New Testament

Originally posted by rwingett
It's impossible to say. Some anonymous figure from the 2nd century who wanted his writings to have an authoritative stamp on them.

True, (you could say that about most books of the Bible) but the fundamentalists attribute Timothy to Paul.

Originally posted by moon1969
True, (you could say that about most books of the Bible) but the fundamentalists attribute Timothy to Paul.

Of the fourteen Pauline Epistles, there is broad consensus that seven are unquestionably written by Paul (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon).

There is no clear consensus on the authorship of Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians.

1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus are widely accepted as being pseudepigraphical (forged in Paul's name).

Almost everyone agrees that Hebrews was not written by Paul.

So that's half of the Pauline Epistles that are indisputably Paul's.

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
I think he is saying that women are to blame for everything.

From the garden of Eden to the latest worldwide economic recession.

He likes his women quiet and obedient.😉

No he is not saying women are the blame for everythng, the woman was
tricked was what he said. The man was there with his eyes wide open.
Kelly

Originally posted by rwingett
Of the fourteen Pauline Epistles, there is broad consensus that seven are unquestionably written by Paul (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon).

There is no clear consensus on the authorship of Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians.

1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus are widely accepted as being pseudepigraphical (fo not written by Paul.

So that's half of the Pauline Epistles that are indisputably Paul's.

I am no theologian or biblical hsitorian but agree it seems clear that books like Romans and 1&2 Corinthians were written by Paul. Yet, he had help. And think about the bible in its current form. How true is it to Paul's words. By the way, on a completely different topic, some think Paul was a closet homosexual.

Originally posted by KellyJay
No he is not saying women are the blame for everythng, the woman was
tricked was what he said. The man was there with his eyes wide open.
Kelly

Relax Kelly,

That posting of mine was tongue in cheek.

A joke.

A men Vs. women joke.

I have the greatest respect for women as you will clearly see
if you read all my postings.

I want to see women on an equal footing with men in all aspects of life.

Paul in a letter teaching (chastising) the church of the Corinthians:

34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.

35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Originally posted by KellyJay
No he is not saying women are the blame for everythng, the woman was
tricked was what he said. The man was there with his eyes wide open.
Kelly

Maybe so, but Paul is also clearly saying that women are to learn in silence with all subjection, and not to usurp authority over the man, and women are not to teach.

Apparently, the reason for this is at least in part that Eve was in the transgression. Yet, no matter the reason, Paul in the word of God in the New Testament here states that women are to learn in silence and be in all subjection, and not usurp authority over the man. Also, he is not big on women being teachers.

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

1 Timothy 2:11-14

Paul and the New Testament does not have a monopoly on stuff like this. And Old Testament favorite:

"And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her" (Ecclesiastes 7:26).

Indeed, women are deceitful and manipulative.

"I find more bitter than death the woman."

Originally posted by moon1969
Maybe so, but Paul is also clearly saying that women are to learn in silence with all subjection, and not to usurp authority over the man, and women are not to teach.

Apparently, the reason for this is at least in part that Eve was in the transgression. Yet, no matter the reason, Paul in the word of God in the New Testament here states that women are to ...[text shortened]... was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

1 Timothy 2:11-14

Eve was set up.

It was a bum rap.

If someone deceived you, how would you like to be blamed?

And not just blamed, but blamed for all eternity??

This is a stupid story. I don't like this game.
The poor fricken arse women. Geez.

Men should stay shut up or offer remarks reflecting equality.

To actually blame them is like....blaming their kids or something.

To blame anyone for whatever is boring and forgotten quickly

Originally posted by moon1969
I am no theologian or biblical hsitorian but agree it seems clear that books like Romans and 1&2 Corinthians were written by Paul. Yet, he had help. And think about the bible in its current form. How true is it to Paul's words. By the way, on a completely different topic, some think Paul was a closet homosexual.

Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan have written a book called The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon." In it, they claim that if you take away all the disputed epistles and look just at the undisputed ones, you come away with a very different interpretation of Paul. One who is much less conservative. They put forward the argument that later church fathers wrote the disputed epistles to reign Paul in and make him more amenable to existing power structures.

Originally posted by rwingett
Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan have written a book called [b]The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon." In it, they claim that if you take away all the disputed epistles and look just at the undisputed ones, you come away with a very different interpretation of Paul. One who is much less conservativ ...[text shortened]... he disputed epistles to reign Paul in and make him more amenable to existing power structures.[/b]

I suppose there could be some truth in that.

Wasn't he called Saul? And when he was called Saul he was a persecutor
of the Christians?

So if that was the case then maybe his conversion was not as convincing
as was previously thought.

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
Eve was set up.

It was a bum rap.

If someone deceived you, how would you like to be blamed?

And not just blamed, but blamed for all eternity??

She was greedy (and manipulative)

Originally posted by rwingett
Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan have written a book called [b]The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon." In it, they claim that if you take away all the disputed epistles and look just at the undisputed ones, you come away with a very different interpretation of Paul. One who is much less conservativ ...[text shortened]... he disputed epistles to reign Paul in and make him more amenable to existing power structures.[/b]

Fascinating.

I would like a less conservative Paul.

Originally posted by moon1969
Fascinating.

I would like a less conservative Paul.

It's an interesting book. Very readable. If you ever come across it, I'd recommend it.