<p>14:34- see on 1 Cor. 7:17.</p><p><i>Let the women keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted for them to speak</i>- The spirit of the prophets was subject to them (:32- see notes there). It was therefore quite possible for women to exercise silence; again the evidence would be that the genuine Spirit gifts were not the same as the 'possession' experience of the idol shrines. This controversial verse may mean no more than that the women were not to chatter during church services- as was the habit in many synagogues. Their excuse that they were just asking for more clarification about the message is then answered in :35.</p><p>We must give full weight to the intentional contrast with Paul's discussion of women prophesying and praying in chapter 11. He clearly accepted that women should prophecy in the church. And there are New Testament examples of this. But I have noted throughout this chapter that there was a huge difference between the actual possession of the real Holy Spirit gifts, such as prophecy; and the farce that was going on in the Corinthian church, whereby they acted like the surrounding idol cults, imitating their speaking in ecstatic utterances and claims to possessing the gift of supernatural prophecy or speaking forth a supernatural, divine word. These claims were false. They didn't really have the gifts of true Holy Spirit. But this was not to say that there were no sincere Christians in Corinth. Clearly there were some; and there were some women, according to chapter 11, who did have the gift of prophecy. So the key would seem to be in the command for &quot;<i>Your </i>women&quot; (Gk.) to be silent. Whose women? The &quot;you&quot; of the context (e.g. :36) are those who in the wrong on these matters, claiming to have the Holy Spirit gift of tongues when they were merely babbling. <i>Their</i> women / wives were false claiming to speak by the Holy Spirit gift of prophecy; for in the surrounding idol cults, female prophetesses were popular. The Christian church at Corinth was clearly imitating the cult at nearby Delphi, based around the temple of Apollo. This cult was characterized by women claiming to be prophetesses. And it would seem that the women of the church pretended to the same office. This is why Paul is uncharacteristically blunt and direct on this point- they were to shut up. They were not true prophetesses. I have noted several times that the Corinthians were also under the influence of Judaizers. And so Paul now plays their own logic against themselves- he quotes Jewish scripture and Jewish synagogue reasoning back to them, as if to say: 'If you are really as Jewish and Mosaic Law compliant as you claim- well then in any case, your women should be in subjection to their husbands; &quot;the law&quot; says so'. They could not on one hand claim to be compliant with Judaism and the Jewish law, whilst on the other hand allowing their women to act as the prophetesses of Delphi, but under a Christian guise. I noted on 1 Tim. 2 that a similar problem arose at Ephesus, with the women in the church acting as the priestesses of Diana, but under colour of Christianity.</p><p>There are of course other possibilities. Perhaps we are to read this command about women specifically in the context of the memorial meeting, which appears the context here in 1 Cor. 14. However, it is evident that women did possess the gift of teaching by 'prophecy' in other contexts:<br />- To teach other women after the pattern of Elizabeth teaching Mary, and Miriam the women of Israel- both by the gift of prophecy (cp. Tit.2:3,4). The reference in 1 Tim. 2:9 to how women should &ldquo;also&rdquo; pray publicly in an appropriate way suggests that there was an organised &lsquo;sisters class&rsquo; movement in the early church. It has been observed: &ldquo;Where women were kept secluded in Greek society, sisters would be the only ones who could teach them. Teaching by brethren would be difficult in such circumstances&rdquo;. <br />- To teach in 'Sunday Schools' (there is ample Old Testament precedent for women teaching children). <br />- To teach unbelievers. This clearly occurred in the early church. Euodia and Syntyche had &ldquo;laboured side by side&rdquo; with Paul in the work of the Gospel (Phil. 4:2,3 NIV). Priscilla helped Aquila teach Apollos the Gospel (Acts 18:26). At least eight of the sisters mentioned in Romans 16 are described as workers / labourers. Philip&rsquo;s seven daughters were prophetesses- presumably not speaking the word to baptized brethren, but either to the world or to other sisters. &nbsp;</p><p>There's even evidence that there was an organized women's missionary movement in the early church. Clement of Alexandria commented: &quot;The Apostles, giving themselves without respite to the work of evangelism... took with them women, not as wives but as sisters, to share in their ministry to women living at home: by their agency the teaching of the Lord reached the women's quarters without raising suspicion&quot;.</p><p>All these references to women in the early church teaching would have been anathema to many of the surrounding cultures in which the Gospel spread in the first century: &ldquo;Not only the arm, but the voice of a modest woman ought to be kept from the public, and she should feel shame at being heard&hellip;she should speak to or through her husband&rdquo; (Plutarch, <i>Advice to Bride and Groom</i> 31-32). Likewise the encouragement for a woman to &ldquo;learn in silence&rdquo; was a frontal attack on the position that a woman&rsquo;s duty was to follow the religion of her husband and concern herself with domestic duties rather than religious learning. The way the Lord commended Mary rather than Martha for her choice to learn and her rejection of domesticity similarly challenged the prevailing gender perception. There is no doubt that a 1st century Christian woman was far more liberated than in any other contemporary religion. In our societies too, our sisters mustn&rsquo;t&nbsp; concern themselves <i>only </i>&nbsp;with domestic duties.</p><p><i>But let them be in subjection, as also said the law- </i>But the word translated &quot;in subjection&quot; has just been used in :32 for how the Spirit would be subject to the prophet. The question is therefore to what or whom should the woman be subject; and where does &quot;the law&quot; state that. The same word for &quot;subjection&quot; is used about a Christian married woman's subjection to her believing husband (Eph. 5:22; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1). And within this same section, Paul has taught that the head of the married woman is the man husband (1 Cor. 11:3). In this case, the Old Testament reference to female subjection to the husband would be to Gen. 3:16. This seems the obvious reference; but see my comments on <i>Let the women keep silence</i>.</p>