Re: SIGATW in 1 Cor 14:34

From: Jonathan Robie (
Date: Fri Jun 27 1997 - 17:20:52 EDT

At 02:30 PM 6/27/97 -0400, Theresa J List, Dcs wrote:

>Well, this interpretation never really made sense to me, because he
>didn't command the ANQRWPOI to be silent, but the women. Males could
>chatter away? Or do we wax insulting with our translations and say that
>chatter is inherent to women and not to men (NOT to imply that you mean
>that, just to show what seems to me to be the natural underlying
>assumption of that rendition).

You seem to be indicating that I've stumbled on a standard translation,
which is comforting, since I'm improvising here. I don't know the standard
arguments on either side, and was frankly uninterested in examining them
until recently. You see, from 1976 to 1982, I lived in an intentional
Christian community which became more and more rigid, and at the end, women
were instructed not to do too well in college lest they become smarter than
whoever they might later marry, not to study scripture too hard so that they
wouldn't be tempted to contradict their husbands, etc. After leaving that
group, it took many years before I was emotionally ready to explore these
questions. But I'm ready to do that now...

Since this is a letter written to a specific place that has problems with
their church services, is it possible that it was generally the women in
Corinth who were disrupting the church services? This wouldn't have to be a
universal truth that applies to all women at all times. In fact, nothing
would point to it being a universal truth.


Jonathan Robie
POET Software, 3207 Gibson Road, Durham, N.C., 27703

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