Search — Theology Explorer

Mike reads the passage and acknowledges modern readers will find it offensive, but states his main concern is understanding what it actually means in context.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 biblical authority 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 women's silence in church

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Christian obligation to receive and understand scripture fully

Mike states his commitment to believing and supporting what scripture teaches, even on difficult topics.

biblical authority biblical inerrancy

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Overview of the egalitarian vs. complementarian debate

Mike frames the two polar opposite positions on women in ministry as context for the five views he will present.

complementarianism egalitarianism gender roles

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Introduction of View 1: The Interpolation View

Mike introduces the first of five views, which argues these verses do not belong in the Bible at all.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 textual criticism 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 interpolation theory

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Introduction of View 2: The Quotation-Refutation View

Mike introduces the view that Paul is quoting the Corinthians and then refuting them in verse 36.

1 Corinthians 14:36 quotation-refutation view 1 Corinthians 14:36

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Introduction of View 3: The Education/Clatter View

Mike introduces a cluster of related views that shift the focus from women per se to education or disruptive behavior.

education view clatter view Dionysus cult

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Introduction of View 4: The Utter Silence View

Mike introduces the most strict complementarian view, which limits women from nearly all public speech in church.

complementarianism utter silence view women's speech in church

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

Introduction of View 5: The Judging Prophecy View (Mike's own view)

Mike introduces his preferred interpretation, which limits the silence command specifically to the testing/judging of prophecy.

complementarianism judging prophecy view testing prophecy

← Prev Page 119 of 182 Next →

Question 7: What is Paul's point about creation order and purpose in verses 8-9?

Egalitarians consistently ignore or absorb verse 9 into verse 8

Payne on verse 9: 'woman made for man' means sexual partnership -- creates a contradiction

Gordon Fee on verse 9: woman is 'necessary for man' to fulfill his calling -- also creates contradiction

Keener on verse 9: translates 'for' as 'through,' making it reiterate verse 8

Verse 9 is the weak spot for egalitarianism: no decent interpretation exists

Question 8: What does 'nature' (physis) mean in verse 14?

Craig Keener acknowledges 'nature' normally means the opposite of custom

Something being custom doesn't make it only custom; it may also be grounded in nature

Exceptions to hair length rules: Nazirite vows, philosophers, and the principle behind exceptions

Paul uses physis nine times consistently: never means 'custom'

Hair length is probably a transcultural moral obligation; application to today

Question 9: Is this about men/women generally or husbands/wives specifically?

Question 10: How is woman the glory of man and man the glory of God?

Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2-3: relationship to creation vs. relationship to each other

Egalitarian interpretations of 'glory' all use two different meanings for the same word

Philip Payne's view of 'glory' also fails: man is God's glory means not-woman; woman is man's glory means sexual partner

Tom Schreiner's consistent interpretation of glory as 'honor' works for both uses

Glory as honor connects the entire passage: headship chain produces honor chain

Question 11: Does the woman have a symbol of authority on her head, or authority over her own head? (exousia debate)

Schreiner point 1: verses 7 and 10 form a parallel (man uncovered / woman covered)

Schreiner points 2-4: 'ought' implies obligation not freedom; vv.3-9 clearly about male headship; v.11 is a contrast

Exousia CAN be used symbolically: BDAG, Greek fathers, and Diodorus of Sicily support this

Revelation examples: diadems and crowns on heads are symbols of authority

Early textual variant substitutes 'covering' (kalumma) for 'authority' (exousia) in verse 10

Even if exousia is active, it can refer to the man's authority in this context

Question 12: What does 'because of the angels' mean? Four views evaluated

Mike's preferred view: holy angelic observers who delight in seeing God's order in worship

Question 13: The testicle theory -- Troy Martin's claim about peribolaion

Three key questions for evaluating the testicle theory

Ancient medical thought: Hippocrates and Aristotle on hair and reproduction

Martin's two ancient sources for peribolaion meaning testicle: Achilles Tatius and Euripides

Euripides source: all published translations use clothing metaphor, not testicle

Martin's later paper shifts: claims he can establish testicle meaning from 1 Corinthians alone

Six reasons Martin gives for testicle in 1 Corinthians 11 -- all fail

How the testicle view does NOT fit 1 Corinthians 11: five additional problems

Question 14: How does it apply today? The argument FOR transcultural head coverings (7 points)

The argument AGAINST transcultural head coverings: Paul never argues for the MEANING of head coverings

Hair length IS probably transcultural since Paul argues for it directly from nature

The cultural view is not arbitrary: five facts support it

Warning: head coverings can be a gateway into cults and weird teachings

Final conclusions: male headship is biblical, complementarian, and to be celebrated

Introduction of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as a highly controversial passage

Christian obligation to receive and understand scripture fully

Overview of the egalitarian vs. complementarian debate

Introduction of View 1: The Interpolation View

Introduction of View 2: The Quotation-Refutation View

Introduction of View 3: The Education/Clatter View

Introduction of View 4: The Utter Silence View

Introduction of View 5: The Judging Prophecy View (Mike's own view)

Bible Link Settings