Childbirth, A Protection For Women (Per Paul)... How?

by AGuest 212 Replies latest jw friends

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    There is a major difference between an ethnicity/cultural identity and citizenship. Fewer and fewer people idenitfy themselves as soley American. Rather they say my parents were British, my gparents hailed from France and Italy or I am a German-American. We are the land of the hyphenated. Paul did not grow up with Caesar as God. His norms were Jewish. If he were Roman, his zeal for persecuting the early church would have have been much less.

    I've read commentaries of all sort on Paul for decades. He is referred to as a Jewish convert, never Roman. HIs citizneship is only raised concerning the method his execution. I'd much rather be beheaded than crucified.

  • james_woods
    james_woods

    Just a side question - again, please: What did Paul's supposed birthplace and citizenship have to do with whether this verse made any sense or not?

    Other than someone's vague and unprovable notions about it?

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    Ive noticed much confusion with Shelby as to Romans and Jews. She does not seem to have a clear understanding of each group, even in Biblical terms. What he supposedly wrote makes no sense -- even if he were Scandinavian or from the land of purple polka dots. Part of the arrogance is assuming she knows any more about the Bible than people generally do. It reminds me of the Witnesses.

  • cofty
    cofty

    The most sensible interpretation I have ever read sees "chidbearing" as a kind of shorthand for general matters of caring for the home and family which Paul saw as women's god given role.

    Compare his similar admonition in chaper 5 of the same letter.

    "Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach; for some have already turned aside to follow Satan". - 1Tim 5:14,15

    Paul does not think it fitting for women to take a leading role as a teacher or leader. He refers to the fact that Adam was made before Eve and the one time Eve acted independently of Adam she was deceived by the devil. He fears that when women try to take "men's role" it leaves them vulnerable to snares of the devil.

    This simple explanation is in keeping with the immmediate context and that of the letter as a whole.

    No supernatural voices necessary.

  • james_woods
    james_woods
    He fears that when women try to take "men's role" it leaves them vulnerable to snares of the devil.
    This simple explanation is in keeping with the immmediate context and that of the letter as a whole.

    This is indeed the simple explanation. This is what I also think he meant - but in modern philosophy it makes him a hopeless misogynist.

  • cofty
    cofty

    in modern philosophy it makes him a hopeless misogynist

    Agreed.

    It is still the foundation of the widely held view that "a woman's place is in the home".

  • peridotgreen
    peridotgreen

    To all those who believe that Paul's letters are inspired of God:

    I do not, nor did I ever, believe that God wanted women to be second class citizens. The God I love values me.

    As I witness, I always said to Jehovah, "If you despise women so much, why did you create them?" I hated being treated as though I didn't matter.

    In the 9 years since I first came here, I have grown a lot. I no longer pay any attention to the Bible, save for Jesus' words. As a Witness, I always hated the way women were treated.

    The creator is a God of tremendous love and he wants women to be happy. Most of all, he wants all of us to value and love ourselves.

    I respect your opinions but felt compelled to chime in. The truth has set me free. I'm a woman, I'm intelligent, I'm valuable and I refuse to hide my light under the cloak of "submission".

  • cofty
    cofty

    I'm a woman, I'm intelligent, I'm valuable and I refuse to hide my light under the cloak of "submission".

    Well said.

  • james_woods
    james_woods

    Frankly, the more I read of Paul, the more I believe he was just an opinionated, egotistical, (possibly hypocritically homosexual), jerk.

  • cofty
    cofty

    james-woods - Intersting comment about Paul possibly being homosexual. I think it is a strong possiblity. Was this the "angel of Satan" that the lord would not take away from him?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit