Worship—An Inductive Word Study

This is a long study. To download the Word document, just click here. The formatting is much better than our website supports.—Lucas

 We are searching for the truth of the word and meaning of what Jesus said in:

Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.  "You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.  "But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.  "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."  (John 4:21-24)

The word that is translated as “worship” in this passage is the Greek word “proskuneo.” With what Jesus said in mind, let’s review every instance of the word “proskuneo/worship” being used in the New Testament. Ready? Let’s go.

A Look at Worship in Matthew
Matthew 2:2,8,11
Magi and the birth of Jesus.

Mat 2:1 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying,  "Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him."  When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.  Gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. 

They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea; for this is what has been written by the prophet: 
'AND YOU, BETHLEHEM, LAND OF JUDAH, ARE BY NO MEANS LEAST AMONG THELEADERS OF JUDAH; FOR OUT OF YOU SHALL COME FORTH A RULER WHO WILL SHEPHERD MYPEOPLE ISRAEL.'" 

Then Herod secretly called the magi and determined from them the exact time the star appeared.  And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him."  After hearing the king, they went their way; and the star, which they had seen in the east, went on before them until it came and stood over the place where the Child was.  When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 

Mat 2:11 After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Then, opening their treasures, they presented to Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 

****Until we come to verse 11 do we see worship in an action. The magi fell to the ground and worshipped Him.

Matthew 4:9,10
Satan tempts Jesus in the desert.

Mat 4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He then became hungry. And the tempter came and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread." But He answered and said,

"It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ONBREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.'" 

Then the devil *took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, 'HE WILL COMMAND HIS ANGELS CONCERNING YOU'; and 'ON THEIR HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP, SO THAT YOU WILL NOT STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST ASTONE.'" 

Jesus said to him, "On the other hand, it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'" 

Again, the devil *took Him to a very high mountain and *showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; Mat 4:9 and he said to Him, "All these things I will give You, if You fall down and worship me." 

Mat 4:10 Then Jesus *said to him, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'" 

Then the devil *left Him; and behold, angels came and began to minister to Him.”

****Satan wants Jesus to make a trade and it includes worship by Jesus of Satan. The action given is the falling down and worship of Satan.

Matthew 8:2

Jesus and the leper, plus a definition translation.
And a leper came to Him and bowed down before Him, and said, "Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean

**** Here, the translators made a definition translation. They did not use the word “worship” but rather its literal meaning, “bowed down.” They could have easily translated it, "And the leper came to Him and worshipped before Him."



Matthew 9:18
While He was saying these things to them, a synagogue official came and bowed down before Him, and said, "My daughter has just died; but come and lay Your hand on her, and she will live."

**** The translators did the same thing in this passage. They used the definition of the word proskuneo instead of the English word, worship.

Matthew 14:33
And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, "You are certainly God's Son!"

**** Here, the translators used the word worship. There is no action given in this passage as to how they worshipped.

Matthew 15:25
But she came and began to bow down before Him, saying, "Lord, help me!"

**** The translators used the definition.



Matthew 18:26
"So the slave fell to the ground and prostrated himself before him, saying, 'Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.'

**** This passage expands the definition by using, "prostrated himself before him" for the word proskuneo.

Matthew 20:20
Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus with her sons, bowing down and making a request of Him.

**** Again, the definition of the word is used.

Matthew 28:9
And behold, Jesus met them and greeted * them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him.

**** We have a bit more of a view as to what worship entails. The worship is so low that one can grasp the feet of the Lord.



Matthew 28:17
When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful.

**** Here, there is no action given.


Summary of Worship in Matthew:

Of the 13 verses in Matthew, the word proskuneo shows the following:

-5 times, no description of action
-8 times, falling down, bowing, prostration, grasping of feet

****As we continue our study into the other 25 verses from Mark to Jude, we will see the very same information. There is no deviation from what we see in Matthew's use of the word proskuneo.  It should be noted that nowhere are any of the 5 acts commonly called worship in the texts associated with proskuneo.  However, some form of prostrated submission is very commonly associated with proskuneo. This reminds me of James 4:4-10, which brings up an important spiritual point about submission and humility, saying,

James 4:4-10
Jas 4:4 You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.  Or do you think that the Scripture speaks to no purpose: "He jealously desires the Spirit which He has made to dwell in us"? But He gives a greater grace. Therefore it says, "GOD IS OPPOSEDTO THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE." 

Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.  Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded.  Be miserable and mourn and weep; let your laughter be turned into mourning and your joy to gloom.  Humble yourselves in the presence of the Lord, and He will exalt you. 

Until we are humble before him, we are not a worshipper. Worship is not a group activity until we get to Revelation—but we’ll get there in due time.

 

A Look at Worship in Mark
Mark 5:6
Seeing Jesus from a distance, he ran up and bowed down before Him;

Mark 15:19
They kept beating His head with a reed, and spitting on Him, and kneeling and bowing before Him.

 
****Mark's two usages uses the definition form of proskuneo.

  

Summary of Worship in Mark:
-2 times, bowing down




A Look at Worship in Luke
Luke 4:7

"Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours."

Luke 4:8

Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'"

Luke 24:52

And they, after worshiping Him, returned to Jerusalem with great joy,

Summary of Worship in Luke:
-3 times, no definitive action, but “before me” is mentioned.


A Look at Worship in John

John 4:20

"Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship."

John 4:21

Jesus *said to her, "Woman, believe Me,an hour is coming when neither inthis mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.

John 4:22

"You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.”

John 4:23

"But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.”

John 4:24

"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

John 9:38

And he said, "Lord, I believe." And he worshiped Him.

John 12:20

Now there were some Greeks among those who were going up to worship at the feast;

Summary of Worship in John:
-7 times, translators used the word worship with no action given to it.

A Look at Worship in Acts
Acts 7:43

'YOU ALSO TOOK ALONG THE TABERNACLE OF MOLOCH AND THE STAR OFTHE GOD ROMPHA , THE IMAGES WHICH YOU MADE TO WORSHIP.I ALSO WILL REMOVE YOU BEYOND BABYLON.'

Acts 8:27

So he got up and went; and there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure; and he had come to Jerusalem to worship,

Acts 10:25

When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him.

Acts 24:11

since you can take note of the fact that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship.

 
Summary of Worship in Acts:
-3 times, no action given
-1 time, the action is described along with, “fell at his feet and worshiped,” some sort of bowing

 A Look at Worship in 1 Corinthians

**** Paul used the word one time in 1 Corinthians, and it is one of my favorites when discussing this topic. It is the only one that shows worship at an assembly. What is interesting is that the group of Christians are not worshipping. It is the unbeliever who comes to a point of worship in his life. This worshipper is shown to be doing proskuneo by its definition.

1 Corinthians 14:25
the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.

 
Summary of Worship in 1 Corinthians:
-1 time, the action is described along with, “falling on one’s face.”

A Look at Worship in Hebrews
****To round out the final two passages before we get to Revelation, the book of Hebrews uses the word twice. Once there is no description of action given,  and the other gives us the only divergence from the definition.

 I believe that this divergence is due to Jacob’s age, which made it impossible to bend his physical body into a fully bowed down/prostrated position. He was about to die, and this was the best he could do.

Hebrews 1:6
And when He again brings the first born into the world, He says, "AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP”

Hebrews 11:21
By faith Jacob, as he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff.

Summary of Worship in Hebrews: 
-1 time, no action given.

-1 time, “leaning on top of staff” in the infirmity of old age

 



Summary of Worship from Matthew to Jude: 

-19 times, No description of action
-13 times, falling down, bowing, prostration, grasping the feet, leaning on a staff

A Look at Worship in Revelation

**** Revelation contains much of the same information, but it is less definitive in meaning, as the book is one of symbols and visions, and even starts out saying that it “signifies” things. Much of the imagery—such as physical harps being handed out, a massive dragon, and 144,000 saved—is indeed symbolic. For that reason, it is more difficult to use when discerning the meaning of “worship.” Still, we’ll take a look, because it’s packed with proskuneo. Ready? Here we go.

Revelation 3:9

'Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie --I will make them come and bow down at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you.’

Revelation 4:10

the twenty-four * elders will fall down before Him who sits on the throne, and will worship Him who lives forever and ever and will cast their crowns before the throne, saying,

Revelation 5:14

And the four living creatures kept saying, "Amen. "And the elders fell down and worshiped.”

Revelation 7:11

And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God,

Revelation 9:20

The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold and of silver and of brass and of stone and of wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk;

Revelation 11:1

Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, "Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it.

Revelation 11:16

And the twenty-four * elders, who sit on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God,

Revelation 13:4

they worshiped the dragon because he gave his authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, "Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?"

Revelation 13:8

All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.

Revelation 13:12

He exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence. And he makes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose fatal wound was healed.

Revelation 13:15

And it was given to him to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast would even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed.

Revelation 14:7

And he said with a loud voice, "Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters."

Revelation 14:9

Then another angel, a third one followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand,

Revelation 14:11

"And the smoke of their torment goes up forever andever they have no restday and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever *receives the mark of his name."

Revelation 15:4

"Who will not fear, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy; For ALL THE NATIONS WILL COME AND WORSHIP BEFORE FOR YOUR RIGHTEOUS ACTS HAVE BEEN REVEALED."

Revelation 16:2

So the first angel went and poured out his bowl on the earth; and it became a loathsome and malignant sore onthe people who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped his image.

Revelation 19:4

And the twenty-four * elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who sits on the throne saying, "Amen. Hallelujah!"

Revelation 19:10

Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he *said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

Revelation 19:20

And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark ofthe beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.

Revelation 20:4

Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ fora thousand years.

Revelation 22:8

I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things

Revelation 22:9

But he *said to me, "Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.

 
Summary of Worship from Matthew through Revelation:
Combining all 60 references from Matthew to Revelation we have this:

9 times- worship of the dragon and the image of the dragon.

1 time- worship of demons with no action given to describe that worship

1 time- liars bowing down to the saints

24 times- no description of action

19 times- falling down, bowing, prostration, grasping the feet, leaning on a staff, falling down AND proclaiming “Amen, Hallelujah!”

My Thoughts:

As Christians, it is important that we let God define words the way that He wishes them to be defined. “Proskuneo” seems to always be some form of bowing down, prostration, or submission. Bowing is a sign of submission across many cultures and continents, from Japan to Saudi Arabia. Jesus said that this submission/prostration would occur in a location—spirit.

As Christians who are baptized into Christ and receive the gift and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, when are we not in Spirit? When should we not be in submission?

Notably, there is no such thing as a “worship service” ever listed in the New Testament. In 1 Corinthians 11, the Corinthians were rebuked, and it says in verse 20, “Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper.” They were rebuked for not doing what they were supposed to, and what they were supposed to be doing was assembling to take the Lord’s Supper—yet nothing is said about worshiping.  In the Bible, there is no denotation of “five acts of worship,” or even anything like that. People were never even said to be “going to worship,” “assembling to worship,” or having a “worship service.”

So what does calling our assembly “worship” do? Look at most congregations. They have a “Bible class” at 10AM and “worship” at 11. Because we use the word “worship” in a way that God does not, we put an emphasis on one hour of the week. It becomes a rote ritual to please God. Suddenly only 20% of the people show up for Bible class—because it’s just not that important. Shouldn’t we call it assembling? Isn’t the time where we study the Bible, as the Bereans did, noble and edifying? With one simple twisted word, Satan has changed the entire purpose of our assembly.

It would seem to me that we assemble to instruct one another through various means, including Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph, Col), and that we take the Lord’s Supper in remembrance and proclamation of all that He is, including His death.  It is safe to say that our assembling is “for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ.” (Eph 5:12)

Hebrews 10:24-25 really sums it up, saying, “And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to assemble together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.”

For more of my thoughts on this subject, please see the following resources:

A podcast/sermon on “Looking for Worship in All the Wrong Places” http://bit.ly/1R6D6Ad
The visual aid to go along with the podcast—you’ll need it: http://bit.ly/1MODCUP

More notes on worship, plus a look at service: https://www.facebook.com/notes/lucas-necessary/what-is-worship-what-is-service/602241239871046

What is righteousness?

Elli Poysti, a very spunky cowgirl-turned-city-slicker, asked me, "What does being righteous mean? What does righteousness look like?" Those are really great questions. I'm hoping that Mike and Nettie Clouse and the rest of our study group get some good answers. It should make for an awesome study. 

As much as I'd like to say that God gives a couple of bullet-points on this topic, reading His word shows that God says a TON on righteousness, so it's important to know what it means. For example, He says, "And the work of righteousness will be peace, and the result of righteousness, quietness and confidence forever." (Isaiah 32:17) He also compares being good with being righteous, notes that there was righteousness in the Law, but a type which did not give life, that we must ourselves have "righteousness which exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees," or we won't have eternal life, and points out that faith is inextricably intertwined, and thus partially defined, by righteousness. 

Anyway, some things to consider. Afterward, answer the questions originally asked based off these passages.  

1—The Greek word "dikaiosune" means ""the character or quality of being right or just;" it was formerly spelled "rightwiseness," which clearly expresses the meaning." The root word, "dikaios," means to be "just," as in justice. Righteousness, applied to us, means, " right action."(Vines Theological Dictionary of Greek: http://www.menfak.no/bibelprog/vines?word=%AFt0002409)

2—Righteousness is an aspect of being saved: "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator" (I Peter 4:17-19). 

3—Righteousness is a part of our decision-making as Christians. ""Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." (Jn 7:24)

4—Righteousness can be of the wrong variety, such as the Jews who: "have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God" (Romans 10:2-3).

5—Righteousness is critical to salvation: ""For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

6—Righteousness is faith, "For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS."

——>And this faith is borne out by actions. "By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed [i]by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going.  By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise;  for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God." (Heb 11)

7—Righteousness doesn't necessarily mean "goodness." "For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. (Rom 5:6-7)

8—Righteousness in the Law (which we are no longer under) could be a harsh mistress. Paul said of himself, "as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless." (Phil 3:6)

9—Rightousness and justification/salvation are not the domain of the "undeniably perfect," "religious leaders," etc., and may come from surprising places. However, rightousness lives in action, and grows from a desire to love and live like Christ, and to please God.  Check out this little stunner: "In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction?" (James 2:25)

TLDR: Righteousness is following Christ, which makes sense, as He said, "“If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15). It is demonstrated in our lives, and we exhibit it because of God, and the working of belief in us. Ultimately, it is an expression of our character, and is notable for making us appear more like Christ, and less like the world. It can be of a type that does us no good: self-righteousness, or righteousness based off our own thoughts (ignorance) and not God's.  

Righteousness, however, is not merely making the right actions. It is not merely justice. It is tied up in our character and our motives. 

Here is one thing I studied a while back, though, about being GOOD and exceeding being merely righteous.  https://www.facebook.com/notes/lucas-necessary/son-of-encouragement/720620628033106

Can a woman speak "in church?" Must they be silent?

Can women talk AT ALL “in church?” I've had a lot of people asking me questions about whether or not women can speak "in church." Inevitably, they say, "Well the law said that we couldn't, and Paul reiterates it."

Now before you start on this, please understand that you really MUST do your own research and not just trust me or any other teacher. Furthermore, even just on 1 Cor 14, there are a multitude of different opinions, such as:

—It applies only to spiritual gifts.
—It applies only to wives.
—It applies to no women and is a part of a dialog, and is refuted.
—It applies to all women—they must be silent.
—It applies only in a “worship service.”
—It is an interpolation and does not belong.
—It is not an interpolation, but historically has two displaced verses which, when seen as they originally were, change the meaning.
—It applies only to the Corinthian congregation and is the result of the Artemesian priestess influence.
—Etc.

I am not going to review all of those points of view, though in my own study, and with other, more seasoned Christians, I have done so.   The object of my study is to find the point of view which most closely aligns the sum of the Word, so that the fewest errors exist. Since I am throwing this out there, this, in my opinion, is one of the most solid takes on it all around, although a couple of others are somewhat decent, and there are a bunch which seem tantalizingly true, but which are a façade supported by a misapplication of scripture.





--------------[MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT]--------------

This deserves a little deeper look, and if you do, you'll see that neither the law NOR Paul said that. Paul, in fact, was responding to things the Corinthians were saying, and his response to the "women shut it" bit was a big ol' (paraphrased), "What!?! Do you have some special knowledge (you don't), because you're saying this for the first time?"

When Paul quotes the Law, he actually quotes it. I have made a picture using the Modern Literal Version (which is the most accurate version I can find) to show various passages in Corinthians. Please notice that after quoting the Law, there's always an actual quote...but NOTHING is quoted for women not speaking in the assembly, because that's a man-made thing, and not from God. 

Indeed, after Paul wrote that one line about women not speaking, he rhetorically responded (to the Corinthians, who had apparently told him that) with a, "WHAT? Was it from YOU that the word of God went forth? Or did it arrive to you only?" Basically, Paul said, "Seriously? Where'd you get that from, because it's news to me and God!"

The Law never said it, and God didn't, either. While He has specified leadership positions for men, and for ladies (and actually, everyone) to not be raucous, He never said that women flat-out couldn't speak in assembly.








--------------[A POINT-BY-POINT LOOK]--------------


Always good to research deeper. The picture below shows that when quotes are made from the Law, the source can be found. The "quote" about women not speaking has no corresponding reference, and in fact, Paul follows it up with a, "Whatcha talkin' 'bout, crazy?"



1.) The interesting thing is that, in the Greek, there are no punctuation marks to add the quotations. In fact, it's all UPPERCASELOOKINGCAPITALLETTERSWITHOUTPUNCTUATION. The translators themselves had to determine where to put the periods, question marks, and quotations. See the picture for an example. Because of this, some versions are translated with quotations in different spots than others. 



2.) The letter to Corinthians is partially in response to what the Corinthians themselves had said, and they were a somewhat dysfunctional lot. If we remove the man-made numbers for book-chapter-verse, it reads much more like a letter and a dialog. How do we know that he was responding to the Corinthians at all, and that maybe some of the letter is quotes from the Corinthians? Because he says in 1 Cor 7:1,

""Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.""

And in 1:11 he mentions that,

“For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you.”

So they were indeed writing him, telling him about the issues that they had as a congregation. 1 Cor 3 mentions the divisions within the assembly, and how immature they were, so Paul had to do some teaching.  And it had been ongoing, because he says in 5:9,

“I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people.” So this isn’t even really 1st Corinthians. It’s really at least 2nd, but it is the first which God preserved for us. Regardless, Paul was addressing and correcting some of the things that the Corinthians (not God) was saying. So we should be aware that Paul might be referencing some things which were from the Corinthians—a dialog.



3.) Where the quotation marks go can make a difference. As I mentioned previously, translators aren't always certain where quotations should be, because they aren't always sure who each quote can be attributed to.

Let's look at an example. 1 Cor 6:13 says, "Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body." (NASB) 

Or it says (NRSV): “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food,” and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

But I think it would be negligent to stop there. Let's look at another verse where quotation marks make a difference. This time, we will pull from the excellent Rotherham's translation to look at 1 Cor 6:12, which says:

"All things, unto me, are allowable, but, not all things, are profitable: all things, unto me, are allowable, but, I, will not be brought under authority by any."

The word there is "allowable," or "permissible." Now let's look at it with the point-counterpoint quotations added:

"“All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything." 

As I said, where quotations go makes a difference, and I think that is critical to understanding the issue of women speaking in the assembly.

4.) The rhetorical eta is used in 1 Cor 14:36. While some translations deceptively leave it out, it's important. What if the quotations should be like this in 1 Cor 14:

QUOTE FROM THE CORINTHIANS "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." UNQUOTE 

PAUL RESPONDS: "What? Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized."

That makes a difference, huh? As we saw before, a dialog was definitely being had, so could this be a part of it? Well, you can decide for yourself. However, before you decide, please understand that a very important Greek grammatical symbol is used between those chunks of text, and the most accurate translations preserve this important piece of information.

That symbol is the rhetorical eta. Used alone, it looks like this: h 




5.) The eta is important, and since the Greeks didn't use quotation marks, this is used as a heads-up in lieu of them. Paul uses this device many times in 1 Corinthians.

It is important here because it clearly shows a refutation of the previous passage. In fact, that is really what it's for, and Paul has a fondness for it throughout 1st Corinthians, seemingly because he had a lot to respond to. 

Since the Greeks did not have quotation marks, this device serves as a notice that Paul is responding to something that the Corinthians said—not him nor God. 

We can see this clearly in English, if we know what to look for. The verse states: (35) “If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."

(36) What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached?"

6.) With the rhetorical eta and the above evidence, it makes it seem that Paul was refuting the false notion that women are flat-out commanded to stay silent "in the congregations." This device, as mentioned before, shows incredulity and, often, disapproval for something being discussed. Consider its use in 1 Cor 16:

1 Cor. 6:15-20 "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? (Nonsense!) Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, 'The two will become one flesh.' But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit. Flee from fornication."

If we look at where Paul uses the eta, it is very often used to compare alternatives: one good, and one bad.



7.) Context is important, and that context is that there was some amount of chaos in the Corinthian church. In addressing the problems, Paul uses an argumental structure which resolves the dilemma in a reverse order. Here is a bullet-list on how I think he was addressing it; formally it's known as a chiastic pattern. (All verse numbers from 1 Cor 14; letter sets (A;A2) present arguments and also resolutions or other notes.)

--A) v26—All Christians may have a verbal contribution in assembly. 
--B) v27-28—Tongues – be silent [sigao] if there is no interpreter.
--C) v29-33—Prophesy – be silent [sigao] if another speaks.
--D) v33-35—33-35 Some Corinthians say. “Women be silent! [sigao]”
--D2) v36-38—Paul responds with the eta, and asks Corinth if this "new" Word of God somehow got to them first, because no one else has heard it.
--C2) v39—Prophecy—desire it.
--B2) v39—Tongues—don't forbid them.
--A2) v40—All things done decently and in order in the assembly!

It seems that some legalists wanted to utterly silence women, perhaps because they were being rowdy, as could happen in the synagogues. Paul refutes this as being from man rather than God.





8.) Referencing the use of "silence" in the assemblies above, the word "sigao" is used. This word means to be utterly silent. Here are two examples:

Acts 12:17, "But motioning to them with his hand to be silent, he described to them how the Lord had led him out of the prison . . . "

1 Cor. 14:30, "But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent."

The Corinthians were suggesting that women can't speak at all in assembly. Period.





9.) Some go to 1 Timothy 2 to back up this refuted notion. Let's consider the context of 1 Timothy 2. It says, starting in verse 9,

"Likewise also, let the women adorn themselves in a respectable array, with modesty and self-discipline; not with braided hair or gold or pearls of costly garments, but what is suitable to women professing godliness through good works. Let a woman lean in quietness with all subjection. Now I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to DOMINATE a man, but to be in quietness."

Consider that. Women were NOT allowed to teach, and the whole passage is referencing proper decorum. But it also says that they are to learn in quietness, and not to DOMINATE a man. How many times to you say, "Don't dominate that person?" It's a very strong term. Obviously women were being told to let the men have the authority that God gave men, and to be learners.

10.) But with the above said, does that mean that women just can't talk, as the Corinthians said? Is quietness "absolute silence?" The word for absolute silence is, "sigao," which means to say nothing. 

In 1 Timothy 2, that word IS NOT USED. The word used is instead, "hesuchia." From Vines Expository Dictionary of the New Testament, we see that this word means,

"<Adjective,hesuchios> 
"indicates "tranquility arising from within," causing no disturbance to others. It is translated "quiet" in 1 Tim. 2:2, RV (AV, "peaceable"); "quiet" in 1 Pet. 3:4, where it is associated with "meek," and is to characterize the spirit or disposition. See PEACEABLE




11.) This word is used in other places. If we contend that women absolutely cannot speak, then we misuse this term, and also have to use our distorted definition in each place that "hesuchia" is used. Look at this from 2 Thess 3:13, where it is used:

"Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread."

Is God saying that these people cannot speak at all? What if someone asks them a question? Must they be utterly silent? No. We know that God is simply saying, "Be tranquil and now rowdy." And the people He is talking to were those who, "are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies."

Please consider the implications that this has on 1 Timothy 2. The meaning is, "Men are the teachers, and you need to be tranquil. Quit dominating men." 

It did not mean that women had to keep their lips zipped in assembly.






--------------[CONSIDER THESE QUESTIONS]--------------


Please consider some of these questions and thoughts:

1.) Does a woman being tranquil and peaceful while learning mean that she can't speak, period?

2.) God says for women to learn. Part of the learning process in any classroom involves a teacher (in God's church, the men) asking a question and picking on people to answer. Does it usurp man's authority, or dominate a man, by a man calling on a women to answer a question he asked, especially if she does it in a peaceful manner?

3.) 1 Cor 11 discusses women praying and prophesying, and instructions are given. Paul says of the instruction, "But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse." So apparently there were women, at least then, doing some praying when they came together "as a church." Would this not make the absolute-silence approach found later somewhat contradictory?

4.) If we instruct women to be silent (sigao), that means that they also cannot sing songs, hymns, etc., which we are all commanded to do in various passages. Wouldn't this make God contradict Himself?

5.) If women are not allowed to speak in the assembly, this reminds me a bit of a non-instrumental CoC question that asked, "Can we use a pitch-pipe, or is that a mechanical instrument of music and thus forbidden?" The response was to stop "the worship" until the sound waves died down. By trying to make the Lord's Day assembly something it wasn't, these people also had to make up rules upon rules which God didn't state, because they were missing the guiding principle.

The guiding principle here, to me, is that ladies are to learn tranquilly and not to take leadership away from men. If we make up a rule, as the Corinthians did, that women "have to be silent, period," we have to make up exceptions. Can they sing? I guess. Can they ask their husbands quietly in the seat beside them? Yeah sure. Can they ask another lady a question? Ok, mayyybe. Can they talk about off-topics? When do they have to apply the shut-up rule, and when can they speak a little? Do they shut up at 10:00 sharp? What if a man asks a question to a lady, and she refuses to answer? Does that not take away authority from him? 

That is the problem with making rules where God gave principles. 



--------------[A DISCLAIMER]--------------

Disclaimer: It is ABSOLUTELY true that the Old and New Testaments place man as the head of woman. (Gen 3:16, 2:18, etc.) Furthermore, some positions in the New Testament church are given only to men, such as the positions of evangelist and elder. For example, "An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife." (1 Tim 3:2) Men are also the ones designated to be the teachers. 

If we were to make a woman an elder, it would "usurp authority from a man.” The idea of "teaching a man" as a violation of that law, or speaking in the assembly answering questions as part of the audience is, however, at least in my mind, far-fetched. Did Priscilla usurp authority over Apollos when she (and her husband) taught him the word of God (Acts 18:24). Probably not. It's important to not usurp authority and overturn God's order, but as men, the mere act of a woman speaking, in assembly or out of it, should not make us feel "dominated."

--------------[1 TIMOTHY 2]--------------


There is more to be discussed about 1 Timothy 2, so let’s do that. 

This is a quote from the Modern Literal Version, which aims to be the most literal and accurate version. It has roots in the Restoration Movement.

“11 Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection.

12 Now I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to dominate a man, but to be in quietness.
{Footnotes: 1 Tim 2:8-12 is probably meant in a religious place or congregation* otherwise verse 12 would be a Bible contradiction.}"



1.) My note: The Bible contradiction would be due to the instructions given to women to teach, such as Titus 2:2, 3, but the setting must be different, such women presiding over men vs women being with only women. Given the nature of "teaching" and this passage, it also does not contradict 1 Cor 11 or other places, which do address a public, mixed assembly, where women are mentioned as praying and/or prophesying.



2.) It's important to look at that word, "dominate." This is an unusual term, used only once in the New Testament, and seems to be addressing and correcting a serious problem in Ephesus. The Greek goddess Artemis was the city’s favored deity—the Temple of Artemis, located in Ephesus, was one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World—and pagan beliefs were seeping into the young Christian church. Timothy’s charge was to urge the Church to stay true to the Christian faith, and to correct problems that the assembly had. Apparently one of the problems dealt with women; it may have been because of the influence of the pagan worship of Diana, which, if you look for pictures has a pretty gross looking, many-breasted woman. In the Hellenic sense, though, she was a goddess of the hunt, and protector of women. 



3.) Since context is important, please consider the following thought process. While I do not think this is an accurate thought process, it brings up a good principle:

For those among us who have been taught to approach the New Testament as a law book, here is a command. Do you obey it? How? All the time?

"Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. "
(James 4:9)

Or is there a need to understand scripture in the context and for the purpose it is given? Should we be able to disregard this command to us IF WE DON'T fit the circumstances it was spoken to correct? 

So what about this statement:

"Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. Now I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to dominate a man, but to be in quietness."
(1 Timothy 2:11-12 ESV)

What if THIS statement ALSO has a context that is a specific problem within the audience? Can we then consider whether WE fit the context and should follow or do not fit the context and do not have to follow? Can we determine if it is a blanket statement? 

---->3b) Now I think the argument above has a number of fundamental errors (it creates a dichotomy by assuming that "non-codified law" excludes principles just because it may lack a number of conspicuous rules), but it does at least bring up the necessity of using context instead of blanket application. 
-------->3c) My personal opinion, however, is that this is blanket application and is correct to be viewed as such.




4.) What does "to dominate" mean? Along with teaching, this is what women are not to do. Looking at Thayer's (or any other," it has two possible meanings. Here are two sources, but all agree:

831 authentéō (from 846 /autós, "self" and entea, "arms, armor") – properly, to unilaterally take up arms, i.e. acting as an autocrat – literally, self-appointed (acting without submission).

a. according to earlier usage, one who with his own hand kills either others or himself.

b. in later Greek writings one who does a thing himself the author" (τῆς πράξεως, Polybius 23, 14, 2, etc.); one who acts on his own authority, autocratic, equivalent to αὐτοκράτωρ an absolute master; cf. Lobeck ad Phryn., p. 120 (also as above; cf. Winers Grammar, § 2, 1 c.)); to govern one, exercise dominion over one: τινς, 1 Timothy 2:12. 




5.) Is a woman answering a question asked of her not being tranquil? Is answering a question somehow dominating a man?





I was asked to address the subject of what it means to be in...uh...subjection, and also in submission.  Not quite the same things, but pretty close. Well grab your hats and let's get ready to roll. And please remember, do your own research. I am not an infallible person, and have a lot of growing to do myself. It's fine to trust, but excellent to verify. :)  As Acts 17 says,

"Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."









--------------[THE WORDS]--------------


It's always easy to start off looking at words, so let's review Eph 5 for a minute, starting in verse 21

"Be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  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.  But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything."

The first word used is, "be subject." That's from a Greek word, "hupotasso," which means, "primarily a military term, "to rank under" (hupo, "under," tasso, "to arrange").  

So right off the bat, we see that we are each told to consider ourselves "ranking under" each other. Put in another light, we should not be considering ourselves as better than others. God then immediately springs into the husband-wife relationship, noting that wives should submit themselves to their husbands. 

This is of great importance, because wives, as far as I can tell, were not told to be in submission to "all men," but rather always to their husbands. To re-iterate, consider:

Ephesians 5:22—Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

Ephesians 5:24 —Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

Colossians 3:18—Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

This can get a bit hairy, as sometimes the word for "wives," is the same as "women." For example, many find that 1 Cor 14 reads more plausibly when it says, "The wives 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 wife to speak in church." 

What? Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?" 

Regardless, wives are told to consider themselves as being subject to their husbands. In each case, it comes back to the husband and wife relationship every time. From 1 Tim 2, we read,

"But I do not allow a woman to teach or rule over a man, but to remain in quietness.  For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.  But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint."




Key points here:

—God goes back to the beginning.
—He says that women may not rule over/dominate a man.
—Women will be preserved through child-bearing.

Those key points all tie in with subjection as we've seen from Ephesians and Colossians, which relates to the husband and wife relationship. Since God went back to the beginning, let's go there, too. Read Gen 3:16,

"To the woman He said “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you will bring forth children; yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

Right there we have all the elements: childbirth, and the husband ruling over the wife. It seems to me that Timothy was dealing with a problem where women were ruling over their husbands.  Wives were designed to be suitable helpmates, and men to be protectors and leaders.











--------------[SILENCE or SUBJECTION?]--------------


It is very important here, though, to note that God does not demand silence from women.  He made them to be helpmates and not slaves, and allows them to be participants, but not leaders. In fact, no requirement for silence is imposed in the assembly, with the exception of when gifts such as prophecy was in use, or if someone were utterly ignorant. The quietness in view here is that of due acceptance of authority, respect for God's rule of prohibiting women from taking over the public leadership, and the quiet acceptance of their womanly role as child bearers and mothers of our human race. Certainly, in the asking of questions in dialogue and teaching situations, and in such things as singing or readings, women do not violate this passage by their participation. Can a woman not stir up others to love and good works while still being in submission?


Verse 12 says, "But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness." 

Since God does not lie, let's look at some areas of scripture that this can't violate, which, if we understand it better, will help us understand subjection.

This does not and CANNOT violate the following (so it instead becomes critical in helping us understand the relationships it applies to):

—Titus 2:3, where older women are told to, "be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good." 

—Ephesians 5:18-19, where we are told to, "be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart."


—1 Cor 11, where women and men are told how to pray in assembly. 

—1 Cor 14, where all were told to, "desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues.  But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner." 

—Acts 21:9, where Stephen had "four unmarried daughters, who prophesied."

—Luke 2:36-38, where Anna spoke in front of the temple: "Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel... which departed not from the temple ... and spoke of Him (Christ) to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem."

— Acts 2:17, where the apostle Peter, on Pentecost, cited the Old Testament Scriptures which prophesied that in the times of the new covenant, "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy." 

From these passages from the New Testament, it is clear that the total exclusion of women from any public speaking did not occur, nor was the action of such women construed as "usurping authority/dominating" a man. Anna spoke openly in the temple to everybody; and all Israel went "up to Deborah" for judgment.

But we can also see that, in the Old Testament, God also made exceptions. I want to make that clear. EXCEPTIONS. For example, in 2 Kings 4, the Shunammite woman wanted her son to be alive, but, for reasons not explained, the husband didn't do anything. She took it upon herself, and God blessed her.

Let's look at some other exceptions:

(a) Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her (Exodus 15:20).

(b) And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time ... and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment (Judges 4:4,5).

(c) So Hilkiah the priest ... went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum ... and they communed with her (2 Kings 22:14).

Clearly, the prophetesses of the Old Testament exercised their gift publicly, even the priests and the king being subject to what they said.

The whole tenor of the Bible, therefore, forbids the arbitrary enforcement "women must be silent," in relation to subjection to husbands, but it does NOT overturn some things about which God is extraordinarily clear.  For example, he tells women not to teach, being used in respect to men in the assembly, which makes sense. For this reason, the positions of elder, deacon, or evangelist, must, in the light of the entire New Covenant, not be given to women. The rules for elders, for example, require them to be the "husband" of one wife. Women, to put it simply, are to be helpmates, and not leaders.  God goes on to reference Eve taking the reins and stepping out onto a limb (proverbial) to partake of some forbidden fruit, and while it didn't leave Adam blameless, it did confirm the arrangement God desires: men as the leaders.

--------------[HUSBANDS and WIVES]--------------

Which, by the way, takes us back to Ephesians 5, where wives are again to be in subjection. We have to view this, though, under the obligation for the husband to love his wife even as Christ loved the church. God designed a system that is headed by men, and every system needs leadership, including even a hill of ants. God ends Ephesians 5 by saying that a wife must, "fear (as in respect) her husband."


Now we've covered a lot of ground, but I have to make something clear: if a man isn't around, through circumstance, or is unwilling, through spirit, to do what is right, and to spread the gospel, women are not absolved of this responsibility.  We ought to obey God rather than men, and a husband, for example, being ungodly, not does mean that the woman is allowed to say, "I shall be in subjection to him utterly." This subjection can only go so far as is "in the Lord." 


We've now looked at a good chunk of subjection, and we'll return to the relationship between husband and wife again, but before we do, I think we need to address subjection in other places. Paul preached `submission,' or `subjection' to authority in Romans 13:1-7; 1 Corinthians 16:16; and Titus 3:1.    Titus is especially nice, because while it discusses being in subjection, it reminds us to be "ready for every good deed." I think that really sums up the goal of everything. Overall, God made a system in the beginning with men first and women second, both combined as a team to accomplish His good pleasure. If a man views a wife as a mere tool, or a wife views a man as a tyrant, very little good will come out of it. Furthermore, if a wife tries to hinder a husband, or a husband tries to degrade and make a woman merely subservient, instead of a teammate which completes him, God's will cannot be accomplished. 


1 Peter 3 also discusses how wives can be submissive, saying,

"In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior...let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. 

For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands;  just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.

You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered."


That's a lot, but how can we really sum it up? What does it all mean? Well, God tells us in the next paragraph, saying,

"To sum up, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kindhearted, and humble in spirit; not returning evil for evil or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead; for you were called for the very purpose that you might inherit a blessing."

We are to be active in our subjection. As one person said, merely sitting quietly does no good. The word for "quietly" in 1 Tim 2 for example, means, "tranquility coming from the inner man." It is totally possible to be inwardly rebellious while "sitting back and taking it," having a terrible attitude.  In that sense, no amount of silence does any good. It is the attitude which matters.

--------------[TOTAL TEAMWORK]--------------

Since we've looked at a bunch of stuff, let's look at the narrative of one of the greatest husband and wife teams noted by God, who must have been getting subjection, leadership, and being a helpmate right. If you guessed that we're going to learn about Priscilla and Aquila, you're right. 


Starting in Acts 18:

"After these things he left Athens and went to Corinth.  And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, having recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. He came to them, and because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and they were working, for by trade they were tent-makers.  And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks....

...Now a Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, [an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John; and he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately."

Continuing in 1 Cor 16:19,

"The churches in the province of Asia send greetings to you. Aquila and Prisca greet you warmly in the Lord, with the church that meets in their house."


And Roman 16, 

"Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, 4 who risked their own necks for my life. Not only I, but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them. 5 Also greet the church in their house."

Priscilla and Aquila were fantastic. They worked together in trade, and they instructed people together.  Paul said that he and the Gentile churches owed them, and they even had an assembly in their house. The fact that Priscilla is often mentioned first is very unusual, as well, especially given the culture of the time. Obviously, she was a very influential person. 









--------------[LACKLUSTER SUMMARY]--------------


When we try to make rules for subjection and such, we lose sight of principle and attitude. Our goal is to add living stones. God gives us the framework: men as loving leaders and protectors, and wives as nurturers who complete the missing chinks. Like a puzzle piece, we should fit together. Matthew Henry wrote: “The woman was made out of Adam’s side. She was not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be trampled upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be loved.”

Wives are to be participants, not silenced observers. I should also note that God's will is going to be accomplished anyway, and that husbands and wives, like Christ and the church, should be in constant communication; a wife may often speak great wisdom. An example of this communication is in Gen 21, where Sarah grew angry with Hagar and told Abraham to remove her, to which God said, "Listen to her."  

They are to be helpers, and not leaders, unless there is no one else to lead. And like the church, they cannot forget their first love. Proverbs 31 describes the most excellent wife, which is also a description of Christ's bride, which is the church. 

"She opens her mouth with wisdom,

and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.

She looks well to the ways of her household

and does not eat the bread of idleness.

Her children rise up and call her blessed;

her husband also, and he praises her:

“Many women have done excellently,

but you surpass them all.”

Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain,

but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.

Give her of the fruit of her hands,

and let her works praise her in the gates." 


Notice that the wife opens her mouth with wisdom.   To be completely silent in any relationship is to have no WORKING relationship at all, and our objective is to work for God. God does not give us a set of rules on how to be in subjection, but through the marriage relationship, and the creation account, He gives us the principles on how it works. 

--------------[POST-STUDY CONSIDERATIONS]--------------

1 Cor 14 where it says women must be silent, as the Law also says, and this does exist. However, it occurs in Rabbinical texts, not Biblical ones. Please note:

“Any male member of the synagogue might be asked by the ruler to read from the law or the prophets, but the woman was to preserve strict silence, The woman does not read out of the Torah for the sake of the honor of the congregation.”

—Megillah 23a [Baraitha]:

Please also consider how strange it would be for Paul to revert to binding Law. Look at his other writings on Law:

Romans 6:14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.

Romans 7:6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Galatians 5:4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

The last interesting thing is in reference to how, "man is the head of woman." This term is used in the sense of "head of a river," or “the source.” Man is the source of woman. Yet Paul responded with, "For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God." The importance is that we are from God. 

Can women speak in the assembly?

Please note that this is one of several ways of non-bindingly examining some confusing scriptures. There are a plethora of ways to look at every piece of the Bible, but only two are presented here. Furthermore, regardless of the number, only one is correct. Please do your own research and look at more than just this point of view.  There are at least 4 others that I can think of immediately. 

BQ: We're going to start off by looking at 1 Cor 14:34-38 (NASB) in depth. We'll refer to this text for a whole series, so keep it in mind. Let's get rolling:
 

"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. 36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?

37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. 38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized."

These verses seem to imply that women can't speak in assembly. Is it deeper than that? Yes.  Here Paul seems to say that women must not speak. A few chapters before, in 1 Cor 11, he gave various rules about both men AND women speaking, however.  Verse 5 shows that women did indeed speak, saying, "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." 







BQ: We're looking at 1 Cor 14:34-38. Yesterday we saw that women were talked of as both prophesying and praying. Why does 1 Cor 14 say they must not speak? Let's look at some translation issues. Verse 34 says, "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." The part where it says "the women" here comes from Greek, " αἱ γυναῖκες, which is "hai gynakies," or more rudimentarily,  "hai gune."  In most standard translations, the "hai" is not correlated with an interlinear reference, but it is indeed there. What differences does it make?

The word for "women" in this case, is also the exact same word for wives. So it can also be read as "The wives" are to keep silent in the churches. This makes sense, because how can an unmarried woman as her non-existent husband? She can't! Tomorrow, we look at "hai."






BQ: We saw that 1 Cor 14:34-38 was applied via Greek and context to wives. The word "αἱ/hai" is also used. This is the feminine form of "Οἱ/hoi." 

Why does it matter? Because the Greeks had a LOT of ways to translate "the." Hai and hoi are very often translated as "those," not the.  If you have various translations on hand, you can examine the following verses and see that some translate it as "the," and others as "those." Look up some verses such as John 6:14; 8:26, Romans 8:5, 1 Cor 10:18; 15:18; 15:23, Gal 3:9; 5:24; 6:13, 1 Thess 5:7, 1 Tim 3:13, and 2 Tim 1:15 and 3:6.  

Let's look at just John 6:14. First, the NASB: "Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”

Now the KJV:  "Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world." 

Now let's apply that to 1 Cor 14:34. "THOSE wives 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."

Makes a difference, doesn't it? 






BQ: So if someone were talking about "those wives" in 1 Corinthians 14:34, why would they have wanted them silent? We saw that in earlier chapters they were indeed taught to be speaking, and, like men, to be doing it without bringing dishonor. What, then, was wrong with these ladies?

Well we have to ask, "what wives?" To ascertain this, we need to look at the context. The verses proceeding this are talking of spiritual gifts, and especially speaking in tongues, so we need to go to the section mentioning spiritual gifts primarily, and in this case, it's in 1 Cor 12. Let's see if anyone was misusing spiritual gifts and in need of being made to shush:

"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware.  You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however you were led.  Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit." (1-3)

It is indicated here that some were using false spiritual gifts to curses Jesus—truly wrong. Could this be it? You decide, but the original Greek will reveal an entirely new aspect of the discussion.






BQ: Yesterday we saw that 1 Cor 12 had a section mentioning some saying, "Jesus is cursed." The interesting thing is that, in the Greek, there are no punctuation marks to add the quotations. In fact, it's all UPPERCASELOOKINGCAPITALLETTERSWITHOUTPUNCTUATION.  The translators themselves had to determine where to put the periods, question marks, and quotations. I've attached a picture to make it easier to visualize. 

​
Some translations, such as the NASB, don't bother to insert quotation marks very often. Let's look at an example. 1 Cor 6:13 says, "Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body." (NASB) Or it says (NRSV): “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food,”and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

Notice how the quotes make a difference? One shows that Paul is enlightening and attacking what the Corinthians have said, showing their error through comparison and contrast. But is that what he's doing? Let's see more tomorrow.







BQ: Yesterday we saw that MAYBE Paul was really refuting some things that the Corinthians had written to him in correspondence. But how do we know that they ever told him anything ludicrous? How do we know that it was almost a point-counterpoint style of writing? Well, if we read 1 Cor 7:1, we see that indeed he was having a dialog:

 "Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.""

So they were indeed writing him, telling him about the issues that they had as a congregation. 1 Cor 3 mentions the divisions within the assembly, and how immature they were, so Paul had to do some teaching. Tomorrow we'll look at more evidence of this.






BQ: We saw that, in 1 Corinthians, Paul was addressing some of the issues that the assembly there had. We saw that the originals had no punctuation, so translators have added it where they thought was best, and some just didn't bother at all. Let's look at another verse where quotation marks make a difference. This time, we will pull from Rotherham's translation to look at 1 Cor 6:12, which says:

"All things, unto me, are allowable, but, not all things, are profitable: all things, unto me, are allowable, but, I, will not be brought under authority by any."

The word there is "allowable," or "permissible." Now let's look at it with the point-counterpoint quotations added:

"“All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are beneficial. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything." 

Think about it—does God permit ALL things? No! When viewing this as Paul corresponding with the Corinthians about their immature points of view, it makes more sense. We'll see why that's important in regards to women speaking tomorrow.






BQ: So we saw that Paul was often chastising the Corinthians for their poor behavior, and now we're going to apply that to...1 Cor 14:34-38. Examine it like this:

QUOTE "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." UNQUOTE 

PAUL RESPONDS: "Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment.  But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized."

That changes things significantly, doesn't it? Corinthians saying that women must not speak, as the "Law" says, but must be quiet. We'll see more tomorrow.






BQ:  So we looked at women speaking and saw some evidence that Paul was writing in a point-counterpoint style when speaking of women not speaking, and instead of telling women never to speak, and contradicting himself, as he wrote earlier, he was rather saying that it was not ok to say that women must not speak. But why do we think that Paul was refuting some nonsense by the Corinthians? Isn't that a little bit too easy?

Verse 36, where the attribution of Paul speaking was inserted, says, "Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?" (NASB) However, in some versions it says, "What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" (KJV)

 Why does that "what" exist? It's because the original Greek has a symbol that is called a "rhetorical eta." It looks like a little n with ears on top (ἢ), and when used by itself, means something like, "What nonsense!" or "That's ridiculous!" or "How absurd!"   

So, immediately after saying that women must not speak in the churches, Paul exclaims, "That's ridiculous!" and follows it up by sarcastically asking if they have some special revelation. Makes a difference, doesn't it?






BQ: But wait, is this "rhetorical eta" used anywhere else by Paul? Well indeed it is, in addressing the Corinthians, who as we saw had written him a pile of silliness and were very immature. Here are some examples:

1 Cor. 10:21-22—"You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons. [RHETORICAL ETA Nonsense/that's gargabe/ridiculous!] Are we trying to arouse the Lord's jealousy? Are we stronger than he?"

1 Cor. 11:13-14--"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled?" [RHETORICAL ETA Nonsense/that's gargabe/ridiculous!] Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering."

We see here that it isn't a one-off thing. Instead, it's used by Paul to make a point when something is patently absurd.






BQ: Something else to consider is the fact that, in the following places, Paul quotes the Old Testament Law: 1 Cor 1:19;31; 2:9; 10:7, 14:21. In 14:21, he quotes Isaiah 28:11-12 and says, "In the Law it is written, “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me."  

In each case where Paul (and thus God) quotes the Law, he inserts the actual scriptures. Let's look again at 1 Cor 14:34, which says, "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."

Notice that Paul does not actually quote the Law here. Why is that? It's because the Old Testament never says this at all. In fact, the closest one can get is a Pharisically-created rabbinical tradition being espoused as "Law," which is in fact never uttered by God. 






BQ: So we've examined that. What other evidence is there that women may indeed speak in the assemblies? Let's look at some of just a few women who spoke publicly and had the approval of God:

1. Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her (Exodus 15:20).

2. And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time ... and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment (Judges 4:4,5).

3. So Hilkiah the priest ... went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum ... and they communed with her (2 Kings 22:14).

Clearly, the prophetesses of the Old Testament exercised their gift publicly, even the priests and the king being subject to what they said. So tomorrow let's see if women had to just zip it in the New Testament. 






BQ: So we saw that women could speak in public in the Old Testament, now how about the New? Yep:

(1) And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel ... which departed not from the temple ... and spake of him (Christ) to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem (Luke 2:36-38).

(2) The apostle Peter, on Pentecost, cited the Old Testament scriptures which prophesied that in the times of the new testament, "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (Acts 2:17).

(3) "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a deaconess of the church which is at Cenchrea;  that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the [b]saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well." (Romans 16:1-2)

Note that "deaconess" can also be translated as "servant," but in whatever case, she had an important and independent role. Furthermore, extra-Biblical resources indicate that women performed somewhat official functions, with Pliny (close to Paul's death) writing of the early church, "After receiving this account, I judged it so much the more necessary to endeavour to extort the real truth, by putting two female slaves to the torture, who were said to officiate  in their religious rites: but all I could discover was evidence of an absurd and extravagant superstition."

Many consider those two females to have been the equivalent of Phoebe, but this is supposition.






BQ: Is there anything else that makes women stand out in the New Testament? Yep.

(1) "Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus,  who for my life risked their own necks, to whom not only do I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles;  also greet the church that is in their house. Greet Epaenetus, my beloved, who is the first convert to Christ from Asia.  Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you.  Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me." (Rom 16:3-7)

Of those mentioned, Junias is the only uncertain one. Junias was considered by the majority of the early church "fathers" to have been a female, and in all the Greek manuscripts, it is denoted a feminine. With that said, it is a name somewhat like "Leslie," and can be either masculine or feminine.   

Still, consider that Mary and Priscilla were also mentioned, and that Priscilla is rather stunning, as she is most often mentioned before her husband. This is not at all normal for the culture and Greek, and would be similar to us getting a piece of mail to "Mrs. and Mr. Lastname."






BQ: We saw one look at Priscilla, but I felt that it was important to mention something that one commentator wrote:

"Amazingly, she is mentioned first, even ahead of her husband, and first of all those whom Paul was about to name. From this it has been concluded that she was more active and successful in Christian work than her husband Aquila; for not merely here, but in Acts 18:18,26, and 2 Timothy 4:19, the same preeminence of Priscilla is indicated; however, in Acts 18:2,1 Corinthians 16:19, Aquila is mentioned first.

There were doubtless very good reasons why this couple should have headed the list of all whom Paul desired to salute in Rome, and some have supposed that Prisca was of the Roman nobility; but we cannot believe that anything of that nature would have carried any weight whatever with Paul. There were qualities of character and service involved in the bestowal of such honor as was given this great Christian woman, an honor above even that of her husband; and it is natural to think of their laying "down their own necks" on Paul's behalf, an action in which Prisca might well have been the principal participant, encouraged and supported by her husband." (—James Coffman) 






BQ:  We've seen that women were very active in the New Testament, and that they were not forbidden to speak. However, it is true that the Old and New Testaments place man as the head of woman as a principle. (Gen 3:16, 2:18, etc.) Furthermore, some positions were given only to men, such as the positions of evangelist and elder. For example, "An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife." (1 Tim 3:2)

If we were to make a woman an elder, it would "usurp authority from a man,". The idea of "teaching a man" as a violation of that law, or speaking in the assembly answering questions as part of the audience is, however, far-fetched. Did Priscilla usurp authority over Apollos when she (and her husband) taught him the word of God (Acts 18:24). Nope!  

In fact, women are told to speak, and not just in songs, hymns, and spiritual songs, but also praying and prophesying—yet in many congregations, they are not found praying for fear of "stepping out of line." I have even met some Christian females who would not teach an un-baptized male because they could not "teach a man."  It's a horrible state to be in, and one that undermines our effectiveness for God. 

There is much more that can be said about this subject, and I will probably post more research in future BQs, but for now, I've run out of time, and air traffic controlling calls. 

What is respect?

BQ: I'm looking into the word "respect"  and what it means in the Bible. This study has been considerably more tricky than others, and I think it's because we've really muddled what "respect" means. So with that said, let's take a look at respect as found in the Bible and as found in common English.

In common English, respect means to, "admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities, or achievements." In the Bible, as it turns out, respect can be translated from several different words, such as "apoblepo," which means to "look away from all else." This means that when someone respects something, they value it highly; to the exclusion of considering other things, even.  However, that version of respect is rarely used, and when it is used, it is in regard to the eternal. Can you spot where "respect" is used in this sentence, from Heb 11:26?  "Considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he was looking to the reward."

When the word that we pair most closely with "respect" is used, it's not used in reference to people, but to the eternal riches of Christ. Tomorrow we'll start looking at a far more prevalent idea of "respect" that God wants us to use in out interactions with others, and we'll see how important God's version of respect is.





BQ: Yesterday we saw that respect means to look away from all else in order to give full attention to something, and that this is used in giving value to our eternal lives. When we say that we "respect" someone, what word does God use for that, and what does it mean?

A: The word that is most commonly used is actually to "honor" someone. It primarily comes from the words "timao" and "time," and carries the meanings, "a valuing; a price paid or received; to value something at cost." We have a hard time identifying the word honor/respect because it is to us quite strangely used, and translators often massage sentences to make the words fit in better to our understanding. Consider that the word for "honor/respect" is used here, "For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body." (1 Cor 6:20)

If you read Matt. 27:6,9; Acts 4:34; 5:2,3; 7:16,  Acts 19:19; 1 Cor 7:23, 1 Pet 2:7, and many other verses, you'll see the word "price" used, because respecting someone is all about OUR values.  We'll look more at respecting people tomorrow. 




BQ: We've seen that respecting someone is equivalent to honoring them, and that the meaning is always associated with putting a value/price on something. Today we'll look at this word "honor/respect" being used in more accessible forms. Let's consider the following verses:

"The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching." (1 Tim 5:17)

" You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered." (1 Pet 3:7)

"Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Mt 19:19)

Honoring someone is respecting someone, which, as it turns out, is valuing them. If we say that we have no respect for a person, we effectively say that they have no value; they are worthless; they carry no price and are not worth "looking away from [something else] to set one's gaze upon." 

Do you respect people? Do you look for value even when at first it seems not to be present? That's something that I need to work on, and we'll see why tomorrow.




BQ:  I have a problem, sometimes, with respecting people, because some part of me tries to quickly say that someone flawed is not worth much, which is the same as not being respectable. What does God say about flawed people and respect?

"...And those members of the body which we deem less respectable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable, whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked." (1 Cor 12:23-24)

Sometimes I've seen new (or old!) people in the assembly with flaws and thought, "They're not really worth that much. I don't see them up there doing much. Bet they still have struggles with drinkin' and such. Might as well smack 'em upside the head with a fryin' pan." My problem was that I didn't value them as God valued them.  Eisenhower scolded a general for speaking of a soldier as "just a private," telling him that, "The private is the man who wins the war." This is exactly what God is pointing to in 1 Cor 12. When we quit valuing those who are just learning how to fight, we don't show them respect nor honor, and yet without them, we'd be alone. 

Do you respect those around you? How about the new ones, the ones fresh out of boot camp? These people need us to value them even more than others, and we should do so to encourage them and to please God!  When a relationship is just starting out, VALUE IT EVEN MORE!