Web Results
Questions/Answers
What literary forms go withJames, Timothy and Revelationin the New Testament?
JAMES. TIMOTHY. REVELATION. What literary forms best suits each of these new testament books???? Possibilties: Apocalyptic literature, Epistles, Letters. I need to match these up!!! Please help!
Revelation - Apocalyptic, of course. James - Epistles Timothy - Letters, by deductive reasoning
How would you compare andcontrast the letter ofGalatians and the PastoralEpistles?
The pastoral epistles are 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Its for an important college essay...
That's a question that would take longer than 30 seconds to answer. :) Here's a website that teaches the meaning of every verse of every Book of the Bible: http://www.soniclight.com/cons table/notes.htm You can use it for your essay.
What do YOU think is the pointof a Pauline Epistle?
Paul wrote these letters to individual churches to address specific problems they were having. Some of the advice applies to us all, and some is clearly a cultural matter. For example in 1 Timothy Paul writes: "I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes..." Does this mean it is a sin to braid your hair? No. In the culture he was writing to, braided hair was a sign of prostitution. Paul is basically saying: don
A great discussion of these two issues can be had in Bart Erhman's book "Misquoting Jesus." As to your specific point, there is a great deal of evidence that 1st Timothy is not written by Paul, but is in fact psuedopigrapha. The oldest and best copies of the scripture do not include it, and there is strong reason to believe it was written using Pauls name more than a century after his death. If you go back, and read the letter, it differs widely from things we do know WERE written by Paul. In 1 Timothy, his vocabulary, writing style, theological modes of expression and pressuposed historical situation all differ from those he uses else where, say in his letters to the Church at Corinth, which (at least the first 2 that are included in the Canon, not the [excluded] so-called 3rd Corinthians) we actually know he wrote. But what about that then? In First Corinthians, chapter 14 (which as I said, we DO know he wrote) there is a clear reference to women not speaking out. This becomes problematic, because if you remember 1 Corinthians chapter 11, Paul actually says that women COULD speak in church, prophesy and teach (the caveat being they should have their hair covered when they do so, a prelude to the amazing hats I used to see in church, 7 stories tall and more feathers than an emu farm.). So how, in the same letter but 3 chapters earlier, could Paul flip-flop so obviously? Go back to 1 Corinthians 14. Mentally remove the passage about women not speaking in church (1Cor: 34-35), but remaining silent. Re-read the passage - and I know from your linguistic training you have to have taken a few literature classes - what do you notice? The passage, minus the part about women not speaking, flows much better from beginning to end. His prohibition on women speaking seems sudden, out of context and completely puzzeling in it's placement. Combine that with the fact that in different translations, older versions, and other texts, the passage is inserted not where it is in the current version (assumeing KJV or NST or most other English translations) but in other places in 1 Corithians 14! Scholars have long found manuscripts with a-Scriptual notations in the margins. It was common practice for scribes to write a passage, and write another cross reference to another passage they knew by heart. Later scribes, copying the text would see the notation, and mistakenly insert it into the text. Scholars have concluded that because of the fact that 1 Corinthians 14 contradicts not only 1 Corinthians 11, but also Pauls other letters as well as Pauls letter to the Galatians (Gal 3:28 "In Christ there is not male or female"), coupled with the fact that the ONLY other time "Paul" references women's subservience to men is in 1 Timothy (a text which as per the above, was not even written by Paul) it can be safely and conclusively said that Paul did not write that passage in 1 Corinthians 14 (34-35). Let us not forget Romans 16: 3, 6, and 12 when Paul specifically names Women who worked as Christian missionaries, 16:1 where he mentions Phoebe, deacon of the church at Cenchrea, and most importantly 16:7: Naming Junia as "foremost among the apostles" The evidence is more than clear that Pauls views were exteremely progressive for the time. Many, MANY people wrote letters in his name, and it is overwhelmingly evident that 1 Timothy is just such a psuedonymous writting. With actual analysis of the text, we see that YOUR, not CJ's, interpretation is much closer to what Paul actually thought.
Submit your question
knowledge base
* Indicates a required fieldAdd your knowledge or ask a question:
  • Display Name:(letters/numbers, no special characters)
  • Your knowledge or question:*
    (min: 100 characters, max: 2,000 characters)
  • Character count: 0
Privacy Policy | About ToseekA.com | Contact Us | Popular Searches
© 2009 ToseekA.com
Portions of this page powered by: yahoo!