MART asked: Have cultural changes trumped the social order of the Bible? Or have we in some way misunderstood the intent and wisdom the Apostle Paul when he wrote, “God is not the author of confusion but of peace…Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says” (1Cor 14:33-34).
We have misunderstood Paul. Just a few minutes before, he penned instructions on how a woman is to pray or prophecy (1 Cor 11:5). Paul wouldn’t contradict himself a couple minutes later in the same letter. And a few minutes after chapter 14 in chapter 16, he commends Priscilla (rather than rebuking her)
Look what Priscilla was doing right alongside her husband. This sure sounds like she co-pastored/shepherded/discipled Apollos:
Ac 18:26 And he [Apollos] began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
PAUL writes:
Ro 16:3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:
1Co 16:19 ¶ The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house
I think all of Paul’s words in Romans 16- right down to traditional translation choices- are enlightening regarding the position of women and the danger of enshrining belittling of women into a “doctrine”. Not only Priscilla, but numerous women co-laborers are commended right along with the men. Note that Phoebe (Rom 16:1) is a “diakonos”. This same Greek word is translated “deacon” and “minister” when used of a man but in her case her spiritual authority has been obscured by translating “diakonos” as “servant”.
Romans 16 warns about those who would “cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned” Rom 16:17 followed by a reference to the victory over Satan which was promised in the garden “And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly” Rom 16:20. And John explains that “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work” 1 Jn 3:8. Wouldn’t that include those consequences of the fall that you mentioned, Mart? In HIM we have been set free to be co-regents per Genesis 1:26-28 (a joint commission which was never retracted by God)! 
Charis,
you say:
Note that Phoebe (Rom 16:1) is a “diakonos”. This same Greek word is translated “deacon” and “minister” when used of a man but in her case her spiritual authority has been obscured by translating “diakonos” as “servant”.
I think we have a very big problem with pride and thirst for power in our churches today. Everyone wants to have Spiritual authority, everyone wants to be able to “lead”, “have their say” and “have the last word”.
In fact, I think Jesus made it very clear that leaders are servants. The word Diakonos means servant! The first deacons were meant to serve the tables! Why the whole fuss over whether they have spiritual authority or not?
The second issue is what is spiritual authority? Does it not come from the word of God and the Spirit within us? Any “lay person” has Spiritual authority if he/she is speaking the truth from God’s word, discerned with the help of the Holy Spirit.
Authority should also come from a person’s credibility. Many people can string enough sentences together to preach a nice sounding sermon, but how many are actually a living example of what they preach?
I really think we have a problem with pride in our churches.
I agree with you, Ruth. The ones who were chosen as deacons (to serve tables) were chosen based on being men “known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom” (see Acts 6). That is spiritual authority (not to be confused with worldly power/authority):
Of interest is that “diakonos” is translated “servant” only when referring to a woman and many in Christendom bar women from serving as a “diakonos” insisting that Paul was restricting that role to men only when he wrote: “A deacon (diakonos) must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.” 1 Timothy 3:12 Paul was doing no such thing or he would have condemned and rebuked Phoebe instead of instructing the Romans “to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you” Rom 16:2
Charis,
I see your point. Double standards. Diakonos, when referring to men, means position of authority, a person who gets to have the last word or whose say weighs more than Pete Pew-warmer’s. When referring to women, it means cookie baker, toilet cleaner or dish washer. Her say weighs as much as any other woman’s, that is, probably less than Pete Pew-warmer’s, cause he can still get to be head.
I stick to deacon as being a servant. Servants aren’t known for holding authorities over others, but rather for being under someone else’s authority.
But Paul also taught to honor those who serve the body of Christ and that seems to be the spirit in which he told the Romans to receive Phoebe in the Lord.
Phoebe was a servant who was worthy of honor.
My issue is not with the titles, but what people want those titles to entitle them to. We are told to give honor to those who serve well. The teaching elders who serve well are to be given double honor (is that right?). But we are never instructed to go about looking for honor or wielding power and authority over others.
Amen!
I totally agree, Ruth!