Sorry onacruse, it's late and my mind lost it's place. I agree with your concluding comments, other than your attribution of the words in 1 Tim to "Paul". My comment above was referring to the glossing of the verses in the Philips trns. The other quotes are saying for women to shut up because of the limitations placed upon them by God. They are just smooth in saying it.
Was Paul really a woman hater?
by peacefulpete 26 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
peacefulpete
I should have added that the Interpreter's Bible quote is dead on.
-
Euphemism
Valis:Dan, I'm sure many a dub would argue the same thing in favor of forgiving the WTBTS for their indiscretions over time.
I'd have to disagree. The WTS has been the opposite of progressive, even when seen in their time-frame.
New England Christians were accepting blacks as equals in the mid-19th century; the WTS still taught "a colored person makes the best servant" in the 20th century.
Women got the vote in the US in 1920, and there was a woman in the Senate by the 50's; the WT still doesn't allow women to have any position of authority.
While other churches in the South fought the Jim Crow laws starting in the 50's, the WTS congregations in the South were segregated until the laws were repealed (mid to late 60's).
I could go on; I think you get the point. Paul's views on the position of women--in the authentic writings, at least--were progressive when compared to his culture (Judaism). The WTS is not, and never has been, progressive when compared to its culture.
-
Aztec
doesn't progressiveness have to be defined in light of the times?
I suppose but, reading anything that encourages women to be in subjection to anyone rankles me. I suppose the irritation is more from having it tried to be applied to modern times when it clearly is no longer expedient.
I don't think Paul was a women hater but, like most men of the bible, he seems to place little value on them. They seem to be there to bear children and be quiet.
~Aztec
-
Euphemism
. I suppose the irritation is more from having it tried to be applied to modern times when it clearly is no longer expedient.
Totally understood.
They seem to be there to bear children and be quiet.
Again, I really think that this idea comes from the unauthentically Pauline letters... particularly the pastorals. Paul's authentic writings paint a different picture.
But that's just my take.
-
Narkissos
PP: agreed. Just as a side comment, the "two in one" feature is a recurrent (and definitely Gnostic) motive in GThomas. Besides logion 22, we find it in 106a: "When you make the two into one, you will become sons of man" (compare 106b with l. 48; also l. 16, 23, 30).
L. 61 is interesting because it implies another woman: "Jesus said: 'Two will rest on a bed. The one will die, the other will live.' Salome said: 'Who are you, man? You have gotten a place on my bed as one from one (emend.: as a stranger) and you have eaten from my table.' Jesus said to her: 'I am he who comes from the one who is always the same. I was given some of that which is my father's." [She answered:] 'I am your disciple!' 'Therefore I say: If someone is destroyed (emend.: becomes like God), he will become full of light. But if he becomes one, separated [from God], he will become full of darkness."
It is often assumed that this widespread gnostic motive is used in a non-gnostic way in (postpauline) Ephesians 2:15, about Christ "making the two into one" -- applied to the ecclesiastic issue of Jews and Gentiles (but see also 5:31).
-
Pistoff
Put me into the "Paul was a woman hater" category. The WT has defined "hate" sometimes as loving less, real doublethink.
But remember: Paul told the elders to 'make sure' of any widows who were on the list, watching out for their sexual impulses. Hmm; I would say that generally men are more notorious for their sexual impulses. He talked of them gadding about the houses; I can't imagine the men were immune from gossip, but Paul does not single them out.
Paul also said they HE would not allow a woman to teach (any reference to other writers saying the same?); why? He obviously thinks that they are inferior, or should be in their place. Jesus showed no such ideas that I can recall; his own followers questioned him as to why he would talk to a woman.
Paul succumbed to pressure on more than a few occasions; to me this is just one more case of him not only caving in to old system beliefs, but introducing some of his own.
I value Paul's contribution but the more I read his life story and his letters the more his Pharisee background jumps out.