Paul's Passing Thoughts

The Problem With Church and Women Preachers According to Andrew

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on November 13, 2019

ppt-jpeg4Pastor John MacArthur is back in the Church news and what is presently trending in the Church drama kingdom. Many who follow him have gone to their Twitter accounts and posted their accolades concerning his uncompromising stand on the word of Gawd (pronounce with hard G). His total compromise with the wacky New Calvinist cartel notwithstanding.

So, what is it this week that distracts from a focus on the justification by faith false gospel that isn’t justification by the law because Jesus keeps it for us? Not the usual favorite, election, but ah yes, the controversy of women preachers. MacArthur preached a sermon against women preachers that has gone viral. Note: this means Beth Moore is receiving an unacceptable market share of layman slave labor.

In the sermon, he focuses on 1Corintians 14:

34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

As a former SBC pastor I was all-in on the anti-women preachers thing…and the cognitive dissonace that goes along with it in the church. MacArthur uses this passage to make a case for women not preaching in the church or being elders, but Houston, we have a problem.

The passage does not say it is a shame for women to preach in the church, it states that it is a shame (disgrace or immoral) for women to say anything in the church…period. MacArthur uses this passage for the pastor issue, and no one even blinks; the whole grammatical concept of total silence does not create the slightest spark of individual thought but rather a running to the PC to extol MacArthur’s Scriptural brilliance.

Meanwhile, no one thinks anything about women teaching children’s Sunday School classes. “Silence” all of a sudden doesn’t mean “silence”; it only means silence in regard to preaching. Of course, many other examples of women speaking in the church to serve its purposes could be added; point here follows, it’s logically inconsistent to say the least. But welcome to church, and welcome to why people are not getting saved because of their God-given commonsense.

Let’s be honest; these inconsistencies are driven by a traditional lust for authoritative caste systems and then labeled with the haughty “Sola Scriptura” which is rank propaganda. People go to church because thinking is hard, and they are all too happy to pay the John MacArthurs of the world to think for them while getting a ticket to heaven to boot. Supposedly. And let me be a bit more clear: people go to church because they are lazy thinkers.

In our home fellowship movement, our learning is collective. A collective effort by Christ’s body is the only way that the full counsel of God’s word is going to be understood. This brings up Andy Young’s interesting take on this passage of which initially I was skeptical, but recently less so.

Though Andy is not yet dogmatic about this, he suggests that Paul is referring to a secular ekklesia of that day. This is the Greek word for the political assemblies of that day, and is the word borrowed for Christian assemblies and for some weird reason translated “church” in English translations. In the Roman ekklesias, by law, women were not allowed to speak. All of a sudden, a context where women are forbidden to speak at all makes perfect sense. In context of a Christian assembly fellowship, you have all kinds of problems with logical consistency if that is what Paul is talking about.

“But wait,” I thought, Paul also said “as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.” So, Paul is identifying what ekklesia he is talking about, right? Ironically, I remembered that argument from a prior sermon by MacArthur on the same passage some years ago. But once again I find that instead of MacArthur being a grammatical technician, he is, in reality, a grammatical sluggard and there are many, many examples of this. Paul mentions the Christian ekklesias immediately prior to this sentence on women speaking, and the prior statement could actually be a demarcation for purposes of writing about the other; this also fits the context of Paul’s discussion on another issue.

Paul is also addressing the cultural feminist movement that had inundated the assemblies at Corinth which included women with shaved heads speaking in ecstatic tongues during the Christian gatherings and fellowship. Paul is addressing this kind of anti-social behavior in the name of Christianity. It stands to reason that feminists were also speaking out at Roman ekklesias in violation of the law as a way to practice civil disobedience for protest purposes. Or, as another way to prove that they were free from their husband’s authority over them, may have been asking the assemblymen questions about civil policies in the open forum.

At any rate, this take on women not speaking at all makes sense; in context of Christian assembly, it makes no sense at all. Hence, I don’t think Paul is talking about a Christian assembly.

And by the way, in our day, if there is a woman out there that can articulate the true gospel of justification by new birth; I say, let her preach. It wouldn’t be the first time God has called woman to do a man’s job when men won’t do it, and it goes without saying that there is a severe shortage of real men in the church.


10 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Anonymous said, on November 13, 2019 at 5:51 PM

    Paul, what do we do with this verse:

    1 Timothy 2:12

    I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.



    • Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on November 14, 2019 at 6:24 AM

      I do agree that eldership is not a gift granted to women by the Spirit. But it is not a role or status of authority; rather, edification. When there is authority leadership and persuasion aren’t needed; people merely obey what they are told to do. God wants the freewill offerings of love from a willing heart not obedience to the law to avoid consequences. I think in 1Timothy 2:12 we find that cuts both ways and is Paul’s response to what is going on in the culture at that time. In our home fellowship women are more than welcome to add to the lesson but I prepare it and lead it because I am an elder. However, there is a severe dearth of the true gospel in our day; if a woman can aptly articulate the true gospel of justification by new birth, I say let her teach. Yes, if men will not stand up to the pseudo theological expertism of our day and have a mind of their own let the women stand up. In fact, that’s what we find here at TANC ministries often; it’s godly women who are standing up to what’s going on while the men are asleep at the switch. MOREOVER, church women are really being called on to submit to church leaders by default because husbands are told to be “in submission to godly men.” Lastly, the whole thing with women Sunday School teachers is wholly inconsistent with the theological position and nobody blinks. For example, when I was a student at WA Criswell Institute for Biblical Studies, I found out that Criswell’s wife taught an adult Sunday School class. But to have her in the pulpit? Perish the thought!!!!! Sola Scriptura!!!!! Gag. Church is a total morass of confusion. It’s a joke.


    • lydia00 said, on November 17, 2019 at 2:55 AM

      The first thing we don’t do is interpret authenteo as “authority”. There are two other Greek words that are used to communicate authority in other places. It’s only used once in the NT and nowhere else as authority. It’s a very complicated concept that fits the situation in Ephesians and the Temple of Artemis. “Murder by false teaching” or compell with words was the way once caller put it. And it fits since the Temple of Artemis taught that Eve was formed before Adam. It was a fertility cult that was supposed to ward off death in childbirth. Paul saying they are saved by “the childbearing” is a reference to the Messiah birth and a play on that cults teaching. unless of course people believe that women are only saved by having children. A ridiculous interpretation for barren women. There’s a lot more to it but that’s a start.


  2. Lydia said, on November 13, 2019 at 11:20 PM

    Some scholars point out that Paul quotes questions he was sent throughout Corinthians in order to address the issues. They believe it’s the same here. In that particular passage, the words are almost identical to the Talmudic teaching of women’s silence at the synagogue. Paul actually refutes it. Ironically, the KJV has the best translation

    4 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

    35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

    Verse 36 is Paul refuting that teaching in a very direct and somewhat sarcastic way. Something to consider. (Also see his references to judging angels in chp 6 and the reference to “because of the angels” in chip 11)


    • Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on November 14, 2019 at 6:41 AM

      The problem here is that Paul is telling women to be totally silent in the venue and not to speak. How can that be referring to a Christian gathering? But regarding a Roman ekklesia, it makes perfect sense as law prohibited women to speak at those assemblies. Paul is clear in this passage; women are to be silent and not speak. Where do we get it in this passage that Paul is speaking directly to the issue of teaching only? Paul didn’t want the assemblies dragged into the cultural controversies of that day.


      • lydia00 said, on November 17, 2019 at 2:59 AM

        No. Paul is not telling them that –he is quoting from a letter he received with many questions he answers throughout Corinthians. Verse 36 actually refutes the previous 2 verses. Remember back then they had no punctuation marks. translators are the ones who decided where to put them and where not to put them. Why would Paul teach from the talmud?


  3. Walter Moss said, on November 27, 2019 at 8:28 PM

    Hi Paul, I just recently found your blog and am very much enjoying reading and thinking through the subjects. Lydia00 is talking about the missing punctuation in 1 Corinthians 14, and I thought it might help to see a translation that includes the punctuation. Below is an excerpt from The Gift New Testament which is a translation by a friend of mine, Paula Fether:

    14:29As for prophets, let a few speak while the others judge what is said.14:30If a revelation comes to another who is sitting there, the first one should stop.14:31You can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may learn and be comforted,14:32because the spirits of the prophets are under their control.14:33For God is not the God of disorder but of peace, as in all the Congregations of the holy ones.

    14:34[You write,]

    “The women must be silent in the meeting; they are not allowed to speak but must be supportive, as the law also says.14:35If they want to learn anything they must learn from their own husbands at home. For it is vile for a woman to speak in the meeting.”

    14:36What?! Did the Word of God originate with you? Do you really think you are the only ones to whom it was given?14:37Whoever presumes to be a prophet or to be spiritual must realize that what I’m writing to you is a directive from the Master.14:38Whoever is wrong about this is wrong indeed!

    14:39So then, sisters and brothers, be eager to prophesy and do not prevent people from speaking in unknown languages.14:40Yet do everything decently and in order.

    Here is a link to the whole chapter and where you can navigate through the rest of the translation:

    I hope this helps with understanding and God bless you all!



    • Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on November 28, 2019 at 11:21 AM

      Thanks Walter; one must take note of Paul’s imperative that women not speak at all and it is a vile act if they do. That makes no sense at all in a church setting or home fellowship setting where Christians are gathered together. Of course, the church gets its cake and eats it to when they claim this is only talking about the pulpit which wasn’t a mode of teaching during that time to begin with. What’s really going on?


      • Walter Moss said, on November 29, 2019 at 1:48 PM

        Yes, the “church” today has a perverted doctrine because this was not Paul’s imperative. Paul was quoting them (the Corinthians) and they were quoting the Talmud or the Rabbis. Paul is definitely refuting the idea that women should be silent. As far as what’s really going on is the Rabbis are still in charge of a lot of so-called church organizations in many ways, in my humble opinion.


  4. Walter Moss said, on November 29, 2019 at 2:27 PM

    My friend Paula has also put together some excellent teachings on YouTube under the channel “Bible Literalist”. Below are links to her teaching on 1 Corinthians, and she does expound upon the popular misinterpretions, particularly those regarding women.

    1 Corinthians, Part 1

    1 Corinthians, Part 2

    1 Corinthians, Part 3


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s