St Pauls' baggage

[TomS]

Just want to throw it out for discussion. I am NOT trying to piss people off but am really interested in opinions on this:

St. Paul brought some baggage with him.

I just think that no matter how saintly he was, that he could not help but bring part of his past/culture along with him. And that past impacted the way he interpreted things and what he considered correct. St. Paul was a Jewish zealot and I think I recall reading somewhere that he may of been a Rabbi. If not a Rabbi, then he was certainly a learned scholar/teacher before he set out to persecute Christians.

I think that he brought with him his view of woman and how they should be treated and act from Judiasm. And truthfully, back then it was not much different from the Muslim view of woman now. I can't find any other disciple/apostle from the original group who wrote about women the way St. Paul did. Personally, I don't think he liked women!

I find it interesting that in all the dealings that the savior had with woman in the Gospels, he treats them as equals. He never makes any comments about them having to "stay in their place". That they should not be included in the group. That they are a bunch of gosssips and should not speak.

Some of the statements that St. Paul made in his epistles about the way women should be treated/act were inconsistent with the way Jesus treated women in the Gospels. Don't you think that if this was such an important issue that the LORD would have said something about it?

In the same vein, St. Augustine got his hangups with sex being dirty from his background. It was part of the baggage he brought with him.

Just because someone is saintly does not make them always right.

[尼古拉前执事]

Not everything Jesus said or did was recorded in the Bible. The Bible itself even says this, that the rest is carried down in the form of tradition. Where does Paul say something that is diametrically opposed to the teaching of Jesus after his conversion and renaming? Why do you think that he would teach the opposite of what Christ himself taught?

[TomS]

Why do you think that he would teach the opposite of what Christ himself taught?

Because he was a man and therefore imperfect.

We have saints in the church whose complete teachings are not accepted. In some areas they were considered wrong.

[尼古拉前执事]

But again, what are you claiming that Paul taught that was wrong and opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ? If it was wrong, do you think those writings would have been permitted to remain in the Bible? Surely you do not consider the Sacred Scriptures to be errant, do you?

[TomS]

Surely you do not consider the Sacred Scriptures to be errant, do you?

Oh Please, Nik! You sound like a Grand Inquisitor during the middle ages. Are you going to tell me now that the earth IS the center of the universe because "Scripture/Holy Father says so"?

Don't be silly. Evertyhing is a product of the period it is written in.

Yes, taken as a WHOLE the bible IS sacred scripture, but even the church will admit that it is not to be taken literally, right?

As a WHOLE St. Pauls writings may be sacred, but his ideas on women were formed by his Orthodox Jewish background and I believe are inconsistent with the inclusiveness of our Lord.

[TomS]

But again, what are you claiming that Paul taught that was wrong and opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ?

As I said in my original post, I see no areas where Jesus makes any attempt to NOT include women in everything he does. He even speaks to the woman at the well who is flabbergasted that a Jewish man would talk to her. And don't use the argument that it was just because she was a Gentile.

And I said before -- if this was SO IMPORTANAT that women cover their heads and not even be allowed to SPEAK in church, don't ya think that it would have been mentioned by Him somewhere? Or at least the others?

All of these ideas come with St. Paul from Orthodox Judiasm.

[尼古拉前执事]

Tom, you are just getting defensive and not answering the questions. So let me ask again. What exactly in Sacred Scripture, that was written by Paul, that has not been questioned by the Church for 1900 years do you find diametrically opposed to the teachings of Jesus.

Obviously God sees men and women as different, that is why there were no women apostles, there were separate sections for men and women in the Temple and in Orthodox Churches until GOA started bucking tradition in the 1950's. heck, before the 1900's the standard was modest dresses and head coverings in protestant churches!

It is sad that in these modern days, when men have decided they were far superior than the Fathers of the Church and know better than them, that the Bible's teachings are either questioned, ignored, or rebuked. Not all of the Bible is taken literally, as some is allegorical, parts are even to be taken both allegorical AND literal and much is prophecy. But it is all truth and part of the Tradition of The Church.