A passage in the Bible that was used to prevent women from being ordained is not original and was added in later, it is claimed.
The section in Corinthians, which says that women should remain silent in church, has been used to restrict the priesthood to men only.
But academic has claimed that the passage was not written by the Apostle Paul but was actually added in later.
New addition: The passage which is believed to have been added later on – section 1 Corinthians 14:34 – which decrees women should not speak in church
It reads: ‘Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.’
But Dr Philip Barton Payne, a US academic writing in the journal New Testament Studies has now cast doubt on section 1 Corinthians 14:34.
He claimed that a symbol next to the passage shows that the writer believed it was not original – but was added in later.
Dr Payne analysed the Codex Vaticanus, one of the oldest versions of the Greek Bible, and identified the symbol called a ‘distigmeobelos’.
It is made up of two smalls dots and a dash and appears in the left margin of the text at the beginning of verse 34.
The academic also argued that the passage is inconsistent with other sections pf Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, including Corinthians 11:5.
It says: ‘Every woman who prays prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head.’ – which suggests that women are allowed to preach.
In his paper Dr Payne says: ‘This study demonstrates that scribe B was a careful textual critic who identifies 1 Cor 14.34–5, the only Bible passage silencing women in the church, as added text.
Dr Philip Barton Payne claimed that a symbol next to the passage shows that the writer believed it was not original – but was added in later. Pictured: The Reverend Libby Lane became the first female bishop in the Church of England in 2015
‘Vaticanus provides early and credible judgement in what is widely regarded as the most important NT manuscript that vv. 34–5 were not in the body text Paul’s original letter, but are a later addition.
‘This is important theologically since it offers a resolution to the notorious difficulty of reconciling vv. 34–5 with Paul’s many affirmations of women in vocal ministry and their equal standing with men in Christ.’
He told the Daily Telegraph that it would be an ‘unwise judgement’ to reject the scribe’s judgement, which has been so faithful in other areas.
Further evidence that the passage was not written by the Apostle Paul is demonstrated by it appearing in a different place in some early versions of the text.
Other scholars claims that, because it appears after verse 40 at the end of the chapter, that it was not written by Paul but added after the original letter was penned.
But not all academics are in agreement with Dr Payne.
Dr Pieter Lalleman, tutor in Biblical studies at Spurgeon’s College, told website Christian Today: ‘The fact that some manuscripts have the passage in a different location (at the end of chapter 14) can be explained by the fact that at one stage a copyist forgot the verses and added them at the end of the chapter.
‘The fact is that no single surviving manuscript omits the two verses altogether.’