" answer
+++++++++++++++
Please note that brother Don needs to re-think his argumentation line concerning "an assembly" and I Tim. 2 and women not being able to ask a question in "an assembly" (his reference to ~learn in silence~) that is religious in nature, since he allows women to ask questions in an orderly fashion in the simultaneous Bible class arrangement in which he/Don teaches (which is ~AN assembly~! But not "the assembly", that is, THE WHOLE CHURCH COME TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE). According to Don's use of the term "an assembly" in his previous writing, the Bible class at church services actually fits this descriptor (thus my challenge on ~equivocation~ on his part stands unanswered to date) and Don agrees women can ask questions in an orderly manner in such an environment (they don't always do so <G>, but they can)!!! Just because Don doesn't like questions being asked when ~he~ preaches when the whole church is come together into one place OR he believes there is a BETTER WAY to handle questions, does NOT necessarily mean that such is "disruptive" in all cases…for in the first century it is UNAVOIDABLE TO CONCLUDE that one prophet would HAVE TO let another prophet know (thru some means of asking a question or raising his hand or something) in order for the first prophet to yield and hold his peace! And such was GOD'S WAY of doing things in those assemblies and were NOT necessarily disruptive! (They could have been, but not if done like GOD wanted them to be). Don has no argument on this particular part of the discussion either.

I highly recommend in-depth studies of the following issues that will help bring unity of belief on this issue about, in my estimation: the located preachers issue, women teachers of women and other children in church arranged Bible classes, women preachers, prophetesses, spiritual gifts, Bible classes conducted by the local church vs. no-class argumentation, specific and generic authority, and God's role for women in the New Testament. Such in-depth studies should yield the fruit of proper interpretation and application of I Cor. 14:34,35 and I Tim. 2:11,12 in their respective settings.

Please note another unanswered issue by Don worthy of note that is contained below within the astericks.
*****++
ILLEGAL SUBSTITUION
Don accused me (again) of not noting the context and "to whom" the writer was speaking. Don knows so much about the Greek he should be ashamed that he keeps SUBSTITUTING "prophetess" for "woman" in I Cor. 11 ("every woman" is "every prophetess" to Don) and he seems to be SUBSTITUTING "prophets' wives" for "women/woman" in I Cor. 14: 34,35 (for it is a shame for "women" to speak in church is "prophets' wives only", to Don, in vs 35b).
******++
Don has failed to provide us his understanding of whether the scenarios I gave in A-L of my Question One were right or wrong after my asking this of him twice. Jeff and I happen to be in agreement, imagine that <g>, on the answers to ALL the ~my question one scenarios~ (though we might not be in perfect agreement in all areas of application at this point in our respective understandings on I Cor. 11, 14 and I Tim. 2, we are certainly close). I hope Don will answer in his next post, whether he believes the A-L parts of Question One are "right", OR "wrong", OR "that he does not yet have a studied conviction on the answer to that particular scenario". While I ~am interested~ in Don's good, better, best approach to things [i.e. his ~I believe there is a better way to handle questions~ approach(es)], I am MORE INTERESTED AND SPECIFICALLY ASKED Don to give an answer for whether he believed each situation presented was RIGHT or WRONG. Brother Don, this would help facilitate the discussion since I am waiting to know what you believe on those scenarios to proceed with this discussion. I cannot imagine that you don't have a position on all that was asked. Thanks.

(see post three of three)

In Christian Love,
Mark J. Ward
The Religious Instructor
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/
The Golden Isles church of Christ
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/church
(from MARS-List Digest 4067, April 6, 2003)

Subject: Re: I Corinthians 14:34,35
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 22:52:59 -0400
From: "Mark J. Ward" <markjward@darientel.net>
To: mars-list@mtsu.edu, dmartin5@concentric.net, jeffsmelser@ntgreek.net, markjward@darientel.net

Mark J. Ward to Don Martin, Jeff Smelser and the list

(post three)
Here are Don's answers to A-L of my Question One, so far, and please note that we STILL don't know whether Don believes each situation is right or wrong (except for J & K wherein he says those are "right". If Don would only answer the other parts to this question, we could proceed to respond to his answer <g>. Such has nothing to do with our coming to a point wherein we can no longer reason together. It's a simple matter of answering the scenarios given (right or wrong). We hope brother Don will respond.

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1A:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. No, I do not believe such is in Paul's mind or included in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1B:
Answer: Ibid. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1C:
Answer: Ibid. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Second answer given to 1C:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. No, I do not believe such is in Paul's mind or included in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35.

Mark, I think strictly in terms of placement and contextual meaning. Hence, I cannot imagine a prophetess having to ask a religious question of her "uninspired husband" who is not even a Christian. You do not have this problem in view of your understanding of a prophetess. Moreover, I really cannot imagine a woman asking a question in the religious assembly without it being disruptive. I have had several people try to ask me a question while I was preaching and it was disruptive. In one case, the woman was also insubordinate. The Bible classes and "formal worship" services with which I am familiar have a different structure and format. The Bible classes that I teach lend themselves to questions without confusion; the service in which the Lord's Supper is observed does not. Therefore, my mind will not work as does your mind in these matters. (from Mars-List Digest 4055, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1D:
Answer: I do not believe I Corinthians 14: 33-40 is addressing this event, as such (such assumes a question could have been asked in the assembly in a way that was not disruptive). As I believe there were and are better ways of dealing with questions, I would not encourage such a practice today, even as you have qualified it. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1E:
Answer: As I believe there are better ways of dealing with questions, I would not encourage such a practice, even as you have qualified it. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1F:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1G:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. No, I do not believe such is in Paul's mind or included in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1H:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. No, I do not believe such is in Paul's mind or included in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1I:
Answer: Such a question reflects Mark's continued misunderstanding of the Bible prophetess. No, I do not believe such is in Paul's mind or included in I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's answer to Mark's 1J:
First answer given: Mark, I do not understand any relevance between this question and I
Corinthians 14: 34, 35. No scripture condemns such. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

Don's Second answer given:
Answer: Mark, I do not understand any relevance between this question and I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. No scripture condemns such. (from Mars-List Digest 4055, April 1, 2003)

MARK'S NOTE INSERTED HERE: DON SAYS THIS SCENARIO IS "RIGHT" for the woman asked about to engage in. Don really DID answer THIS PART, CREDIT FOR ANSWERING "J" part and the "K" part that follows, but see above and below his responses to parts J & K wherein he DID NOT answer "right" or "wrong" on those parts. Thanks. What say ye, good brother Don? (back to Don's answer to my part K of Question One):

Don's answer to Mark's 1K:
Answer: Mark, I do not understand any relevance between this question and I Corinthians 14: 34, 35. No scripture condemns such. (from MARS-List Digest 4054, April 1, 2003)

MARK'S NOTE INSERTED HERE: DON SAYS THIS ONE IS "RIGHT". Don really DID answer THIS PART, CREDIT FOR ANSWERING "J" part (above) and the "K" part here, but see above and below his responses to parts J & K wherein he DID NOT answer "right" or "wrong" on those parts. What say ye, good brother Don? (back to Don's non-answers to my remaining parts of Question One):

Don's non-answer to Mark's 1L:
No answer given (yet, unless I missed it, and this one is about "prophets' wives" particularly <g>) concerning whether or not "prophets' wives" could ask a question (in the proper spirit) away from the assembly of the church of another man (one not their husband) or a woman who might be more knowledgeable than they.

End of Don's non-answers (and answers to J & K) to the various parts of Mark's Question One.

Mark here:
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY EXCLUDES…
Please note that when we have ONE SCENARIO among several possibles, like in I Cor. 11 on the Lord's Supper (if any is hungry, let him eat at home) which DOES NOT EXCLUDE other scenarios (like eat at a restaurant OR over at someone else's house) that we must not be dealing with specific/exclusively binding authority. SUCH IS ALSO THE CASE in I Cor. 14 "let them ask their husbands at home"…such DOES NOT EXCLUDE a women (even an unmarried woman) from asking someone a question… so long as such was AWAY FROM THE ASSEMBLY OF THE LOCAL CHURCH. See the point? Further, such instruction being given to not speak in the assembly of the local church is NOT LIMITED to "prophets' wives only", or even to "wives only", but rather to "women", ~all~ women (for it is not permitted unto them to speak…for it is a shame for women to speak in the church).

In this part of our discussion, brother Don has asked us to believe some assumptions. We will note them now:

DON'S ASSUMPTIONS ON I CORINTHIANS 14:34,35
- That the instruction was/is for "wives ONLY"??? and not only that, but…
- That the instruction does/did NOT APPLY to prophetesses, even tho' they are "women"??? and not only that, but…
- That the instruction was/is for "prophets' wives ONLY"??? and not only that, but…
- That the instruction was/is ONLY dealing with the matter of disruptive, disorderly and/or insubordinate asking of question by these ~specific women~??? and not only that, but…
- That the instruction ~was/is applicable~ to "prophetesses", ~in a general way~, IF and only IF??? they would be disorderly, disruptive, and/or ~insubordinate~ <g> in their asking/speaking/preaching??? in the assembly of the local church??? <G>

Don has not proven his main premise…that the instruction is LIMITED to a "special class of women". Don's argumentation thus utterly fails, in my estimation, and does not warrant us holding hands with him in agreement on his particular teaching in the matter. The passage teaches (I Cor. 14:33-35):

"33for God is not [a God] of confusion, but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, 34let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. 35And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church." (ASV 1901)
http://www.ccel.org/bible/asv/1_Corinthians.htm

"33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
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." (KJV)
http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/kjv/1_Corinthians/14.html

The "b" part of I Corinthians 14:35 clearly teaches that it is incorrect/forbidden for women to speak when the whole church is come together into one place. Such is NOT LIMITED to "prophets' wives only", but would include them, for sure. Such is NOT LIMITED to disruptive behavior, but would include such activity as being wrong, for sure. Such is NOT LIMITED to insubordination instances by women in the assembly, but would include prohibiting such for sure. And, there is no passage in the New Testament which would indicate the "prophetesses" get an exemption from this instruction.

Brother Jeff and I DISagree on the particulars of "the covering(s) of I Cor. 11:1-16" (and I have a great respect and appreciation for his studies and love for truth on all subjects of the Bible) and yet WE AGREE on particulars concerning women not speaking when the whole church is come together into one place and the application of I Cor. 14:34,35!!! How about that! Brother Don asserts much about both passages and makes a big to do about how Mark has to do this or has to do that to believe thus and so about I Cor. 11 with the prophetesses, when brother Jeff and I don't even agree on that passage and yet Jeff understands what I contend is God's truth on I Cor. 14:34,35 concerning all women (including prophetesses) not speaking in the assembly!!! Down goes another assertion by brother Don!

I have enjoyed this discussion. I appreciate and love brethren Don Martin and Jeff Smelser for many things in the kingdom of God's dear Son. I believe we should all have our convictions and beliefs (and supporting argumentation) tested to the fullest. We should all want the truth, and teach the truth, know how to reason and discern the truth and learn how to better articulate such. This has been a wonderful spiritual exercise and I commend it to everyone. God is certainly pleased when brethren who disagree try to reach agreement and in the process point to weaknesses and flaws in positions taken they believe to be incorrect. I solicit the prayers of Don and Jeff and those of the readership. Also, we should never make a false or unsound argument, even in support of truth. May we continue to reason together and strive with love to reach agreement. Thanks for reading and God bless. (We hope that if Don cannot continue, that he will let the list know and maybe we can pick this study up in the future, Lord willing. I still wanted to ask about "inspired prayer" since we are now in the chapter 14 part of our agreed upon discussion).

In Christian Love,
Mark J. Ward
The Religious Instructor
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/
The Golden Isles church of Christ
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/church

(from MARS-List Digest 4067, April 6, 2003)

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE NEXT ARTICLE

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO THE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS STUDY

[Editor’s Note: This is one of the most in-depth, comprehensive studies between brethren on the issue of whether the women in the "b" part of verse 35 of I Corinthians 14:34,35 is "all women", including women today, or whether those women were only the "prophets' wives". We hope all readers will continue to study all Bible topics with open minds, willing to conform to God's Truth. Thanks for reading! - Mark J. Ward markjward@yahoo.com ]

Email the Editor at markjward@yahoo.com