|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:18 am
Seems that 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and 14:34-35 might be interpolations.
John Muddiman, John Barton, ed (2001). The Oxford Bible Commentary. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.. p. 1125. ISBN 978-0-19-875500-5. "It is full of awkward argumentation, so awkward that a few scholars even consider it a later addition to the letter by another hand."
Also those verses contradict 1 Corinthians 16:19
"The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Prisca salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. "
Hmm... Paul tells women not to preach yet he praises them for running Churches out of their houses?
Couple this with the evidence of most Early Christians being women, it seems very likely that the above mentioned verses were added in at a later date.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:12 am
Hmmm, I decided to read 14:30-40 and it seems it's more about keeping order within the church, then telling women to not say anything at all. If a women starts speaking in tongues, they are to let them do so from what I am reading.
Because God is the Head of His House (Church), then wouldn't that mean because men are built in his image, that men are his "second in command". So really, women speaking in church is out of turn, or something like that. It is probably just to keep order in the Church and show respect to their husband's and other man's authority in the Church.
The head covering thing, just seems a little too Religious to me, it doesn't seem spiritual, seems like something that Paul made up, but, I could be wrong. It seems he leaves it open for debate, meaning it could just be an opinion.
So his praise to those women, were not contradictory, more, how to put this, he just showed that even though men should be head of the Church, he acknowledged women can preach and lead also.
Something like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:44 am
We really do need to remember the society of the city of Corinth... I do believe Paul's letter here is directed specifically at the churches of that city of that specific time period...
I say this because Paul does not direct the women of other churches to do so. Besides, head covering of women was not really very much practiced during Paul's time. Usually, women would not cover their heads because most women had to work for their household, and veils got in the way... Normally, the women who wore veils were those who were wealthy enough to have servants, and then the head-covering was more of a statement than anything else...
That being said...
Modesty was in short supply in Corinth during that day. The rest of the people of the Roman Empire had pretty much singled out Corinth as a melting pot for all things acceptable AND unacceptable... but mostly unacceptable... There was even the addage, "to live like a Corinthian", meaning that nothing was taboo to those who lived like the proverbial Corinthian...
Corinth was a cross roads of the Empire and thus the melting pot of many cultures. Any place that becomes such a melting pot also acquires the tendency to become tolerant of more than any singular culture normally finds acceptable...
I myself believe that Paul's instruction to the women to cover their heads was to help them realize they needed to set themselves apart from the rest of the generalized population... It was a starting point for finding a bit of modesty in an un-modest society...
You also have to realize that Corinth was chock full of prostitution, and where do you think those prostitutes conducted business? Their homes... For women to be allowing many people into their homes at the same time, well, I think that what was going on could be misinterpreted by those who had no way to distinguish prostitutes from Christian women... This is an assumption on my part though... Yet at the same time, if this is how it was going down, I would think that having the men make their presence and intentions clear in such situations would also be a sort of protection for those women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:24 am
Interpolation means that someone other than the author added/inserted text to a manuscript. I'm suggesting based on this opinion from the Oxford Bible Commentary, and what we know about women's role in Early Christianity, that the above mentioned passages were added later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:34 am
Oh right right. Should have looked up the word.
Well, if Paul did write it, I hold to what I say...
But if it was added in, well, they were given the plagues of the bible like it is at the end of the Book of Revelation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:57 am
It is possible that the chapter was tampered, but I think it is just as possible that Paul DID write it. We don't have all the facts to understand what he was saying very clearly... One of the reasons I don't get super excited about reading Paul's letters is because of how specific they were to the churches he was writing to, and that he adds opinionated flavor to his instructions...
Not to say that it is wrong mind you, but the fact that so many church leaders of today have attached their spiritual umbilicus to all that he writes with careless abandon for whether it is opinion, tradition, or inspired, AND THEN condemn others by his letters (which was NEVER the spirit that Paul would EVER intend)... Well, honestly, it has tempered a little biased into what I favor when reading the NT.
Honestly, when you posted that article on Facebook the other day, I nearly squealed, I was so excited... Something I haven't been in a long time in regards to the Canon... I had to share it for the sake of a couple friends of mine who have been having particularly rough times coming to grips with themselves (and as sort of a defense for them)...
Anyways... There are several reasons I can see for trying to tone down the women, and it isn't because men were thought spiritually superior, or even that women should be submissive to men, or whatever other "Christian" tradition that is taught today...
I think the major reason would be for the women's protection, especially in the above mentioned state of Corinthian society... Another major issue would be for the cultural state of the society, as most of the Empire was patriarchal, and in a melting-pot such as Corinth, it was hard to be taken seriously... Yet, again, there was the issue of modesty, and a statement needed to be made that Christianity was meant as a respectful set of modest morals.
Yet there is always a possibility or later additions. If we were to find it as so in 1 Corinthians, well it wouldn't be the first time we have learned of later additions or subtractions from the books of our scripture...
I am of the mind that there is rational reason for the seeming contradictions in the NT, yet I won't be surprised if the rational reason is because of tampering. rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:07 am
He does leave it open to debate, in a way... 1 Corinthians 11:13. So it could be just an opinion, or his interpretation of what God wants.
And yeah, on that subject of using Paul's books for condemning others... He was blinded for condemning and judging others... You would think after reading that, you would think that line "judge not, or let ye be judged" would pop into your head instantly. And then remember it when you want to judge others using his books.
Anyways, yeah, cultural reasons could have supported his claims... they probably were not laws, more like warnings or suggestions of protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
