Go to Sannhetseeker
- Add a comment
- Go to Some Books in the New Testament May be Forgeries
very interesting...
posted by
Metta
on May 31, 2005 at 2:40 PM
| link to this | reply
i think he was protecting the church
women were prominent there.
I don't know about the Jewish culture of the day -- certainly the NT shows that women seemed to have certain freedom of movement and expression.
one thing is that in the Greek world, women did not have rights.
the word, "ekklesia", which is rendered "church" in KJV, was used for the democratic institutions of the time. it means, basically, those called out of the general population for a specific purpose. it voted democratically on issues. it was composed of free men; women and slaves did not have the vote. one passage where ekklesia was used, but rendered, "assembly" in the KJV was -- Antioch, I think -- where the Jews there were stirred up and then stirred up the general population because of Paul's teachings. They all went to the local amphitheater and it was a very disorganized meeting.
but the center here is "ekklesia" -- and the idea that women did not h ave rights. I would suppose that it was best for women to keep silent at the meetings just so that those outside the "Ekklesia of God" would not have problems with the meetings and the meetings might be dispersed.
I think in some instances, it's a matter of protecting the young church -- restricting activities so that the meetings could continue.
in some instances, it is highly possible (and generally recognized concerning some of the epistles) that someone authored other than he to whom the work was ascribed.
the other quote we should take note of is "there is neither male nor female, bond nor free" in spiritual realms. I'm pretty sure that's how it goes.
spiritually, there is equality -- dealing with the outside world, a group that wants to survive must conform to its "mores".
posted by
Xeno-x
on May 31, 2005 at 6:06 AM
| link to this | reply
Paul had a rather jewish attitude towards women - they had their place, and it was not in the temple where the men discussed the laws. It's not a put-down of women; just a statement that they were different from men.
As for Paul's letters and "inclusions", it is highly likely. Remember,there were no photocopying machines, so they all had to be transcribed by hand. More importantly, the structure (as far as I can remember from reading supposedly original versions) was very much like our day's "personalised form letters" - set out with areas where others couldput in what was important to them and their parish. So, obviously some would be more patriarchal than others.
It's nice to see that the "controversy" is coming out again!
posted by
L.E.Gant
on May 30, 2005 at 9:01 PM
| link to this | reply