Cheryl Schatz

Mark,
Again there is a huge difference between attacking a person or disputing and refuting their position. This blog is about giving a reason for the hope that is within us that allows women to freely use their gifts in the body of Christ and for refuting the complementarian position by showing where it doesn’t fit with the Scriptures.

As far as the open debate with Mike Seaver, it went very well. Mike is a very likable brother in Christ and I think we will have a friendship even though we do not agree on this issue. Mike did admit to several things that brought a bridge-building attitude into the debate which was very much appreciated.

Mark you said:

The evidence to suggest that Paul is quoting a Corinthian standard is very very limited.

I didn’t say that Paul was quoting a Corinthian “standard”. What I said was that Paul was quoting from the letter from the Corinthians that was written to him. It is a common understanding that Paul quotes from this letter several times in 1 Corinthians. The fact is that there is zero evidence that there is a “law” in the Scriptures that silences women in the assembly and makes their voices considered as filthy. Such a law is found in the Talmud or the oral law of the Jews.

You give a link to Don Carson who you say deals with the questions but this is not true. He does not adequately deal with the questions nor does he answer the contradictions of his own view. He points out that Paul never quoted the Jewish oral law and this fact supports my own view not Carsons. The quote then is not Paul’s quote but a quote from the Corinthians. There is no other such “law” found in the Scriptures so Paul could not be quoting such a law. Carson completely fails to present such a Scriptural “law” that would make the words as coming from Paul himself. Secondly Carson admits that the beginning of verse 36 is “probably” a disjunctive particle. It most certainly is a disjunctive particle and it is used to refute the preceding verses. He tries to make Thayer’s say that it isn’t refuting the previous verses but agreeing with them but this is not not true and makes Carson come across as being deceptive. The Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament gives the same meaning and it even lists 1 Cor. 14:36 as one of the examples of such a question where a negative answer is expected.

c) n is used frequently to introduce rhetorical questions to which a negative answer is expected (Matt 7:9: “Or is there one among you … ?”; 12:5: “Or have you not read … ?”; cf. 20:15; 26:53; Luke 13:4; Rom 3:29; 6:5; 7:1; 9:21; 11:2; 1 Cor 6:9, 16, 19; 9:8; 10:22; 2 Cor 11:7; 13:5; Jas 4:5; a double question in 1 Cor 14:36).
Exegetical dictionary of the New Testament.

Carson’s position simply cannot hold up under scrutiny. He has not refuted the position that verses 34 & 35 were quotations from the Corinthian letter and he has given no place where we can find a law in the OT that restricts women in the assembly. Where is such a law located? Carson says that it is not in Genesis 3:16 as so many think but “probably” is referring to the creation order in Genesis 2:20-24. But there is no such “law” in Genesis 2:20-24 and God’s laws are not indistinct and unclear. God’s laws are not “probably” but clear, distinct and enforceable. Carson has struck out in the very important area of defining the “law” of 1 Cor. 14:34. He has failed as every other complementarian has failed to identify the law.

The fact is that it is identifiable in the oral tradition of the Jews. Since Paul never appealed to this tradition, it must be taken as a quote from the Judalizers who had infiltrated all the other congregations trying to bring the Christians under the Jewish law. No other explanation fits the inspired words in this passage.

Psalms 68:11 is about God’s command that women were to publish the good news. God’s law has no limitations on place or race, class of people or social standing that women are to publish the good news too. If there is to be a Scripture that refutes Psalms 68:11 then it must be distinct that God has forbidden women from publishing the good news in the assembly. There is no such law against this so God’s command in Psalms 68:11 stands.

I hope this helps!