1 Corinthians 14:34- Is this concept found in the Torah? (Netzari)
1Co 14:34 “Let your women keep silent in the assemblies, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says.”
Where in the Torah did Paul get this concept? Paul said that the Torah says women are to keep silent in assemblies but is Paul honest about his reference concerning this verse?
29 September 2010
17 Comments
Leave a Reply
My Control Panel
Recent Comments
When the King comes ruling...
By AprilFlesh and blood cannot inherit...
By Lisa (Editor)Yep, the list is so...
By Larry (Editor)I thought this was an...
By Steven
By April
By Larry (Editor)
By Larry (Editor)House Rejects Iran ‘Containment,’ Ignoring...
By Debra
By Debra
By Debra
Latest Posts
Login
Comments
Netz, from reading the whole chapter, I gather Paul is referring to order of submission (covering?).
Yahushua submits to Abba…..
man submits to Yahushua…
woman submits to her husband/man….
I’m not sure if Paul meant it literally…maybe he did. The reference I found for that verse, in The Scriptures, was Genesis 3:16….
It seems Paul is making two points:
1) If a woman has a question – she should ask rightly – in the right order – i.e. ask her husband (submit to him as her covering?).
This part “…but let them subject themselves, as the Torah also says.” is what appears to be referring to Torah.
2) It’s “improper for a woman to speak in an assembly”
I don’t know where this is found in Torah…maybe someone else knows.
Perhaps it was the custom with the Hebrews, in that time, for men only to speak in the assemblies about learned things. Perhaps Paul is saying unlearned women shouldn’t speak. Maybe learned women could speak?
I’d really like more wisdom on this.
I believe this comes from rabbinic tradition as outlined here:
“The combination of this exemption from certain mitzvot and this separation often has the result that women have an inferior place in the synagogue. Women are not obligated by Jewish law to attend formal religious services, and cannot participate in many aspects of the services (traditional Jewish services have a very high degree of “audience participation” — and I’m not just talking about community readings, I’m talking about actively taking part in running the service), so they have less motivation to attend. Woman’s obligations in the home (which are the reason why women are exempt from time-based mitzvot like formal prayer services) often keep them away from synagogue. In several synagogues that I have attended, the women’s section is poorly climate controlled, and women cannot see (sometimes can’t even hear!) what’s going on in the men’s section, where the services are being led. This has improved somewhat in recent years, but men: if you think I’m lying, ask your wives. ”
I could not find this in Torah but rabbinic tradition has passed this custom down in Talmudic writings. As most of you know, I’m a little weary of Paul (I don’t think he’s a false aposlte per se) however, I think his commentary is not as solid as the 12 Yeshua handpicked and who will be seated on the thrones around him… so this doesn’t surprise me, perhaps someone who is better versed in Paul’s writings could offer some insight.
* disclaimer: in no way does my personal opinion reflect the feelings and teachings of ProfoundProphecy.com
But there was no separation between men and women in the 1st century synagogues.That tradition came from Persia and Islam (which dates it post-6th century C.E).
Sha’ul is writing to a specific congregation about a specific situation and specific people at that particular place and time. We have only 1/2 the conversation (i.e. we have the answer without the question, a bit like Jeopardy) and then we try to make a general principle and doctrine out of it and apply it to our own situation 2000 years and 1/2 a world away.
Is it any wonder that we get ourselves in a knot trying to figure it out?
HG,
I don’t think Paul is a false prophet or teacher either. However, like with everything else, I am skeptical. If what you are saying is true concerning Rabbinic Tradition, than that would mean that Paul was teaching oral law during his time. That would contradict all his other writings concerning oral law.
I know that tradition is not a bad thing. i.e. the 4th of July is not pagain, nor is it a bad thing to do but it is NOT Scriptural. Also, thanksgiving is only a tradition. A good one as well with no pagan roots that I know of. Yet, as long as we don’t elevate the 4th of July and Thanksgiving above or equal to Scripture, those things are ok to do.
However, it seems like Paul is referencing a certain part of the oral law to form a definate decision. Actually, in Hebrew culture this would be called “Halakha” which is a ruling usually done by a Rabbi to determine certain matters of Torah. I think council is good, but the concept of “halakha” sort of puts a person on a pedistool.
I want more wisdom on this as well. I didn’t post this because I wanted to attack Paul, or start controversy. I just wanted to have an open discussion where we can all seek the truth together as Family in Messiah. I am not anti-Paul. I am just for truth
I hope we can keep this thread going also. I wanna see what you guys have to say and what YHWH reveals to you all.
Rodney, I understand what you’re saying. Very valid points, the part that get’s me tripped up is the “as the law also says”… it makes me ask myself which “law” is he referring to? Any ideas?
Net, I agree with you as well… I don’t want people to think I am anti-Paul a while ago I was seriously considering this, now I have reserved myself to the possibility of just seriously misinterpreting his writings.
A very controversial book that I read regarding the topic of Paul, his apostolic validity and the intent of his messages is called “Jesus’ (Yeshua’s) Words Only” it’s available free online if you’d like to check out some of the chapters you can do so here:
http://jesuswordsonly.com/JWO/jesuswordsonly.html (if you scroll down the page there is a link that says “each chapter free online” you can read the full book there.) I would love to hear your end everyone else’s opinions on this if you guys get a chance to check it out.
Thanks HG =)
Harvest, there are 3 laws that Sha’ul refers to in his teachings, all translated with the Greek word nomia (knowledge);
- the Torah
- the “Law of Sin and Death” i.e. if you sin, you die a.k.a. the “curse of the law”
- the Oral Law
Working out which one is in view where can be a challenge, especially since we don’t know the Tanakh anywhere near as well as Sha’ul, nor do we know the Oral Law, nor do we have the other side of the conversation.
BTW, sometimes he quotes others without it being obvious that he’s doing it, for example, “‘All things are lawful for me’. but not all things are beneficial”. The first half of the sentence is a quote (of or from whom is not specified), the second is his retort. Very few English translations pick this up, the ESV is one that does by adding quotation marks (that don’t occur in the Greek) and I believe in this case it is correct to do so (in the context of the rest of Sha’ul’s argument).
You are right to ask the question. We need to be conscious of the fact that nomia is not always (or even mostly) referring to Torah. This is esp. evident in Romans, as well as in Hebrews.
BTW, (OT) Rico Cortes has a fantastic five-part video teaching on his web site (recently released) on the Book of Hebrews and Yom Kippur that is really worth seeing (even taking into account the $5USD registration fee to access the members-only part of the web site). Highly recommended. Oh, the URL would help – http://www.wisdomintorah.com
Brother Rodney,
I really liked the ‘Jeopardy’ analogy, it is exactly how I see it. That can be applied to all of Shaul’s mail. Maybe one day we will get a hold of the lettersl that were sent to him.
Net,
I have a questions that wanted others to help me with. Maybe a new topic?
1) What will make Judah believe that Yeshua is the Mashiach?
a) By recognizing that the Yeshua believers are the Beit Yisrael and the gentiles are his companions (Ephraim + his companions, Ezekiel 37)? – During the Jacob’s trouble
b) When Yeshua comes down from the Father? – At the end of the tribulation
Net,
If we read the other mail sent to Corinth you will realize that that congregation was a messy one. As Rodney pointed out, it was probably a specific problem. It could be a simple as the ladies not being quiet during the reading of the Torah, but chatting with one another.
It turned out into a ‘Women preaching is of the devil’ doctrine.
This too is a good observation… maybe one day we will get the other half…
Great Topic…
I think it is good for us women to pay attention to such things…and watch how we use our mouths in assemblies and anywhere for that matter : )
I also believe we as women are to stand back and pray for our husbands, brothers etc. as they talk more…we need to let them get more words in edgewise if you know what I mean.
If I had a husband I would keep quiet more…especially in public…maybe debate at home or in private….to honor Abba and the man He allows to lead me (that is my prayer and trust in Abba of course)
Netzari…I also talked with Scot at Sukkot and he said to bring up a topic that might interest you to post…
Just how are we changed in the Millenium? Ezekiel talks of Priests marrying and not being defiled with dead other then close family…(in the twinkling of an eye we are changed….)
Sin offerings etc. What’s up? Could be a fun topic : ) it’s up to you.
Hey guys! There’s also the chance that Shaul was speaking in a decorative term when he said “law”, as in the oral one. Sarcasm was around back then too!
Dave, we’ve missed you man… sarcasm… lol, I like that.
One very big differance between What the Davar (word) said to Ezekiel, and what Shaul said is that one was given by Yah’s Word to the prophet, and Shaul doesn’t make such claims. Instead, I think Shaul looked for hidden things inside the text. They may be 100% correct, they may not be as well.
Another thought there is that what is being described in Ezekiel may not be “eternity” as the church teaches.
Sorry for not introducing myself, I’m Dave. I haven’t been on here in a while, (no internet) but I’m back on line now, thanks to wireless internet from my cell service
I still think that Shaul will be shocked and perplexed when he learns how his little letters became “holy books of scripture”, used to condemn, and to reject what Shaul knew as holy scripture. (not saying that HE condemned it.)