Exploring the biblical theology of Christian egalitarianism

Close this search box.


1 Corinthians 14:34-35, which begins with “Women should be silent in the churches,” has been used for centuries to keep women out of ministries that involve public speaking. These two verses are situated in a passage, 1 Corinthians 14:26-40, where Paul addressed the unruly speech of certain people within the Corinthian church. His aim here was to silence disorderly speech, but also to encourage edifying ministry.

Verses 26-40 flow on from a discussion on spiritual gifts where Paul promoted intelligible prophetic ministry (cf. 1 Cor. 14:1, 12). And nothing in 1 Corinthians 14:1-33 (the verses that come before verses 34-35) indicates that Paul’s advice on the use of spiritual gifts, including speaking and teaching gifts, was only for men. Furthermore, we know that women prayed and delivered prophetic messages in the Christian community in Corinth, and Paul did not silence them (1 Cor. 11:5).

Church meetings in Corinth could be chaotic. It seems that some people were talking over others and not waiting for their turn, while others were taking too long when they spoke and were not giving others an opportunity to speak. It is this unedifying and unloving[1] clamour that Paul was addressing in 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 and he silenced both disorderly men and disorderly women.

Because Paul’s intention in verses 34-35 continues to be misunderstood, in this blog post, I’ve laid out verses 26-40 to show its structure and repeated vocabulary,[2] and I’ve highlighted Paul’s main ideas which occur at the beginning, middle, and end of this passage. I’ve also added a few notes which I’ve kept short. I hope that by laying out the passage in this way, Paul’s aim may become more apparent.

A. Encouraging Edifying and Orderly Speech

26 What then, brothers and sisters (adelphoi)? Whenever you come together, each one has a hymn, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.
Everything (panta) is to be done (ginomai) for building up (oikodomeo).

Note 1: In his lists of ministries, including 1 Corinthians 14:26, Paul gives no hint that some of them are only for men. See also Romans 12:6–8, 1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11 and Colossians 3:16. These lists apply to gifted men and women.

Note 2: The verb oikodomeō, meaning “to build up, to edify” occurs three times in 1 Corinthians 14: 14:4 (twice) and 14:17. The related abstract noun oikodomē occurs four times in the same chapter with the meaning “edification”: 1 Corinthians 14:3, 5, 12 and 26. The high incidence of these “building” words in chapter 14 suggests that the Corinthians were ministering in a way that was not edifying, and Paul wasn’t happy about it.

B(a) Instructions for Spiritual Speakers:

27 If anyone speaks (laleō) in a tongue (glossa), there are to be only two, or at the most three, each in turn, and let someone interpret. 28 But if there is no interpreter, that person is to keep silent (sigaō) in the church and speak (laleō) to himself and God.

Note 3: The Greek verb sigaō, which means “be silent,” occurs three times in this passage: 1 Corinthians 14:28, 30 and 34. Paul was silencing unedifying and disorderly speaking from three groups of speakers, not just women, and he provided corrections.

B(b) Instructions for Spiritual Speakers:

29 Two or three prophets (prophēt–) should speak (laleō), and the others should evaluate. 30 But if something has been revealed to another person sitting there, the first prophet (prophēt–) should be silent (sigaō).
31 For you can all (panta) prophesy (prophēt–) one by one, so that everyone (panta) may learn (manthanō) and everyone (panta) may be encouraged (parakaleō).

Note 4: Paul encouraged people to participate in ministry in church meetings (cf. Col. 3:16). The phrases, “each one has a hymn, a teaching …” (in verse 26) and “you can all prophesy” (in verse 29), and his use of “all,” indicates that many people in the Corinthian church participated in spoken ministries, sometimes spontaneously. (This scenario is unlike what happens in many church meetings today.)

Note 5: 1 Corinthians 14:31 implies that prophesy often includes teaching and instruction. Teaching is mentioned in each of Paul’s lists cited in note 1 without any hint that this was off-limits to capable women.

C. Disorderly Speakers Should Control their Speech:
Speech from the Prophets

32 And the prophets’ (prophēt–) spirits are to be controlled (hypotassō) by the prophets (prophēt–).

Note 6: The Greek verb hypotassō is often translated as “submit” in English translations of the New Testament. In the context of 1 Corinthians 14:32 and 34, this verb means to control or regulate one’s speech for the sake of order, harmony, and peace in the community of God’s people. Paul often uses the verb hypotassō intending to promote cooperation and unity. His aim was never to subordinate any Jesus-followers.

X The Crux of the Passage

33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all (panta) the churches of the saints. 

Note 7: Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 are practical, but here in verse 33, he makes a theological statement to support his instructions: God is a God of peace. Paul wanted church meetings to reflect the nature of God. Instead of chaos, he wanted concord and self-control.

Note 8: Akatastasia, often translated as “disorder” in verse 33, can mean instability, anarchy, and confusion. (See LSJ.) This word occurs 5 times in the Greek New Testament for disturbances and ructions.

Note 9: There is some disagreement about whether the phrase “as in all the churches of the saints is part of the same sentence with “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace” as I have it here, or whether it is the first phrase of the following verse. The meaning does not change significantly either way. 

C. Disorderly Speakers Should Control their Speech:
Speech to the Prophets

34 The wives/ women should be silent (sigaō) in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak (laleō), but are to control themselves (hypotassō), as the law also says.
35 If they want to learn (manthanō) something, let them ask their own husbands at home, since it is disgraceful for a wife/ woman to speak (laleō) in the church.

Note 10: Some Christians regard verses 34-35 as an interpolation, an addition not originally written by Paul. Some other Christians regard these two verses as Paul quoting a saying or a teaching of the Corinthians which he then refutes in verses 36-38. I take 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as Paul’s original words. (I discuss these three approaches, here.)

Note 11: I suggest that Paul identified the kind of speech he silenced from wives. Keeping in mind that chapter 14 is on prophetic speech, I believe Paul was telling wives, who wanted to learn (manthanō), and who were disrupting meetings by asking too many basic or nuisance questions of the prophets (cf. 1 Cor. 14:31), to keep their questions for home. In a culture where the behaviour of wives reflected strongly on their husbands, their disorderly, disruptive questions were contrary to the social norm (nomos) and were bringing disgrace to their husbands.[3]

Note 12: “Disgrace” (aischron) is brought up earlier in the same letter, in 1 Corinthians 11:5-6 which mentions women who were prophesying.[4] This previous use shows that it was not always, or necessarily, disgraceful for women to speak in church meetings in Corinth. Rather, there was something disgraceful about the way the female prophets were exposing their heads (or, wearing their hair) and there was something disgraceful about the way some wives were asking questions.

Note 13: Philip Payne writes that the previous two verses where people are told to be silent (vs. 28 and 30) “command silence for a practice normally approved, but specifically restricted in order to enhance worship and learning.”[5] I suggest the same thing is happening in verses 34-35: the wives who wanted to learn were asking too many, and perhaps mundane, questions of the prophets. So Paul tells the wives to be silent also. Paul wanted everyone to learn and be encouraged (1 Cor. 14:31), not just curious wives, and he wanted meetings to flow more smoothly with fewer questions and disruptions.

B. Cautions for Spiritual Speakers

36 Or did the word of God originate from you, or did it come to you only? 37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet (prophēt–) or spiritual, he should recognise that what I write to you is the Lord’s command. 38 If anyone ignores this, he will be ignored.

Note 14: Verse 36 does not refer to the wives (or, only to the wives) as the Greek word behind “only” is grammatically masculine. Paul here returns his attention to the prophets and the spiritual speakers which include the tongues-speakers. He wanted them to be less conceited and more considerate of others. With a touch of sarcasm perhaps, he says that if they are truly prophets and spiritual they will recognise that Paul’s instructions are effectively prophetic or spiritual, since what he writes is from the Lord.

Note 15: Paul then uses wordplay with the verb agnoeō (“to be ignorant, ignored”) used twice in verse 38 while delivering a strong warning. To be ignored was the opposite of what the unruly prophets and spiritual speakers wanted. They wanted attention.

A. Encouraging Edifying and Orderly Speech

39 So then, my brothers and sisters (adelphoi), be eager to prophesy (prophēt–), and do not forbid speaking (laleō) in tongues (glossa).
40 But everything (panta) is to be done (ginomai) decently and in order.

Note 16: Paul concludes this passage by repeating some of the vocabulary and ideas he used in verse 26 at the beginning of the passage. This repetition of language creates an inclusion: verses 26-40 form a literary unit. The verses about wives need to be read in the broader context of verses 26-40.


1 Corinthians 14:26-40 is bookended by verses that encourage edifying and orderly speech, and in the centre of the passage, Paul makes a theological statement: God is a God of peace. Paul encouraged all the members of the Corinthian church, men and women, to bring a spoken ministry, but at the same time, he addressed problem speech of some men and women.

Nowhere in his letters does Paul silence or restrict gifted and orderly ministry from anyone. He only silenced and disallowed disruptive, unsound, and self-centred speech (cf. 1 Tim. 2:11-12). There is no blanket ban in Paul’s letters that prohibit every woman for all time from speaking or teaching in church meetings. Rather, Paul’s overall theology of ministry is gender-inclusive and can be summarised as, You have a gift; use it to build up others.


[1] Paul’s teaching on spiritual gifts in chapters 12 and 14 of 1 Corinthians sandwich his famous words on love in chapter 13. (Ideally, these three chapters should be read together.) Paul felt the need to remind the Corinthians that ministry must be motivated by and given in love, genuine love.

[2] 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 may be structured to form a chiasm. A Chiasm is a literary device used in many passages of Scripture. In a chiastic structure, sentences, or even large passages, are arranged to form a χ-shaped pattern. (The Greek letter χ is pronounced “chi,” and “chi” forms part of the word chiasm.) In chiasms, thoughts are stated sequentially in one direction until a main point is reached, and then the thoughts are repeated in reverse order. In a chiasm, an important point is at the centre of a passage. I’ve written about a few chiasms in Paul’s letters, here.

[3] Paul’s reference to “the law” (ho nomos) is unclear as there is no law in the Bible that says women need to be silent. Cynthia Long Westfall states that nomos is used in 1 Corinthians 14:34 with “its most common meaning ‘rule, principle, norm.’” Westfall, Paul and Gender (Baker Academic, 2016), 237, fn85. According to this understanding, talkative women were to be quiet and behave according to the cultural norms of the day. I have a short discussion on nomos in 1 Corinthians 14:34 here.

[4] Paul’s concern in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 was that there was something unacceptable about the hairstyles or head coverings of the praying and prophesying women. (I’ve written about this passage and Paul’s concern here.) However, he “accepts as normal the fact that a woman can ‘prophesy’ in the Christian community (1 Cor 11:5), that is, speak openly under the influence of the Spirit, as long as it is for the edification of the community and done in a dignified manner.” Benedict XVI, “Women at the Service of the Gospel,” February 14th, 2007 (Vatican Source)

[5] Philip B. Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 256. Payne understands 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as being an interpolation.

Image Credit

Photo of stained glass window by Adrien Olichon (cropped) via Unsplash.

Explore more

All my articles on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 are here.
All my articles on 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 are here.
Extra Honour for UnderDogs (1 Cor. 12:12-31)
Partnering Together: Paul’s Female Coworkers
Paul’s Theology of Ministry
바울 사역의 신학
The Means of Ministry: Gifts, Grace, Faith … Gender?
Every Female Prophet in the Bible
Adelphoi (“Brothers and Sisters”) in Paul’s Letters
Egalitarian Basics

20 thoughts on “The Structure and Language of 1 Corinthians 14:26-40

  1. …a flattering mouth creates ruin… (Proverbs 26:28)
    מִדְחֶה‎ (midḥeh) ruin.
    ἀκαταστασία also appears once in the LXX as a translation for this Hebrew word.
    Thanks for the tip, Marg.

    1. Thanks for this, Jack.

  2. Agreed with all of this and have taught the same. Your argument would be even stronger if you integrated chapter 14 more with the whole passage on this subject of gifts and the practices in being the body of Christ together. Chapters 12-14 are a single unit in the letter with all three chapters addressing various aspects of being spiritual in church life and meeting. The use of πνευματικός in the intro to both chapters 12 and 14 (also in 14:37) makes this clear, as does the content of chapter 13.

    I do appreciate your scholarship and insights and always learn a lot. Muchly impressed!

    1. Thanks, Graham.

      This article isn’t primarily about arguing a point, though I do make a few. I wrote this article for someone who asked specifically about the structure of verses 26-40. Nevertheless, I mention chapters 12-14 in a footnote.

      1 Corinthians 12 is one of my favourite chapters in the Bible! Paul’s vision for community in chapters 12 and 13 is wonderful and it remains my hope. https://margmowczko.com/tag/1-corinthians-12/

  3. When I read Chapter 14 from start to finish in one sitting, verses 34 and 35 stick out like a sore thumb. You mentioned previously to me that they stick out in the Greek as well. The chiastic structure of verses 26-40 seem more cohesive without those two verses. Add the textual evidence that Payne and Fee argue for, and I struggle moving away from the interpolation theory. As for the Quotation/Refutation theory, I don’t believe the first word in verse 36 means “What?!” (as the KJV renders it), I believe it simply means “Or” and it follows perfectly from verse 33. Just my thoughts. Thank you for the breakdown, though, very helpful as always.

    1. And I realize that the interpolation would’ve had to be early, but not impossibly early, and an early interpolation actually makes more sense given the cultural norms (nomos) of the day and the radical changes that Paul was teaching.

    2. Verses 34-35 do stick out, especially if we don’t connect them with prophesy.

      1. You’ve asked me before to “push back” if I don’t agree with your conclusions. With all due respect, I am not agreeing with you here. I’m sure we will have to agree to disagree, which is fine.

        In my opinion, reading all of Chapter 14, Paul consistently bounces back and forth between the gifts of prophecy and tongues. He is comparing and contrasting those two gifts throughout the entire chapter. Verses 34 and 35 are not “connected” with prophesying. They are literally the only two verses in all of Chapter 14 that don’t either specifically mention prophecy or tongues, or at least describe one of those two gifts.

        Knowing that verse 36 can not be directed at women, due to the masculine use of “only”, shows us that it is referring to verse 33 which would make perfect sense, if it weren’t for two random verses in between them. I’m guessing we’d be hard pressed to find a Pauline example of a sentence starting with “or” that didn’t point to the verse or passage immediately preceding it.

        Regarding the word for “shame/disgrace” in verse 35. Paul only uses that word for situations that are truly disgraceful. In 1 Corinthians 11:6 he is indicating that if a woman’s hair is let down, it is as if it is shaven, which would be a disgrace indicating that she was a convicted adulteress, as per Numbers 5. Ephesians 5:11-12 is talking about “unfruitful works of darkness” and “those things which are done in secret”, undoubtedly more disgraceful things than women disrupting a worship service. Titus 1:10-11 is referring to “unruly and vain talkers and deceivers” “who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy advantage.”

        I debated whether the two verses belong after verse 40 as they are sometimes found. However, they would stick out just as bad there in my opinion.

        You’ve persuaded me and changed my thinking on several issues here lately (I thank you for that!), but so far the Holy Spirit has me seeing this issue in a different light.

        1. Hi Jill, I have no problem at all with people who understand verses 34-35 differently from me.

          I’ll address three points in response.

          1. Verses 34-35 don’t mention “prophesy” or “speaking in tongues,” but they do contain 4 verbs used significantly elsewhere in verses 26-40. (Not every statement or idea in verses 26-40 contains a “prophet” or “tongues” word.) And verses 34-35 contain aischron used elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.

          As Ciampa and Rosner point out in their commentary The First Letter to the Corinthians (PNTC; InterVarsity, 2020), asking questions was “the most common mode of engaging prophets in the Hellenistic world.” (See their discussion on Google Books.) And this is what I think some of the wives were doing. See also a summary of Ben Witherington’s understanding of verses 34-35, under the heading “Women must not ask Personal Questions of the Prophets,” here.

          2. For comparison, Paul’s use of ἤ (“or”) at the beginning of a sentence also occurs in Romans 7:1 ESV and 2 Corinthians 11:7.

          3. The speech of some of the Corinthian wives (as well as the appearance of some of the praying and prophesying women) was truly disgraceful and was shaming their husbands.

          Bauer and Danker (BDAG) say this about aischros, a, on:
          “A term especially significant in honor-shame oriented society; generally in reference to that which fails to meet expected moral and cultural standards [the opposite of kalos] pertaining to being socially or morally unacceptable …” (Their use of square brackets.)

          This understanding totally fits with the use in 1 Corinthians. Craig Keener writes, “It was “shameful” or “disgraceful” for a woman to interrupt the service with her questions (14:35) the same way it was “shameful” or “disgraceful” for a woman to have her head uncovered or hair cropped short (11:6): it offended the cultural sensitivies of those whom the church wanted to reach with the gospel.” Keener, Paul, Women and Wives, 86. (I think some Corinthian women were cutting their hair short like Thecla.)

          Aischros, a, on can have other nuances, though. For comparison, the neuter form + infinitive that occurs in 1 Corinthians 11:6 and 14:35 also occurs in Judith 12:12 and 4 Maccabees 16:17. The neuter also ocurs in the late first-century letter to the Corinthians, 1 Clement (47:6).

  4. Good article. I wouid just add that 14:31 is probably not just about being able to learn FROM the prophets speaking, but also that everyone can learn to share (prophesy) also. The more experienced members of the Body are supposed to be equipping everyone for the work of the ministry, and if the goal is for everyone to “prophesy” (share the Lord verbally) then we need to take that seriously and do something about it. And I’m not talking about the current fashion for “Schools of supernatural ministry” that try to teach people to give others supernatural words of knowledge–I’m referring to something much more basic and ordinary that happens in really good small groups, simply learning to articulately share what the Lord has been showing you, teaching you, impressing you with, making insightful comments on what others share, learning how to encourage others in the Body.

    It’s also terrible how some people guilt or pressure shy or introverted people to share their faith with strangers without first giving them any opportunity to learn to share the Lord in the Body with supportive people they know (assuming your church is truly loving and close knit, and not critical and nasty, or a place where people don’t have real relationships with each other and feel comfortable with each other.) Again equipping and discipleship must happen and we tend to be horrible at this. We need to be very cautious about saying you must be “gifted” to minister in the Body, since we all are to minister. Obviously some will gravitate to or be better at some things than another. But you shouldn’t have to be some amazingly adept speaker before being allowed to share…especially short things as opposed to a 45 minute message.

    The secular world understand that learning public speaking is a very important part of education and being well-rounded. They don’t limit it to the incredibly charismatic personalities. We shouldn’t either, but I think we are tempted to define “gifted” that way, and we really only want “highly gifted.” Average decent communicators needn’t bother. People with wonderful things to share but maybe aren’t polished speakers needn’t bother either. Practice makes people better at things and eliminating the stage and pulpit and microphone, and the pressure of needing to have a well-put together 30 minute speech, eliminates most of the fear of opening our mouths and sharing. Small groups can be great for this but most of the time they are just another place to shut up and listen to another lesson by a practiced teacher, even if they take place in a living room. Very sad and ruining thr equipping we are commanded to do.

    1. Thanks’s Angela. I definitely don’t think Paul thought of spiritually gifted people in the way we use “gifted” today, namely, for remarkably intelligent or skilled people.

      I’m not sure about the “learn to share” idea, though. I’ll have to think about that.

    2. In today’s Church, gift Ministries are formally recognized by many. Prophetic utterance is, in its most acute form, Prophetic Ministry. The general Church population can move prophetically to a certain degree — for edification purposes. The Holy Spirit inspires all of us to guide, teach and encourage one another. It is a matter of unification being maintained and sought within the given fellowship.
      For many years I stood with those who moved prophetically, and we all had a deep sense of respect for the other, stepping aside to let the other speak as the Holy Spirit gave utterance. I have moved quietly as Prophetic Minister for close to forty years and the key element is always be motivated by love and kindness.
      The Corinthian church was in a rabble. When you read it it is clear there was some pushing and shoving going on, a fight for personal attention perhaps? Selfish motivation have no place when gifts of the Spirit are in play.
      The ‘interpolation’ is a strange cookie. I know, I use weird descriptions LOL. I don’t believe it was inserted at some time or other, at a later date. I believe Paul said it, or wrote it rather. It is so obvious that something rather serious was happening for him to be so explicit regarding women to be silent. One only need search the Scripture, both Old and New Testament to see that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is upon all flesh. So, Paul must have had a cultural reason for speaking this way. The sad thing about this is this section has been used very aggressively to silence women for generations to come after this was written. A shameful and offensive act by those seeking to control and manipulate.
      I have stood beside and ministered Prophetically with female Prophets without issue, and I have also sat and been taught Scripture by female teachers. I absolutely love listening to female ministers and the body of Christ could do well to open up their hearts and minds (be renewed) to women ‘speaking’ in the liberty of the Spirit. I only wish that men, those is positions of power would surrender control back to God on this.
      I don’t know what else to say except I am speaking from personal ministerial experience which must count for something?

      1. If I may just add this: vs 35, 35 feel like they have been jammed in, heavy handed or fisted into place within the chapter. Feels like a square peg being wedged into a round hole. And also Paul sounds caustic in his speech. I’m not contradicting myself, but from a literary structure perspective it feels clumsy. And Paul seems to have shifted his style of speaking into slap’em down dominance mode? But it IS there. However, there is far too much Scripture that actually contradicts ‘women keep silent in the church’s’ being used as a universal, now and forever in the future teaching. IMHO

  5. I purchased Philip Payne’s book (based on your recommendation) that is referenced in this footnote: “[5] Philip B. Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 256. Payne understands 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as being an interpolation.”

    His evidence is VERY compelling that these verses were never in Paul’s original letter. Some later copyist wrote this as a note in the margin. Later copyists integrated it into subsequent copies of the text. Thus, not Scripture at all – ever. Woe unto them!

    Much time and effort over the centuries has been put into “shushing” women. This is not scriptural. Indeed, the Lord has not contradicted himself nor has the Apostle Paul. Thanks for putting me onto Payne’s books!

    1. Hi Nancy, There are good reasons to think that verses 34-35 is an interpolation. However, there is no existing ancient manuscript of 1 Corinthians 14 that does not contain these verses or only has them in a margin.

      I’ve briefly written about the interpolation theory, and I have a lengthy quotation from Payne in a footnote here: https://margmowczko.com/interpretations-applications-1-cor-14_34-35/

      In that article, I include an image of verses 34-35 in the sixth-century Codex Claromontanus near the bottom of the page. And in a postscript, I have links to images of the verses in Papyrus 46 (the oldest surviving text that contains 1 Corinthians 14) and Codex Vaticanus.

  6. […] In 1 Corinthians 14:26–40, Paul addresses the rowdy speech of some Corinthians. He silences three groups of people while encouraging orderly and edifying speech. In this context, Paul uses hypotassō twice. […]

  7. There is simply no way that Paul wrote these verses. There is a mountain of evidence for interpolation:
    1. They stick out like a sore thumb.
    2. They break up the natural chiastic structure of the passage (withOUT verses 34-35). Your chiastic structure with verses 34-35 is weaker than the one without the two verses, in my honest opinion.
    3. Many Bible scholars and theologians (both male and female) have concluded that the verses were a later addition.
    4. Even though 1 Corinthians was the most quoted epistle by Christian writers in the second century, no Apolstolic Father or early ecclesiastical writer cites these two verses prior to Tertullian (c. AD 200)
    5. Unprecedented presence of a large chunk of text in two different locations (after 33 and after 40).
    6. “As the law says” occurs nowhere else in Paul’s letters.
    7. Codex Fuldensis and MS 88 were each copied from manuscripts that don’t have the two verses.
    8. Codex Vaticanus scribal markings called “obelos” shows that the text was added, not original.
    9. Contradiction of other Pauline verses.
    10. Motive. The whole passage uses gender inclusive language, and that ticked off some early scribe who wrote his thoughts (based on his recollection of 1 Tim 2:11-12) in the margins.

    Finally, my husband who is not typically a student of the Bible, but is a born-again believer, read the whole passage first without 34-35, and then with 34-35, not knowing what the exercise I was having him do was aimed at, and using nothing but discernment from the Holy Spirit, stated emphatically, those verses don’t belong there.

    I know we will have to agree to disagree, and I will never understand why you cling to the authenticity of these two verses. It is my one honest critique of your ministry, and your ministry has been a huge blessing to me. There was PLENTY of time for an early scribe to pen these remarks. And as I’ve mentioned in the past, an early gloss makes more sense than a later gloss. These were radical changes that Paul was teaching.

    God bless.

    1. Jill, you’re not telling me anything I don’t already know, and I’m not sure why you keep posting comments about this. I have no issue with you preferring the interpolation theory, so I don’t understand why it bothers you so much that I prefer a different approach. (“Cling” is not the best verb to describe my attitude.)

      I openly acknowledge the possibility of the interpolation theory in my articles on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. Nevertheless, my view is the same as Craig Keener’s on this: “Personally, I don’t think the manuscript evidence is actually sufficient to argue for that here. I don’t think that’s the solution.”
      From a speech given on March 22, 2024 at the Network of Women Ministers Evening (On YouTube starting at the 44.59-minute mark)

      I don’t see our different approaches to 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as agreeing to disagree. If you’re convinced of the interpolation theory, Great! Go for it! It’s simply not a problem for me.

      However point 7 in your comment is entirely speculative. The sixth-century Codex Fuldensis, written in Latin, has all the verses of 1 Corinthians 14 in the order we have it in modern Bibles today in the body of the text. It is a margin note that raises questions about verses 34-35. And Philip Payne claims that MS 88 was copied from a manuscript that did not have 1 Cor 14:34-35 after verse 33. Rather, these two verses were in a different location.

      There is no manuscript that leaves out verses 34-35 altogether.

  8. Codex Fuldensis is not “entirely speculative”. There is solid evidence that Victor had replacement text (sans verses 34-35) written in the bottom margin.

    Regardless, you are correct, and I apologize. I have been somewhat stuck on the fact that you and I don’t align on this, because we do align on everything else. And you have definitely set me straight in a number of areas. I am in good company with Phil Payne, Gordon Fee, Andrew Bartlett, Terran Williams and others. I guess that will have to suffice.

    1. Yes, you are in good company. 🙂

      Also, I didn’t say or mean Codex Fuldensis itself is speculative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Marg's Blog

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Join Marg's Patreon

Would you like to support my ministry of encouraging mutuality and equality between men and women in the church and in marriage?