Women Speaking in the Church A modern test for Christians www.rlfaber.com/womenspeaking.html March, 2025, updated Aug 2026   biblicalpatriarchy   earlychurchmeeting   relational church   traditional church   organizedreligion   othertrend   worship

Preface
I can no longer call myself a "complementarian." Years ago I used to proudly say I was. I was thankful for the strong Christian support for the biblical teaching of men and women roles with CBMW.org.

But words and movements keep changing and can be corrupted. The definers of "complementarian" have changed their meaning to exlude those who follow the Bible in the simple traditional sense. CBMW.org has changed. Or if CBMW has not changed, it has been hidden from me. CBMW appears to have shifted to a more egalitarian view and no longer accepts the Word of God as stated in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. On the front page of CBMW, 1 Cor 11 is set against 1 Cor 14 in order to nullify the biblical words in 1 Cor 14 about women being silent.

For now we have this article to explain CBMW more. biblicalpatriarchy.html

Introduction

How should Christians take the New Testament teaching about "women remaining silent" as described in 1 Corinthians 14? This is a highly contested passage, of course. We will say that there is a modern view that explains it away and says it is not meant to apply to our modern-day culture, at least in America. Then there is the traditional view that says it applies to all times for various reasons, including the appeal to creation, showing the passage is timeless. What is the correct interpretation? If it does apply to our time, then how does it apply if we normally sit in a large auditorium and listen to a preacher? Should the preacher be allowed to be a woman? This is a controversial topic.

Purpose

In this article we will support the traditional view that the Bible means what it plainly says. We will support the idea that women should remain silent in the church assembly, but women can talk in other meetings when it is not the main assembly, but there must always be an avoidance of women teaching when men are present. There are lots of complicated situations and ideas, like women teaching teenagers, who are "men", etc. Our focus will be on the main idea that the Bible supports "women remaining silent" in the church assembly, even though this is a very unpopular idea.

More About The Controversy, Today

This article shares the story of how some Christians are bold enough to stand on the clear teaching of the scriptures, and others fail the test. Many modern Christians have a difficult time accepting the clear New Testament teaching on women remaining silent at times. The context of women remaining silent in the church assembly is most clearly seen in 1 Corinthians 14. Very few Christians remain faithful to the teaching of the apostles and instead become influenced by the arguments of the day. Most Christians find some way to get out of the counter-cultural idea of Christian women remaining silent. The truth is, however, the situation is much worse as the men are also silent. Most church assemblies do not allow men or women to speak, but rather, one man or one woman is permitted to speak during the main assembly. In this article, we will focus on the women remaining silent, but there is a larger issue of men being forced to remain silent that is related to these other articles (organized religion, othertrend, etc).

A Pretty Good Complementarian Perspective

Even though we are no longer "complementarian", we have a lot of agreement with many thoughtful "complementarians." We appreciate the conversation in this video between Justin Peters and Susan Heck because of the biblical fidelity on this controversial subject (complementarianism vs egalitarianism). See minute ~28, ~45, ~48 especially. We applaud Susan's attitude of being unwilling to bend or compromise when men want to sit in on her popular women meetings.

youtube.com/JustinAndSusan-1

This second video also shows a lot of good in some "complementarians" for knowing when it is appropriate for women to speak in the church. Please ignore the focus on the person attacking Susan, and focus on the discussion between Susan and Justin on women speaking in the church.

youtube.com/JustinAndSusan-2

One interesting detail is minute ~24-26 about women being silent according to 1 Cor 14:34-35. Susan holds to a more complementarian view where women should be "quiet", but also the comment about her husband being a pastor and the "challenging" him being out of place, is well said.

The Traditional/Patriarchal Perspective

We most agree with NTRF View(2/2), John McArthur, and many others who follow the traditional view of "women remaining silent" in the church assembly.

We mention NTRF View(2/2), because with this small group of Christians, there is an unusual belending of two important biblical ideas. There is faithfulness to scripture on both the men and women roles and also the permitting of men to speak, in 1 Cor 14. other trend + biblicalpatriarchy

This is the kind of Christian mindset who we think most show honor of the scriptures and is the type of Christian thinking that we most seek to find and encourage.

Some would consider themselves "complementarian", like John Piper, but they would be strongly against the other trend. Instead, they would support the traditional church model that makes the men also remain silent in the main assembly meeting.

A Flawed View, by Tom Wadsworth, Jon Zens, etc.

On the other hand, we have many friends in the other trend camp, who do not share our views on men and women roles. They believe women should be free to talk in the church assembly like men, and that there should be no distinction, because the biblical statements in 1 Corinthians 14, are purely a cultural thing that we can discard in these modern days. We disagree with these views. https://www.tomwadsworth.com/answers-to-questions/women-in-the-assembly

Some things that are interpreted wrongly are:

1. Misunderstanding the context of 1 Cor 11:5 (Assuming a church assembly)
2. Misunderstanding the application of Acts 2:17-18 and Joel 1:1 Assuming a lot about prophets that is not clear. Prophecy is a broad word. There can be many different contexts for prophecy outside of the main church assembly.
3. Assuming a lot about Phillips daughters who were prophetesses. (Acts 21:8-9) Notice the lady above who has the New Testament memorized, who is careful to not be speaking in ladies conferences when men are present. That is an attitude of respect for scripture that we admire.
4. Assuming a lot about 1 Thesss 5:19-20 "Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prohecies." Assuming that women remaining silent as 1 Cor 14 says, is "quenching the Spirit."
5. Assuming that women who are called "servants" had to be speaking in violation of 1 Cor 14.
6. Misunderstanding the 1 Cor 11:2-16 "creation argument" in 1 Cor 11:8-9 for women who choose to wear the veil literally vs women who have the long hair as a natural covering. The misunderstanding comes out with comments like, "they ignore the creation argument about the veil, but they embrace the creation argument about women speaking." They may say, "If you're going to enforce the restriction against women speaking, you need to enforce the requirement of the veil", not realizing that they are misunderstanding Paul in the "requirement of the veil", when Paul says that long hair on a woman "is given to her for a covering" (1 Cor 11:15).
7. Using the modern sentiment as an argument against the clear teaching of scripture with thoughts like: "much of our culture today-certainly in America-views it as 'disgraceful' and 'improper' to silence women and limit their leadership." But that is a falacious argument as that is the very point scripture making. Of course if you reject the scriptural point, like most modern Americans, then you will be offended at Paul's scriptural statements. But it is a falacy to argue that scripture must be interpreted based on modern sentiment. We need to first ask ourself if we are the rebels. And if Paul meant this "women being silent" idea to be merely cultural, we should find evidence for it in scripture. Otherwise, you really should simply say, that you do not wish to follow this scriptural point and would rather follow the popular view that is easy to follow.
8. The idea that we should equate the "women remaining silent" idea with the abandonment of the "holy kiss" is unfair (1 Cor 16:22). We agree with most modern American's that this is cultural and is clearly so. But the instruction to remain silent is clearly said with stronger and more clear instruction. The instruction to greet one another with a "holy kiss" can easily be seen to be, something like "greet one another warmly with genuine care and love." It is easily seen by the natural reader to be cultural. So the idea could resume and it may be more natural in some other cultures today. But it is not the American way to greet one another. But most people get it. However, if you are trying to dismiss the "women remaining silent" idea, and you claim that "greet one another with a holy kiss" has the same intensity and clarity of teaching force, you are being deceitful. The scriptures clearly put a lot more clarity and force with the "women remain silent" idea. The context even has others told to remain silent also in the same passage (the prophets, if another has something to say).
9. Finally, this is not a conscience issue like Romans 14 says when it is clearly taught in scripture. Do not put this in the same category as drinking wine or eating meat sacrificed to idols. However, we do agree that we will go along with the peace idea and try to avoid contention about the topic. But we strongly reject the idea that this can be put in the "whatever" category like other things that would be freedom issues in Rom 14. Rather, we see this as a test that modern Christians often fail at. Yet, we will gently explain and we will strongly assert what we believe and grant that others may not be willing or ready to accept this clear teaching in the Bible. It is true that each one must be fully convinced in his own mind and that each one will stand before his own master. Christians misunderstand this teaching and still be godly Christians. Many Christians today will get this wrong. Some will be more godly that us. We may have a correct view, but the Christian life is ultimately tested when we stand before God at the end of time.

We must "pursue what makes for peace and mutual upbuilding" (Rom 14:19), so we must accept Christians who have a different view on this topic. In fact, one way of showing love as a Christian, is in sorting out the ideas that we can disagree about and to relate to the other Christians who see things differently. If we can love and interact with the differences, all the better. If we become proud of our own understanding so that we are offended at those who genuinely seem to believe a different interpretation, that is a serious flaw in our own heart. Christian meetings are actually supposed to be places of working out some of these differences. And as the New Testament shows, some working out and explaining of views can be done with written letter or in the privacy of the home. If someone is a public figure with a website and a name, they can be written about online. But if there are sensitive feelings, we can tend to discussing things of difference with a little more privacy. The beauty of the internet is that anyone can interact with the ideas of anyone anywhere in the world, with simply a little bit of online presence (much easier than writing a book) and a keyboard. The danger is that words can hurt if we are not careful.

More About Our Interpretation

NOTE: The rest of this article is old notes from August 17, 2008.

Can women speak at church in some situations? Yes. Can women speak anytime the want? No! Can men speak anytime they want? No! According to 1 Corinthians 14, both men and women are given rules about speaking. Assuming the traditional view that the Bible speaks truthfully and universally about "women remaining silent" in the church assembly, men also must abide by the rules of the meeting and refrain from speaking in certain situations. For example, the text says that if someone else has something to say who is sitting down, the you must allow them to speak and not you. The word is "prophecy", but this is a very broad word that basically means to speak for someone... the idea being to speak encouraging words in the church assembly.

To properly understand the dynamic and context of the Bible, particularly 1 Corinthians 14, we must understand that church was normally a home based thing. There was never a sermon or formal large building event. The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and church buildings were not built. The Christians met in homes. So the dynamic of "women remaining silent" should be understood in those terms and in that context. Once we understand the situation, then we can consider how to apply it to our modern day churches.

We believe it is completely unreasonable to assume that the Christians who always had a full meal Lord's Supper would have shared a meal with women in complete silence. 1 Corinthians 14:34 does require it. The focus of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is the silence while speakers speak. But during the Lord's Supper, the speakers are no longer speaking and are focused on eating. We think is completely unreasonable to assume formality during an informal eating time. God's Word seems to be guarding the primary speaking time of the meeting.

Christians wanting to blur the truth in this area of women remaining silent is not the only area there God's Word is ignored. Many Christians like to blur truth to suit their own desires. One modern example is the Charismatic movement. If you attend a Charismatic church you will almost certainly find people speaking in tongues without a trustworthy interpreter, which is clearly not following bibilical rules.

The speaking time of the meeting is focused on God's devine will of granting only men a time to share encouraging words to the assembly. In God's plan, Adam is blamed for human sin. In the next chapter, in 1 Corinthians 15:22, it says, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive." This is the "traditional/patriarchal" view that we support. God doesn't say in Adam and Eve all die. God puts the man in a leadership/headship responsible position. This is the reason for 1 Corinthians 14:34-45. The traditional view is generally not liked by many Christians today. But this view is a clear sign of faith in God's Word against the popular trend and shows a trust in the Apostles authorized by God.

So because church also consisted of the Lord's Supper meal, a very important time in the church meeting, we could say that women can speak "at church" to some degree. We just encourage people to follow the plain reading of scripture. The Bible speaks about women asking their husbands at home, which implies if they have questions and want to discuss anything they could hold it till later at home. Obviously, women would sometimes meet with other women without men present as in Titus 2. They would of course sometimes want to talk about things that may relate to something said in the main church assembly meeting (with men only speaking). The Bible is very clear that women were not to be teachers over men in the church. But we imagine women would certainly be allowed and free to speak during a more informal family time when everyone at a full meal together (The Lord's Supper). They would not be allowed to challenge what was said by any of the men in the main speaking time, but they would likely not want to talk about that. (See other trend and early church for more on the church assembly)

The New Testament shows that women were very important in the church. Women were highly involved in the ministry of Jesus and the apostle Paul. The New Testament churches, being home based churches, would naturally be very interactive and relational. However, when it comes to the teaching times of the church meeting, these verses are very clear.

The first verse (1 Cor 14:34-35), would seem to say that women should be totally silent at all times in church. But 1 Timothy 2:11-14 seems to clarify it to mean "learn in silence" and not "teach" or have authority in the church [meeting]. Therefore, we think these verses together make it pretty clear. Women would literally refrain from speaking in the main speaking time when men were taking turns to speak to the assembly. But outside of this clear time of the meeting, we assume there would be plenty other times of the meeting when women would be free to talk. There are many other verses giving this idea, but these 2 verses above stand out and we must deal with them. The question is whether we will follow the New Testament guidelines or follow the dominant cultural opinions of the day. We are amazed how zealously some will work at avoiding the clear teaching of God's Word! We think God is testing us to see who will obey and who will disobey. All of life is a grand drama. In the end, let God's clear teaching stand. "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice" 1 Sam 15:22.

Summary Of The Main Views

These are the 4 main views about "women remaining silent":

• The Traditional / Patriarchal / Literal / Universal View This view suggests that women should not speak in the main church meeting and should not be teaching when men are present. Women should of course teach women, but they must not teach men. We think it is fine for women to speak informally, after the main sharing and teaching time that is reserved for men. We assume a home church style meeting (other trend vs traditional church). In a home church setting, we would expect women would participate in many informal ways, but would carefully avoid teaching men. (This is our view, and seems to be a small minority of Christians in America)

• The Broad Complimentarian View Broad complementarianism views male headship and female complementarian roles as an overarching design pattern that applies across all areas of life, including the church, the home, society, and the workplace. Proponents believe that men are naturally called to exercise authority, leadership, and protection, while women are called to support, nurture, and affirm male leadership in both public and private spheres. This view would not allow any women to preach in the assembly traditional church. In a home church setting, this view would allow women to speak in the assembly, but not challenging men when they speak. We would rather attend a traditional church than join a house church meeting ignoring 1 Corinthians 14. But we respect this complementarian view for being closer to the truth. (This view is somewhat popular in America)

• The Narrow Complimentarian View Narrow complementarianism limits the biblical mandate for distinct gender roles strictly to the home and the ordained leadership of the local church. Outside of marriage and church governance, advocates hold that men and women enjoy equal authority and opportunity in business, politics, and civic life, seeing no scriptural restriction on women holding leadership positions in society. This view allows women to freely speak in the church meeting can even allows women to preach in church meeting, if under the authority of the ordained leadership. (We find this view terrible, but it is very popular in America)

• The Egaltarian / Feminist / Non-Literal View This view suggests that women can freely speak just like men because our culture is very different from New Testament times. According to this view, women can even be preachers and teachers in the church meeting. They can even exercise authority over men in the church. They may also be permitted to be elders. (This is very far from our view. Many Christians hold this view)

FOOTNOTES

1. Traditional, Patriarchal, Literal view:

• Our current thinking is that 1 Cor 11 is not the church meeting !
• NTRF View (2/2) - Steven Atkerson

2. Complementarian view:

• Our friends who think 1 Cor 11 is the church meeting !
• NTRF's Steven Atkerson holds this view
• NTRF View (1/2) - Steven Atkerson