Paul a chauvenist or early feminist?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
proverbial student
Student
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:17 pm

Paul a chauvenist or early feminist?

Post #1

Post by proverbial student »

I went to a lecture tonight. The lecturer is a biblical scholar and studies Ancient Hebrew and Greek especially as it relates to the Scriptures. His opinion was that Paul was actually a progressive and was very favorable to women seeing them as equal to men in the eyes of God.

One caveat he added: some people are literalists while others are contextualists, so I am sure there will be varied responses, however, I would still like to hear other opinions.

Note to Moderator: I'm not sure I have this in the correct forum. Please move me if I am in error here. Thanks.

User avatar
BeHereNow
Site Supporter
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: Maryland
Has thanked: 2 times

Post #2

Post by BeHereNow »

Given he was a Jew, one might say he was progressive. Relativity.
Equal in the eyes of god, but not equal in the eyes of man. Their reward to be in heaven, not on this earth.
I’d ask for a refund on that lecture.

Overcomer
Guru
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Paul and women

Post #3

Post by Overcomer »

proverbial student wrote:I went to a lecture tonight. The lecturer is a biblical scholar and studies Ancient Hebrew and Greek especially as it relates to the Scriptures. His opinion was that Paul was actually a progressive and was very favorable to women seeing them as equal to men in the eyes of God.
That lecturer is bang on! I wish more people would take a look at what Paul really said by going back to the original languages, by looking at the number of women in ministry with him, by remembering that in Galatians he said that there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male or female, ALL are ONE in Christ.

You would enjoy reading the book What Paul Really Said About Women by John Temple Bristow and I Suffer Not A Woman by the Kroegers. Phoebe Palmer is another on who is good to read. She wrote in the mid-19th century.

I see Paul criticized at lot, including on this board, by people whose knowedge of this issue is superficial at best.

User avatar
BeHereNow
Site Supporter
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: Maryland
Has thanked: 2 times

Post #4

Post by BeHereNow »

A truth so obvious it only took 2000 years to uncover?

pepo1
Student
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:14 am

Post #5

Post by pepo1 »

Let's just read the bible and humour the opinions of lecturers.

User avatar
micatala
Site Supporter
Posts: 8338
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 2:04 pm

Post #6

Post by micatala »

Did the lecturer explain what Paul was really saying in passages like these.
Paul in I Corinthians 11 wrote: 3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.

11In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. 13Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.


Paul in I Corinthians 14 wrote: As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.


These and a few other passages certainly seem quite chauvanistic, but perhaps not compared to the society current at the time. I have read scholars who have made the case that some of these, in particular the second one I quote, are really later additions and not original to Paul. Bart Ehrmann for example.

I would say that 'gender equality' is more consistent with the central message of Christianity than chauvenism. In general, any 'inequality' or 'discrimination' that is not based on spiritual aspects, but on the physical or biological, seems to me should be irrelevant to Christianity.

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #7

Post by McCulloch »

micatala wrote:These and a few other passages certainly seem quite chauvinistic, but perhaps not compared to the society current at the time. I have read scholars who have made the case that some of these, in particular the second one I quote, are really later additions and not original to Paul. Bart Ehrmann for example.

I would say that 'gender equality' is more consistent with the central message of Christianity than chauvinism. In general, any 'inequality' or 'discrimination' that is not based on spiritual aspects, but on the physical or biological, seems to me should be irrelevant to Christianity.
That is one of the contradictions of the Bible. There are clearly places where it seems to be taught that equality not discrimination are taught in the Bible. There are others, such as the passages cited by Paul or pseudo-Paul, where it is the other way around.

It matters little if the passages were written by Paul or not. They are an accepted part of the Christian canon. Until a breakaway group of Christians publish a corrected Bible, Christians are obligated to deal with the paradox.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

youngborean
Sage
Posts: 800
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:28 pm

Post #8

Post by youngborean »

I personally don't see a paradox. There are distinctions for behaviour in families, church bodies and society at large. As citizens and God's creation women and men stand shoulder to shoulder. Within church bodies (large families) and families god has ordained an order to combat our insecurities. It's only a paradox if you don't agree with this order.

Post Reply