I do not believe I ever said I agree in your interpretation of that word as meaning silence only in the sense of not disrupting the meeting (as it being okay to speak in a non-disruptive way or being okay to speak later when someone else has had the chance to speak).
I was actually referring to the verb itself not its definition.
Such a meaning completely contradicts what Paul says about women not speaking out in church.
Well, no. Because it is actually what Paul said. It only contradicts your beliefs.
You may well know Greek better than me AirDancer but nothing you have said so far about this or that Greek nuance or word has made the case for Paul not meaning to say exactly what it says in the text.
Your getting people mixed up. I'm woodlandapple
And I have explained in detail to show what the text is saying, and why it is translated the way it is. I also demonstrated the reasons why this use is different to others in the same passage. I have also given examples on reasons why your translation of the passage is innacurate.
That women are to be silent during an assembly of the church. And silent in a unique way that does not apply to the men for the duration of said meeting.
The verse does not say this. This is your opinion on what it says. And again this interpretation contradicts several other passages (refer to my last two posts) that Paul writes
Greek or not you have not addressed some of the points I brought up that undermine your interpretation.
I will try my best, having said that you still have a lot to address yourself from my first post.
If your interpretation is correct...that the silence Paul commands is only a silence of the kind that is temporary and only lasts as long as someone else is speaking after which point a woman could herself speak out...(correct me if my understanding of your interpretation is incorrect)...
My interpretation I that the women of this particular church are told to not be disruptive, not to undermine the authority of the church and to respect the law.
- why does Paul tell women to ask their husbands at home if they want to learn something? I mean if their silence is only to be polite to others who are speaking why the need to be silent with their questions until they get home?
So they are not seen arguing with their husbands in public, undermining the family.
- what does the silence commanded of women, if that silence is only a polite type of silence that is not meant to keep them from speaking out during the course of a whole meeting, have to do with submission? The type of silence you are describing is a kind that would be required of men too (in the sense that they too would have to likewise be politely quiet during someone else's talking) yet Paul's admonition for women to be silent is directly tied to their need to be submissive. A requirement that is not put upon the men. It is unique to women. How does that unique command for women in particular to be quiet fit with your interpretation?
No, it is not directly tied to submission. Nowhere does the text state this. The text refers to respecting the law, which refers to genesis and the specific gender roles. I have already pointed this out. And yet even of submission is what Paul is referring to- submission does not mean being a doormat. Refer to the last passage in psalms to see how God portrays a woman of noble character and you will see a leader with authority, who still respects gender roles. The women of this church have an issue with undermining authority which is why Paul addressed only women. Again. You need to read the context. Paul is not making a statment he is providing a particular solution to a particular problem.
- why Paul's fuss about the silence that he commands of women being the norm across the churches of the New Testament? I mean if the silence is only of a kind that would involve being politely quiet while someone else is talking why the need to point out that such was practiced throughout the churches and that anyone who is spiritual and gifted as a prophet should recognize that what he has said is the Lord's command? Isn't that a bit much to support the notion that women should be quiet only in the sense of being polite in not interrupting others?
Paul is only addressing the churches in Corinth.
Paul is demonstrating the ideals of a well organised and orderly service. Which will be the result if the churches of Corinth would stop being uncivil, and the women stop being argumentative.
I think you are underestimating the impact that bickering and fighting can have on a church community. I think it's a bit much to assume that Paul is telling women in the whole world should stay silent in order to combat the problems faced by one city of beleivers.
-if your interpretation is correct...what is so improper about speaking out on the part of women? Paul says it is improper for women to speak out in church. If Paul meant for women to simply not speak when someone else was speaking such that they could then speak when the first person finished what would have been so improper about them speaking out in turn?
again you underestimate the power of a good argument. Especially when it was consistently happening in a church. It was certainly a big enough problem in corenth if Paul had to write them a letter to help control it.
You are not addressing these issues AirDancer and helping me see how what is said in the text fits your interpretation.
I am doing nothing but address your issues, while you do nothing about addressing mine.
Instead you are making assumptions about what Paul says based on verses elsewhere in the Bible, making assumptions about what Paul's use of the word he used for silence means based on a modern day meaning of the phrase to "be quiet".
where are you getting this from? I am basing my meaning from the Greek text, and basing my translation from the Greek grammar. I would suggest that the bible you are reading, and the words in it are far more modern than mine. Seeing as I am actually reading the Greek.
Making assumptions about Paul's use of the word translated as silent based on how it is used elsewhere in the New Testament while ignoring the context in which it is used in 1 Cor 14 (no use elsewhere negates the possibility that Paul meant for women to be silent throughout the meeting of the church in the sense of not speaking out).
this just demonstrates your ignorance on how the process of translation into English actually works.
You speak of context yet completely ignore it yourself. I'm still waiting for you to address this.
I am more than willing to acknowledge the rightness of your interpretation if you can give me something more substantive than your assumptions.
well I guess your assumptions must clearly be true then.
But of course my assumptions are based on the full time application of masters level study of Koine Greek and Christian theology. What would I know on the subject of translating Greek?
Based on what the text actually says in context.
I've done nothing but this.
I would appreciate your addressing the points I brought up above. Points which seriously undermine your interpretation and don't fit with it. I cannot embrace your interpretation as even plausible without an explanation of how it fits with what is written in the immediate context of what Paul said.
points addressed, none undermining though. Again, I think you have to answe for context much more than I do.
Again where does submission fit into your interpretation? Why were the women singled out to be quiet while the men were allowed to speak openly and freely? Why were the women told to ask their husbands about things at home and not in the meeting?
a woman arguing opening with her husband disrupts Gods designed gender roles. Women where singled out as the specific instigators to a specific problem, a woman can question [argue] with her husband in private but It is not recommended in public. Paul is asking the women of this church to stop arguing and to start learning.
Why did Paul make mention of his command for women to be quiet in church meetings as being the practice in all the New Testament churches as being something that was uniquely applicable to the women?
again, Paul is only talking to the Corinthians. It is the ideal practice in all churches for there to be no arguing, fighting or general disorder. Paul is highlighting the goal. Uniquely applicable because it was a specific problem caused by the specific women of the specific church at that specific time (I'm not sure how else I can emphasis context)
Your interpretation does not fit the text AirDancer. I don't see how it can.
yes it does. And it also fits the interpretation clearly given by the dozen text books in front of me as it also fits the original text in Greek. What it doesn't fit is your bias, and your interpretation that has risen from it.
But I remain open to hearing your explanation of how it fits in light of the questions I have raised.
considering your instant dismissal of any thought other than your own. I have trouble believing this.
You say that I have offered no proof for my interpretation yet the proof I have offered is nothing less than what is plainly written by Paul.
so why do you plainly ignore when paul encourages women to speak out in chirch, a d when he encourages specific female church leaders ?
It falls on you to prove that the plain meaning of what Paul said is not really what he meant to say.
i i say i have done that, at the very least I have shown enought that it causes doubt as to the intentions of Paul.
In context and based on what is said. Not based on assumptions, Greek nuances that could go either way and are in no sense definitive among Greek scholars as pointing to the one correct and indisputable interpretation, or based on a bunch of verses that say this or that elsewhere which may or may not point to what Paul meant to say.
As a Greek scholar, I could suggest that you don't actually know know what we are saying. What I am going to say is that Paul definatly does not use the word silent in this verse. These Nuances is what gives Greek it's meaning. Greek is not the sledgehammer language that English is. A plain reading is often wrong.
I don't need to prove that the plain meaning of what Paul said is exactly what he meant to say.
and I have demonstrated that your plain interpretation is not what Paul actually said, and a plain interpretation contradicts what the bible teaches us elsewhere. The onus is on you to justify your interpretation.
That is a given barring any reason to believe otherwise...which reason I do not as yet see from your explanation.
please look harder and maybe get rid of the assumption that you are automatically right?
Carlos
PS. I forgot one other point that I just added.
Blessings
Jono
Edit: I'm not sure why the quote boxes arnt working
*Quote boxes fixed* Correct coding is [ / quote ] not [ \ quote] ;)
