Frank

Though the traditional understanding of 1 Cor 14:34-35 as an absolute prohibition against women preaching and teaching has been shown to be without any sound foundation in any other OT or NT, it is still being used to silence women.  In the May issue of The Trinity Review, Gary Crampton an article in which he pitted 1 Cor 11:2-11 and  1 Cor 14:34-35, arguing that the first passage was “hypothetical” in nature while the second passage is a clear and definite denial of and prohibition against what Paul apparently granted in the previous passage.  Jon Zens (whom some of you may know) that I had previously written a study on prophets and prophecy from an egalitarian viewpoint, and asked me to write a reply to this article.   And one of the first things I targeted was this matter of “the elusive law.”   Still, people stick to their opinions, regardless of the contrary evidence presented to them.  Very sad.