I Cor. 5 ---- was she out of the reach of the elders, because she was an unbaptized subject?--- were ladies of less important to Paul's thinking? , like the primary blame on Adam for "SIN" rather than Eve's?-- for those that still find the talking snake saga worthy of discussion for one reason or another.
weekly bible reading question: Paul recommended disfellowshipping the immoral man, why not the lady involved?
by prologos 8 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Stealth
Possably because Paul never got paid for a tent that he made for the man so he had an axe to grind?
-
prologos
yeah, but some of his axe-grinding seems to be AGAINST the fairer sex, (ICr.14, ! Tim 2) why did he let the unfaithful wife off the hook, sorry: I love mixing metaphors.
-
sspo
It's just like 2013....the men usually gets screwed. Have seen many, many cases that the wife gets off with a slap on her wrist when she commits adultery.
A few tears on the part of the sister go a long way with the elders on JC.
-
AnnOMaly
The most obvious reason (at least to me) is that the woman involved was not a Christian and, therefore, not under the congregation's authority.
-
tec
Or, in the letter of the law (which Paul still adhered to in some areas before he learned more from Christ about love, and faith; something we can see since the next letter Paul sent was to welcome the brother back, and he even said that he did that as a 'test' to see if they would obey)... laying with your father's wife was specifically listed as sexual immorality. Leviticus 18:8.
Paul still had to learn... and just like we carry baggage from previous teachings, Paul did too. We can know this because in the same letter, on the same matter, he says this:
"And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if i were present."
But Christ says not to judge, lest ye BE judged. Paul learns... and in his next letter, he retracts what he said to do.
Peace,
tammy
-
blondie
The most obvious reason (at least to me) is that the woman involved was not a Christian and, therefore, not under the congregation's authority.
My thoughts exactly, Ann. A conclusion that I came to when I was still a believing jw.
-
Glander
I always assumed that "laying with his father's wife" was the Bible way of saying he committed incest with his mother. Interesting discussion either way.
-
tec
Remember that a man's father often had many wives back then. Otherwise I think it would say, do not lay with your mother.
In fact, one 'do not' verse above that one, states "do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother; she is your mother; do not have relations with her." So there are two specific verses in there... one against have sex with your mother (Leviticus 18:7) and one against having sex with your father's wife. (Leviticus 18:8) It even goes on to speak about not having sex with your sister, whether she is the daughter of your father OR of your mother.
In fact, this whole section in Leviticus deals with sexual immorality... regarding WHO (or what) you may or may not have sex with... not HOW you may have sexual relations. Men brought that shame for women (and men) into christianity, instead of knowing what sexual immorality in the NT referred to. But if you follow back what sexual immorality was to the Israelites, and so the Jews referring to it, then it would have been clear. I mean, even in the NT, even Paul spoke about the sexual needs of women, and didn't think to shame them with them... "a man should not deny or negelct his wife, just as she should not for him; and that widows might well burn with desire, if not married again.
Peace,
tammy