The post here by CBE International, Christians for Biblical Equality, who are a nonprofit organization of Christian women and men who believe that the Bible, properly translated and interpreted, teaches the fundamental equality of women and men of all racial and ethnic groups, all economic classes, and all ages. It is also linked below is a very thorough presentation of the three ways of explaining Paul’s words in 1 Cor 14:34–35 about women being silent in the church. They make a very good case for the Quotation-Refutation explanation.
1 Corinthians 14:33b-38 as a Pauline Quotation-Refutation Device Paragraphs below are extracts from his work.
We now turn to an exposition and defense of the hypothesis that 1 Cor 14:33b–38 stands as a quotation-refutation device, where vv. 33b–35 comprise Paul’s quotation from the Corinthians’ letter to him, while vv. 36–38 constitute the decisive refutation of that quotation. In the process, we shall answer the objections to this hypothesis raised by Payne. I hold that the quotation-refutation device begins in v. 33b rather than v. 34 because of the break in thought marked by “As” (hōs) which begins v. 33b. Contra Payne’s suggestion that v. 33 is a complete sentence, v. 33b is most naturally taken as the first clause of the sentence continued in v. 34.21 Following the paragraph divisions and punctuation of two standard editions of the Greek NT (NA28 and UBS5), a woodenly literal translation of 1 Cor 14:33–38 follows:
- 33 For God is not of disorder but of peace. As (hōs) in all the assemblies of the saints,
- 34 the women should keep silent in the assemblies; for they (autais, fem. pl.) are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, just as the law says.
- 35 But if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in an assembly.
- 36 Or (ē) did the word of God originate with you (humas, pl.), or (ē) to you men only (humas monous, masc. pl.) has it come?
- 37 If anyone seems to be a prophet or spiritual, let that one recognize that what I write to you (pl.) is a commandment of the Lord;
- 38 but if anyone disregards this, let that one be disregarded.
Paul introduces both rhetorical questions in v. 36 with “or” (ē), which he does six times elsewhere in 1 Corinthians to argue against the Corinthians’ position 1 Cor 1:13; 1 Cor 6:16; 1 Cor 9:6, 1 Cor 9:8, 1 Cor 9:10; 1 Cor 11:22) and five times to express disapproval of a Corinthian practice 1 Cor 6:2; 1 Cor 6:9, 1 Cor 6:19; 1 Cor 10:22; 1 Cor 11:13. [See below for Marg’s similar explanation.]
Complementarians typically hold that in v. 36 Paul chides women because, by seeking to dominate the worship services, they act as though they alone have received a word from God. But this interpretation is grammatically impossible. As an inflected language, the gender of Greek adjectives must agree with the gender of the words modified. Thus if Paul had meant to direct v. 36 to women in particular, he would have used the feminine plural monas, “women only.” But instead Paul employs the masculine plural monous, which can either be translated “men only” or “people only” (because groups of men and women are referred to by the masculine plural). If, as this article has argued, 14:34–35 is not an interpolation, then the translation “people only” is incoherent, for 14:33b–35 specifically concerns women and is not addressing the Corinthian church as a whole.
Far from attempting to silence women, therefore, Paul is rebuking the Corinthian men for prohibiting women from speaking in the assemblies, for he regards such a restriction as tantamount to alleging that the word of God belongs properly to the men and merely derivatively to any woman married to one of them. Paul summarily exposes the absurdity of this allegation with each part of the rhetorical question, whose form (not to mention the context) requires a negative answer to each part. Obviously, the word of God neither originated with men nor has come only to men; hence it is ridiculous, and contrary to the character of the gospel, to act as though the word belongs properly to men by disallowing women from discoursing about it or asking questions about it in church. For these reasons, the preceding thought-unit is shown not to belong to Paul, but is rather Paul’s quotation of the Corinthians’ position from the letter they had previously sent him, his response to which letter constitutes in large part the purpose of 1 Corinthians.
The accuracy of our conclusion is secured by the undisputed presence of this device five other times in 1 Cor 6:12–13; 1 Cor 7:1–2; 1 Cor 8:1, 1 Cor 8; and 1 Cor 10:23, in which Paul quotes a position from the Corinthians’ letter with which he disagrees and then refutes it.
Extract from Marg Mowszko’s, Interpretations and Applications of 1 Corinthians 14:34–35. She also discusses other explanations for Paul’s text.
1 Corinthians 14:34–35 is a Quotation
Most of the scholars mentioned so far have tried to determine the meaning of 14:34–35 by exploring the broader social context of the first-century Corinthian church, but others have focused solely on the text of 14:34–35 in trying to determine how to interpret and apply these verses.
First Corinthians was written in response to a verbal report from Chloe’s people (1 Cor. 1:11) and in response to a letter Paul had received from the Corinthians asking for his advice.[18] At times, it is evident in his letter that Paul is quoting from the Corinthians’ letter as he deals with its contents. Some of these quotations include, “It is not good for a man to touch a woman” (1 Cor. 7:1), “We all possess knowledge” (1 Cor. 8:1), “There is no resurrection” and “Christ has not been raised” (1 Cor. 15:12, 14). (See postscript 3 below for more on this.) Some scholars believe 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 may also be a quotation. This would account for the way it does not seem to fit with what Paul is saying in the surrounding verses.
1 Corinthians 1:10ff tells us that there were competing factions in the Corinthian church (cf. 1 Cor. 11:18–19). It is possible one of these factions was trying to silence women in church meetings. This would have been a real concern for women like Chloe. Perhaps Paul quotes the faction’s injunction for women to be silent in 14:34–35, but then reprimands the faction, which includes men, with, “What! Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?” (cf. 1 Cor. 14:36 KJV and 1 Cor. 14:36 NRSV).[19] The Greek adjective monous, which occurs in verse 36 and is translated as “only ones” in the NRSV, is grammatically masculine. According to Greek grammar, this adjective cannot refer only to women. The masculine gender of “only ones” in verse 36 does not seem to follow logically after 14:34–35 and its instructions to women unless verse 36 is a reprimand to a group of men that wants to silence women.
The view that 14:34–35 is Paul quoting the Corinthians is one of the few that offers a plausible explanation for the change of tone which verses 34–35 bring into the text, as well as the subsequent change of topic, tone, and gender in verse 36. If this explanation is the correct one, then the apostle is not silencing women in 14:34–35. Rather, Paul quotes and then rebukes the people who are trying to silence the women.
