Re: SIGATW in 1 Cor 14:34

From: Paul S. Dixon (
Date: Fri Jun 27 1997 - 12:57:59 EDT

On Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:04:21 -0400 Jonathan Robie
<> writes:
>At 08:21 AM 6/27/97 -0500, Troy de Jongh wrote:
>>Theresa J List, Dcs writes:
>>> Anyhow, there were most certainly women prophetesses,
>>> like Anna, for example who SPOKE (LALEIN! Look it up!) in
>>> the temple! So, women are not to speak (LALEIN, 1 Co 14:34)
>>> in the assembly, but, of course, Anna did this with God's
>>> sanction. Or, 1 Cor. 11:5, a mere few hundred words
>>> before the injunction against speaking in 1 co 14, where
>>> women are to prophesy with their heads covered. I refuse to
>>> believe that either God or Paul are schizofrenic, erego I know
>>> there is some way to understand these as not contradictory.
>>I agree that these passages don't have to be read as contradictory,
>>Theresa. In fact, I think it helps to remember who Paul was talking
>>to and in what context he was speaking (as well as his overall
>>of writing the letter). Certainly there are many places in scripture
>>where women are labeled as prophetesses or a woman holds authority
>>(Deborah in Judges); but then Paul comes along and tells a particular
>>congregation that women should be silent...

We should be careful here. Only if we infer the negation of 1 Cor 11:5
is there a necessary conflict with 1 Cor 14:34-35. Negations, of course,
are not valid inferences ("If A, then B" does not imply "If not A, then
not B").

Likewise, in 1 Cor 11:5, "if a woman prays or prophesies with her
head uncovered, then she shames her head" does not imply,
"if a woman prays or prophesies with her head covered, then she
does not shame her head." This logical misinference is usually
assumed. Then, this inference often becomes the determining
factor in the interpretation of 1 Cor 14:34-35. See my article,
"Negative Inference Fallacies: Mt 19:9, Acts 2:38, and 1 Cor 11:5"
( for more.


Paul S. Dixon

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:20 EDT