Fee's Folly
This may be old news to some of you, but just yesterday I learned that Gordon Fee, who is on the NIV translation committee that produced the gender-neutral revision (the TNIV), has used a very lame text-critical argument in order to deny the authenticity of 1 Corinthians 14:34-36. His argument was published in his 1987 commentary on the epistle, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), page 699. As Fee admits, the verses are found in every known manuscript of the epistle. But because in some Latin witnesses the verses are placed after verse 40 instead of in their usual place, and because of "internal evidence" (a supposed conflict with 1 Corinthians 11:5) Fee has argued that they are a later interpolation.
Accordingly, the TNIV has a marginal note in this place which was not in the original NIV. The TNIV translation of these verses reads, "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." The note in the margin does not plainly state that the authenticity of these verses is doubtful (it simply reads "In some manuscripts these verse come after verse 40"), but the purpose of this marginal note can only be to acknowledge Fee's text-critical argument against the authenticity of the verses.
I also notice that in the TNIV (which gives verses 26-39 under the heading "Good order in worship") verse 39 reads, "Therefore, my brothers AND SISTERS, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way" (emphasis added), which by inserting "and sisters" makes nonsense of the preceding prohibition.
There is a long discussion (by D.A. Carson) of Fee's argument on the web page at
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cbmw/rbmw/chapter6.html
This is a clear case of a scholar engaging in ideologically motivated criticism of the Bible under the pretense of text-critical science. Fee is an advocate of sexual equality in the church, and therefore he cannot abide 1 Corinthians 14:34-36. He solves this problem and justifies his equalitarianism by denying the authenticity of the verses.
Michael Marlowe
http://www.bible-researcher.com
This may be old news to some of you, but just yesterday I learned that Gordon Fee, who is on the NIV translation committee that produced the gender-neutral revision (the TNIV), has used a very lame text-critical argument in order to deny the authenticity of 1 Corinthians 14:34-36. His argument was published in his 1987 commentary on the epistle, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), page 699. As Fee admits, the verses are found in every known manuscript of the epistle. But because in some Latin witnesses the verses are placed after verse 40 instead of in their usual place, and because of "internal evidence" (a supposed conflict with 1 Corinthians 11:5) Fee has argued that they are a later interpolation.
Accordingly, the TNIV has a marginal note in this place which was not in the original NIV. The TNIV translation of these verses reads, "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." The note in the margin does not plainly state that the authenticity of these verses is doubtful (it simply reads "In some manuscripts these verse come after verse 40"), but the purpose of this marginal note can only be to acknowledge Fee's text-critical argument against the authenticity of the verses.
I also notice that in the TNIV (which gives verses 26-39 under the heading "Good order in worship") verse 39 reads, "Therefore, my brothers AND SISTERS, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way" (emphasis added), which by inserting "and sisters" makes nonsense of the preceding prohibition.
There is a long discussion (by D.A. Carson) of Fee's argument on the web page at
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cbmw/rbmw/chapter6.html
This is a clear case of a scholar engaging in ideologically motivated criticism of the Bible under the pretense of text-critical science. Fee is an advocate of sexual equality in the church, and therefore he cannot abide 1 Corinthians 14:34-36. He solves this problem and justifies his equalitarianism by denying the authenticity of the verses.
Michael Marlowe
http://www.bible-researcher.com
