[Philip Payne, in his egalitarian treatise Man and Woman, One in Christ (Zondervan)] surveys various interpretations and argues that 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 is a later interpolation and therefore not part of inspired scripture. Payne insists the verses must be interpolated, for the disruption in the context is too severe for the verses to be original. Furthermore, only the interpolation theory explains why the verses were added after 14:40 in the Western text. Payne says, “It is not just that the interpolation is plausible; it is the only adequate explanation of the position of 14:34–35 in the entire Western text-type tradition” (228). No scribe, asserts Payne, would have moved vv. 34–35 after v. 40 if the verses were originally after v. 33. He also claims that we do not see such a large block of text moved to another location elsewhere.
Other evidence, says Payne, supports an interpolation. We find in Codex Vaticanus a distigme (“two horizontally aligned dots in the margin,” 232) right after v. 33, pointing to an interpolation. Payne disputes Curt Niccum’s contention that the distigmai probably originated in the sixteenth century, contending that fifty-one distigmai (including 1 Corinthians 14:34-35) match “B’s orginal ink color” (235), and that the bars marking the text also indicate an interpolation. Payne appeals to the work of Paul Canart who argues “that fifty-one distigmai match the apricot color of the original ink of Vaticanus” (241). He concludes that the distigmai were original to Vaticanus or were added in the scriptorium very early.
Codex Fuldensis was corrected by St. Victor Bishop of Capua. Payne argues that a marginal note indicates that vv. 34–35 were not original. Furthermore, since vv. 36–40 are reproduced in the margin, they were intended to replace all of vv. 34–40, showing again that vv. 34–35 were interpolated. Another manuscript supports an interpolation according to Payne. In MS 88 v. 36 immediately follows v. 33, and the scribe inserted vv. 34–35 after v. 40. The double-slashes on MS 88 show, according to Payne, that MS 88 was originally copied from a manuscript that lacked vv. 34–35. Payne defends this interpretation because MS 88 is non-Western, and hence its inclusion of vv. 34–35 cannot be attributed to Western influence. Payne also posits that Clement of Alexandria’s text of 1 Corinthians lacked 14:34–35 since he never cites these verses, and we would expect him to refer to women being silent. Similarly, none of the Apostolic Fathers cited these verses.
To continue reading this Bible article, click here.
Author: Thomas R. Schreiner
Keywords: Priscilla, Priscila, Junia, Phebe, Phoebe, Female apostle, Deacon, Female deacons, Women deacons, Woman deacon, Deaconess, Minister, Clergy, Server, Serving, Church leader, Church leadership, prostatis, patroness, diakonos, head covering, Covering one's head, Female head covering, Headship, Male headship, Kephale, Philip Payne, Authority over, Codex Fuldensis, Egalitarian, Women, Feminism, Female equality, Equality of sexes, Gender equality
Bible reference(s): 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
Source: “Philip Payne on Familiar Ground,” Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, Vol. 15, No. 1, November 30, 1999.
Page indexed by: inWORD Bible Software.