Z
Zundrah
Guest
If of course it actually is authentic scripture.
- Status
J
James924
Guest
I dont get that at all from the context of the epistle. Where does he state or imply anything that you just said?
J
James924
Guest
But your primary reason, your first cause, for questioning/looking into its authenticity was the fact that you didn’t like what you heard, was it not?
Remember:
“Non serviam”
-Satan
Pride, the opposite of humility, is the father of all sins. Don’t let it snatch you from us, from Him, like it has snatched so many in this past half century, please.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
Hi James924,
I’m not trying to promote myself as a Bible scholar. I’m repeating one possible theory to explain how it is that St. Paul tells Timothy in Ephesus not to allow women to teach the men, yet elsewhere, St. Paul approves of particular women teaching, even when it is clear they are teaching men. Scripture doesn’t contradict itself, so there must have been something about Timothy’s situation that called forth that comment from St. Paul in this particular letter. St. Paul addresses a number of cultural issues regarding the women in Ephesus - hair styles, clothing, and other issues of comportment. Given what we know historically about the city and it’s values in general, it isn’t too far-fetched to think that there might have been some specific problem with the manner in which some women in Ephesus were behaving. The entire letter is addressed to the issue of false teaching that was troubling the church. So, St. Paul was addressing a particular problem (not that it doesn’t have application to us), the comportment of some women was apparently an issue or he wouldn’t have bothered to mention it, and he says something about women teaching that seems somewhat different from other approving remarks on that subject. It’s just a one possible way to fit all of St. Paul’s statements on women in teaching roles into a cohesive, coherent whole.
I’m not trying to promote myself as a Bible scholar. I’m repeating one possible theory to explain how it is that St. Paul tells Timothy in Ephesus not to allow women to teach the men, yet elsewhere, St. Paul approves of particular women teaching, even when it is clear they are teaching men. Scripture doesn’t contradict itself, so there must have been something about Timothy’s situation that called forth that comment from St. Paul in this particular letter. St. Paul addresses a number of cultural issues regarding the women in Ephesus - hair styles, clothing, and other issues of comportment. Given what we know historically about the city and it’s values in general, it isn’t too far-fetched to think that there might have been some specific problem with the manner in which some women in Ephesus were behaving. The entire letter is addressed to the issue of false teaching that was troubling the church. So, St. Paul was addressing a particular problem (not that it doesn’t have application to us), the comportment of some women was apparently an issue or he wouldn’t have bothered to mention it, and he says something about women teaching that seems somewhat different from other approving remarks on that subject. It’s just a one possible way to fit all of St. Paul’s statements on women in teaching roles into a cohesive, coherent whole.
J
James924
Guest
No, Paul does not give any indication that his statements regarding women were only refering to false teachings somewhere. Also, Paul teaches similar things in his epistle to the Corinthians. Likewise, we do not say today that, because there is a remote possibility that Paul was refering to specific women dressing wrong in Ephasis, lets all start dressing immodestly because it wasn’t directed at us. I don’t know why we would apply that logic to anything else either.Hi James924,
I’m not trying to promote myself as a Bible scholar. I’m repeating one possible theory to explain how it is that St. Paul tells Timothy in Ephesus not to allow women to teach the men, yet elsewhere, St. Paul approves of particular women teaching, even when it is clear they are teaching men. Scripture doesn’t contradict itself, so there must have been something about Timothy’s situation that called forth that comment from St. Paul in this particular letter. St. Paul addresses a number of cultural issues regarding the women in Ephesus - hair styles, clothing, and other issues of comportment. Given what we know historically about the city and it’s values in general, it isn’t too far-fetched to think that there might have been some specific problem with the manner in which some women in Ephesus were behaving. The entire letter is addressed to the issue of false teaching that was troubling the church. So, St. Paul was addressing a particular problem (not that it doesn’t have application to us), the comportment of some women was apparently an issue or he wouldn’t have bothered to mention it, and he says something about women teaching that seems somewhat different from other approving remarks on that subject. It’s just a one possible way to fit all of St. Paul’s statements on women in teaching roles into a cohesive, coherent whole.
No, the best thing you can do here is what was done at some point in the past few decades and that is make an incredibly vague and ambiguous statement about how what Paul was saying was geared towards a “different culture” and that we can somehow conclude that because we are in a different culture from that, that it doesn’t apply. I even find that to be a stretch (what would stop us from applying that to any number of teachings in scripture?) but it is at least better than the argument that Paul was refering to a specific group of women at a specific time who were teaching false doctrines. I just don’t see that anywhere and it is also countered by the fact that he gives similar teachings to the church in Corinth and again gives no indication in that epistle either that he was refering to a specific group of women. Rather, they probably were exactly what they sound like, general statements regarding the roles of women and what he believed to be the right thing to do.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
I think you and I are talking at cross purposes, James. Stating that St. Paul was addressing a “different culture” is the same thing as saying that there were particular problems in the cultures of Corinth and Ephesus that motivated his statements. These are just different ways of saying the same thing. Just because certain contemporary issues were unique to those times doesn’t mean that St. Paul’s teaching doesn’t have general application to us in other ways. Women don’t dress today as they did in the 1st century, but the teaching on comporting oneself with modesty and circumspection still applies. All of the NT works that way - there are specific teachings that address the period (such as Jesus’s warnings to 1st century residents of Jerusalem about the coming destruction in their own lifetime) that still have general application to people in other times as well. There has to be a way to distinguish between St. Paul’s approving comments concerning Pricilla teaching Apollos, and his seemingly contradictory statements to Timothy. I say “seemingly contradictory” because, as you and I acknowledge, Scripture cannot contradict itself. I didn’t mean to get us off in the weeds. I agree with your advice to the OP. You either accept all of Scripture as inerrant or go your own way. You can’t pick and choose, hoping to make it support your own personal preferences. Pax.
L
LightBound
Guest
So, are we to take that to mean in areas of Church Teaching? Such as being a position to determines what is the Magistrate (as in a Cardinal, Pope, etc) or are we going to take the extreme fundamental approach and say it’s to be used at all times, in all circumstances (I think there is actually a CAF member that posts from time to time, he’s written his own catechism and has his own planet) that actually believes the extreme fundamental version. IF that’s the case for all Catholics, then CAF immediately needs to ban the female members here since I think there is a lot of teaching and educating of both women and men, done by members that are both women and men.
R
Rence
Guest
I, most definitely, am not a fan of Paul. If it angers you, just stay away from his writings and concentrate on the parts that bring you peace.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
Did you read the entire thread, Lightbound? Because I was at some pains to explain precisely your point: the Bible cannot be read out-of-context. It’s perfectly clear that the Church does NOT hold that women must “be silent in church” since there is a female lector in my own church every single Sunday. So, clearly, St. Paul’s statements on what women can and cannot do in regards to teaching and speaking in the assembly must be read in a different light. Res ipsa.
J
James924
Guest
I don’t understand the deal with Catholics saying they dislike Paul’s writings.
Get this:
Paul’s epistles have two authors that cannot be seperated.
Paul = Instrumental Author
God = Principle Author
Therefore:
“I’m not a big fan of Paul’s writings” = “I’m not a big fan of God’s writings”
Kapeesh?
Get this:
Paul’s epistles have two authors that cannot be seperated.
Paul = Instrumental Author
God = Principle Author
Therefore:
“I’m not a big fan of Paul’s writings” = “I’m not a big fan of God’s writings”
Kapeesh?
A
Anniejoe
Guest
writings" = “I’m not a big fan of God’s writings”
Kapeesh?
*
Personally, I love the writings of St. Paul. The Letter to the Romans is the most beautifully written piece of legal reasoning I’ve ever encountered. And his willingness to acknowledge his own past faults and continuing shortcomings is a great comfort to this sinner. Ultimately, God’s Word is true; you reject it at your own risk.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
Nice to know I’m not the only one.
I think then, my problem really lies with the Old Testament if what Paul says doesn’t contradict it.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
They are not doubting God, they are doubting Paul. If of course, all his letters actually are his.
L
LightBound
Guest
Yes, I did and I apologize for how my post was interpreted. I meant it to be rather rhetorical (and exasperated) because of how many times verses such as these (and the head covering- directed at the women of Corinth who had taken to shaving their heads in a pagan fashion and the submission verse when it isn’t presented with the call for mutual submission first and then followed up by the admonition for husbands). I was also trying to do several things at one time and got pulled away before I could finish adding stuff.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
They are. And they are in the NT, so they are God’s.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
NO problem! I’ve done it myself. My own exasperation is more with my own feeble ability to communicate clearly what I’m trying to say!Yes, I did and I apologize for how my post was interpreted. I meant it to be rather rhetorical (and exasperated) because of how many times verses such as these (and the head covering- directed at the women of Corinth who had taken to shaving their heads in a pagan fashion and the submission verse when it isn’t presented with the call for mutual submission first and then followed up by the admonition for husbands). I was also trying to do several things at one time and got pulled away before I could finish adding stuff.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
According to you.
There were many things that could have gone into the bible also. But they were left out.
A
Anniejoe
Guest
Well, I actually am qualified to speak to the issue, as it happens. But no, not according to me. I don’t “lean on my own understanding” in matters of which works belong in the Canon. Maybe it would be useful if you were to study exactly how the works in the NT became a part of the Canon. Your distaste for the teachings that don’t meet with your approval really isn’t an objective analysis. Investigate the matter, and I believe you will find that the writings of St. Paul were not affirmed as inspired on a whim.
There were many things that could have gone into the bible also. But they were left out.*
Well, obviously! God only put in the things you really need to know.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
A
Anniejoe
Guest
It was protestants who removed things from the Bible, Zundrah. Although Martin Luther did add that word one pesky word,* alone*, to the verse “you are saved by faith.” It is very true that the Catholic Church gave all of us, protestant and Catholic, the Bible. If you are referring to the hundreds of texts that were examined and set aside as not inspired or heretical, yes, of course certain things written during the ancient period aren’t in the Bible. Caesar’s commentaries on the Gallic Wars aren’t in there, either. What’s your point?
- Status