What do YOU think is the point of a Pauline Epistle?

Question

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’t dress like a street walker.

I think that the epistles have some great guidelines for right-living, but clearly should be read with a mind open to the state of the culture and specific churches they were originally written to.

Agree or disagree?

Inspired by a question where I said I don't think women should have to keep quiet in my church because we don't have the same problems as the church at Corinth that Paul's letter was directed to.

I received more thumbs down than usual so I KNOW there are people out there who disagree with me, and I would like to hear from them.

CJ: While I'm not obsessed, I have a hard time understanding how being obsessed with trying to properly understand the Bible is a bad thing.

Both Disciple and Gma Joan:
You two raise excellent points, and seem to have a firm grasp on biblical history. I really appreciate your answers, thank you.

Answer 1

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.

Answer 2

Paul's epistles were regulatory letters that were written to Christians, not nonchristians. They were to people who already understood the principles of the Gospel and Paul did not have to explain every little thing in every letter. He assumed that they already understood some things, and the epistles were answers to letters asking questions or addressed to problems that Paul knew existed in the various Churches. When we read the beginning of Revelation, we read some of the conditions of the seven churches that John was writing about. And even though the Pauline epistles were written earlier, some of these conditions were already in the various churches. We do not have the letters that Paul was replying to, and it is very like listening to one end of a telephone conversation. Most of the instructions in the letters are broad instructions that were laws of the early Church and generally apply still today and are timeless. Others Paul even said were his opinions. We have to study these carefully and prayerfully through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Paul told Timothy that all scripture was valuable and for instruction. The letters were not scripture at that time, but they were instructions of an inspiried Apostle and Prophet of God; they are scripture today and we need to take them as valuable and sacred.

Answer 3

The Pauline epistles were also the earliest church writings, most scholars date them about 40 CE, so they are an interesting glimpse into very early Christianity.
However not all of the Pauline epistles are believed to be written by Paul. Scholars consider some of them to be written in the style of Paul and in his name, but not by him. I'm not sure what the consensus is on 1 Timothy.

Oh yeah! Your question... Agreed.

Answer 4

I am looking at my translation of 1 Timothy now and I cannot find the verse about braided hair. Which one is it, please?

ADD: Ok, here it is, chapter 2.
I agree, strongly. Part of the problem though is that very little contextual information is contained in the bible, which means we have to go to outside sources (and their interpretations) for more information. It is part of what makes it so interesting, and so frightening when someone insists that there is only one "right" interpretation.

Answer 5

Again I agree with you. They are letters from a man and not commandments from God. They were like sermons. They were addressed for that audience. Some applies universally and some apply for them at that time. It is very easy to figure out the difference between the two. Good to know I'm not alone on that one.

Answer 6

In general '....All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness [2Timothy 3:16]. Also scripture can be extremely difficult to understand '... as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, [2Peter 3:16]. Paul's letter to the Romans is the nearest thing there is to a systematic statement of Christianity.

Answer 7

Reading some of these answers you would think God himself printed the Bible in English yesterday. It would make sense that he was using cultural reasoning opposed to deciding what is and is not a Sin in Gods eyes.

He associated braided hair with "sinners" not sin with braided hair, makes more sense than: "God doesn't like braids" to me.

Just my arrogant opinion.

Answer 8

Grace(not law) unto YOU, and peace(not division),
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus-->Christ.

DISAGREE. Paul wrote "epistles", not letters.
The letter "killeth", but the spirit "giveth life".
The letter: the law...was glorious, to them
The spirit: grace... is much more glory us
It's allegory: as if comparing moon(law) & grace(sun).
The man in moon notably has no light of it's own at all.
Moon vanishes at coming of the sun of righteousness.

It is preposterous order to teach first, and learn after.
Go ye and LEARN what meaneth Hos 6:6...Mt 9:13.
Scriptures were written aforetime for our LEARNING.
You can also read that in Romans 15:4.

Pauline epistles open and close with "grace";
and they also notably open and close with JC;
And so does the NT open and close with JC.
So what the hell are YOU doing in CJ?
All who will live godly in CJ shall "suffer".
CJ is neither in the begin nor end of NT.
CJ is in the midst of fools & hypocrites.
CJ is mirrorly the reverse of JC.
JC is only foundation laid: Mt 1:1.
Life in CJ is temporal Life + Death.
Life in JC is the eternal Life(ONLY).

Law: Mend it or End it?
Christ is the "end" of the law!
No matter how much fools try to ammend the law,
it's still eventually "the ministration of death" to them,
after it is finished causing them much suffering & sorrow.

Pst: the "you all" in "the end" begins with "YOU"

The GRACE(ONLY) of our Lord J-->C with you-->all. Amen.

Answer 9

Trying to properly decipher, understand and then apply biblical teachings to your own life is not obsessive nor is it a bad thing.

I completely agree with your interpretation, and so does my pastor by the way. We studied much of Paul's writings last spring. Plus, I busted up laughing right in the middle of Bible study - because in one part he says women should not go to church dressed in pearls and gold, and a dear woman seated right by me had a belt made out of big faux pearls and gold chain. She ended up laughing with me.

Answer 10

You're right on target with this one. Paul,...being an Apostle,was charged with establishing all those churches,as well as over seeing their smooth operations,spiritually,and morally. He was the "go between',..if you will, between Christ and the new followers of Christ. Paul, in essence,was their teacher,and authority.
As for this day and age,we must strive to hear what God is speaking to us,and calling on us to do. If He calls on a woman to minister,then she should definitely answer His call.
It is not up to any man, nor woman,to judge whom should do what, That's God's call,He alone,...IS WORTHY !