The Apostle Paul is generally considered to have been central to the early development and spreading of Christianity in the first century. Although he was at one point a persecutor of Christians, he later changed his tune after supposedly being knocked on his fanny by a brilliant light and having a short pow-wow with Jesus. After spending 3 days blind, Paul reversed engines and became the driving force in shaping the fledgling Christian religion.
Paul eventually began establishing the earliest churches from western Asia Minor to Rome. His letters to these churches are among the most quoted text from the New Testament.
As a young Christian, I studied Paul’s letters carefully. While undertaking this study I stumbled across some verses that troubled me. I discovered that Paul apparently didn’t think very much about the judgment of women and didn’t care very much for women dressing up. This troubled me because it seemed to contradict the behavior of women in our church. Paul said that women shouldn’t wear expensive jewelry or clothes and that they should be silent in church. In my church however, there were women dressed to the hilt with all kinds of dangling diamonds, pearls, gold, and the fanciest beauty shop doos not only speaking and singing in church, but leading prayers, testifying, edifying, prophesying, teaching, and even preaching to the congregation.
Naturally I thought there was something wrong somewhere but I was told that, Oh no… Paul only meant those particular words for particular churches he had founded because particular women in those particular churches were getting particularly out of hand.
But this didn’t seem to jive with what Paul was actually saying.
Paul seemed to be indicating that *all* women have inferior judgment. Why? Paul takes us back. Back a few churches? No, back further. Back to the first church he founded?? No, all the way back to the very first woman.
(1 Tim 2:13-14 NRSV) For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was *not deceived*, but the woman *was deceived* and became a transgressor.
So according to Paul. Adam was “formed first” and when it came to devouring the fruit, was blameless. It was Eve’s poor judgment concerning the fruit consumption that was to blame for everything going into the dumpster.
Again, note that this reasoning appears to apply to all women, not just some women in some early churches. Paul is obviously making a general statement about all women by using Eve as an example.
So what are the consequences of Eve’s poor judgment?
Well according to Paul, because Adam showed outstanding judgment in the fruit incident, apparently men are supposed to be at the helm running everything and conversely according to Paul, women need to put a lid on it and learn from men at home.
(1 Cor 14:34 NRSV) women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says.
(1 Cor 14:35 NRSV) If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
(1 Tim 2:11 NRSV) Let a woman learn in silence with full submission.
How about teaching Sunday school??
(1 Tim 2:12 NRSV) I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.
What about dangling jewelry, mood rings, designer dresses, corn rows, bee-hives, reverse mohawks, etc…??
(1 Tim 2:9 NRSV) also that the women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes, …
Paul’s a hard taskmaster.
Yeah, but this is a man who killed how many people?
Altough I am a sceptic I regard the position of the woman in the three “great” religions of semitic origin as a very serious flaw in the mental make-up of the human species and I suspect all religions have more or less a similar failing. These religions are used by the man to prevent the woman from ataining full social and cultural equality. For example, imagine a nun becoming Pope and half the cardinals being replaced by nuns. Imagine all males being barred from attending the mosque and the synagogue. The more secular the society the greater the freedom of the woman
The problem with trying to claim what Paul was saying as only being for certain women of his day is that Paul clearly gives the reason why he thinks *all* women are to be silent and learn from their husbands at home, etc…
(1 Tim 2:13-14 NRSV) For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was *not deceived*, but the woman *was deceived* and became a transgressor.
Because (according to the Bible) Eve was the ancestor to all women, clearly Paul was talking about women in general; past, present, and future and his words meant what they are, that women are inferior, should be silent in church, and learn at home from their husbands.
In short, Paul was of the primitive mindset of most men of his day concerning women and of most men who composed the Bible.
Mr. Capella,
As I mentioned before the Church in the region of Ephesus had a problem with false teachers, and since women have never been allowed to study before they would have been very susceptible to these false teachings. The illustration that Paul is giving is that just like Eve getting decieved in the garden so these Ephesian women were being decieved. And just like Adam was first created by God so the men were to take responsiblity and teach the women properly since the men were allowed to study they had more knowledge at the time. I understand on the surface how sexist it may seem, but sir it is not like that. Paul is still saying let the women study.
I disagree. This is clearly Paul saying *all* women have inferior judgement (because of Eve) so they should keep their mouths shut and learn from their husbands.
Not surprising since this was typical thinking for his primitive time.
I see where your coming from, but what about Priscilla in the book of Acts. She teaches Apollos who becomes a great preacher. A woman taught him, and Paul commends her. In the book of Romans Paul also commends other women for their dedication and the roles they played in the Church. It is very clear in those passages, Pauls feelings for those women is of respect. When handling cases of things not being so clear, I have found that you read what is unclear in light of what is clear. Not the other way around. I understand completley what this says, but this SEEMS to be going the other way a little. Well let me see what was said CLEARLY and judge what was a little foggy on that.
Thanks for your comments Mr. Capella.
Oh hell,
I’m sick of people that read a scripture and try and go in another direction with it.
Paul said what he said and it was meant to keep the women “in their place”.He had the same mindset as modern day rednecks.
They are the same people that can read Matthew 24:34 and come up with the idea that Christ didn’t mean THAT generation but meant “thousands of years later” he would return.
No wonder the bullshit is endless when it comes to “interpreting” scripture.
Whether Paul was referring to certain women in particular congregations is clearly debatable, especially when compared with Titus 2:3-5 and Colossians 3:16.
However, IMHO, the mere fact that such an ‘important’ issue is up for debate tells me that the Bible is NOT clear, unambiguous, and beneficial for teaching, reproving, for setting things straight etc., as would befit a Divine author.
An eye-opening site, capella.
Cheers
Kind of appears to me that its more of the same old inconsistant, contradictory crap found throughout the bible.
(ad hominem attacks snipped)
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand…
(ad hominem attack snipped)
Don’t forget how anti-women the culture was at the time, even allowing a women to study was crazy, they weren’t even allowed to stand up in court as witnesses. So think how crazy it was to have Jesus treating the women with such equality, it was quite an upheaval… Not the sort of thing you would want to do if you were trying to “Start a religion for control” or “gain” as are some anti-Christian arguments… (Although I do think these are good arguments against bad churches)
If the whole Bible talked about women being inferior, or anything like that, then we would have an issue, it would clearly not be a book of God, and I certainly wouldn’t hold the book in high regard (take the Koran’s stance on females for example), but, the general consensus in the Bible is equality. So some dubious verses are not going to out-weigh an entire book, are they? Paul was only human!
There is a lot of confusion among other matters in the Bible too, the book of acts contains accounts of people not sure what to do with speaking in tounges, etc.
(evangelism snipped)
In England 70% of church congregations are female, not something you would expect from a sexist religion would you?
I think what Paul wrote about women was not the least bit hard to understand. He was very clear in different places that women should be silent in church and learn at home from their husbands and that it applied to all women as he cited Eve’s “poor judgement” in the garden of eden myth as the reason.
I also disagree that this type of thing only exists in Paul’s letters. It’s all over the Bible from blaming Eve for corrupting Adam which caused the expulsion from the garden of Eden in Genesis to the almost slave/property status women endured in the law books to the great whore in Revelations.
Women were almost without exception written about as inferiors to men from cover to cover in the Bible.
I do agree with you that this was the norm back then and that’s the reason almost all Biblical authors wrote about women in this way.
Jesus once refered to a woman begging for her daughter as a “dog” because she was a gentile. Since there were no women included in his disciples, I hardly think Jesus was as equal an opportunist as you claim.
Eve was decieved and so was Adam. She ate and he (who was with her) ate also. He didn’t know enough to stop her or protect her?
The Lord said he made Man and Woman. Both in his image.
There were problems with that church just like in any church and Paul was directing that particular problem there.
I believe that a female can be a very powerful instrument for the Lord…. especially if she is not married to listen to a man but him and him alone.
No, again, if Paul was directing this at a particular church, he wouldn’t have based his reasoning about why he though women had poor judgement and men had superior judgement on Adam and Eve.
No matter what you personally believe, Paul stated that he believed that Adam was *not* decieved and Eve *was* decieved which according to him is why he thought women should be silent and learn at home from their husbands, etc…
Paul was no better in his views of women than any of the other authors of the Bible. The Old testament has example after example of women being considered little more than property.