Furthermore,
1 Timothy 2:9-11 wrongly muzzles women on the grounds that women are morally inferior to men. The author blames Eve, not Adam, for the Serpent's deception, when in fact Adam was present during the deception and remained silent before eating the forbidden fruit. By contrast, the real Paul blames Adam for the Fall.
1 Timothy 2:11-14
11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.
12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.
Paul does not wrongly muzzle women on the grounds of women being
morally inferior to men. He says in the passage above only that Eve was deceived (not morally inferior) when Adam was not. Paul also points out the order in which Adam and Eve were created, clearly implying that this order carries with it a certain priority of authority (see verse 12). Also, Paul does not put the blame for the serpent's deception on Eve. The serpent's deception, which it enacted
upon Eve, was the
serpent's deception.
As far as I'm concerned, the deutero-Pauline debate is a post-modernist load of nonsense, in no small part provoked by - and pandering to - the modern hard-line, leftist/"progressive," third-wave feminist ideology of the identicality of the sexes.
NT scholars reject
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as a later non-Pauline interpolation on 5 grounds:
(1) It contradicts what Paul has just said in the same epistle. in
1 Corinthians 11:5 we learn that Paul encourages women to prophesy and pray out loud in church.
1 Corinthians 11:3-5
3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.
5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.
Paul says nothing here about a woman prophesying or praying
in church. He does, though, emphasize - again - the hierarchy of authority he wrote of at other points in his epistles. IN fact, Paul goes on to write,
1 Corinthians 11:8-9
8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man.
9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.
(2) It does not fit its present context, which focuses exclusively on the gifts of prophecy and tongues.
Says who? Verse 34 and 35 appear to fit perfectly well, to me. Paul is not
singularly focused in
1 Corinthians 14 on the subjects of prophesying and tongues. In fact, his ultimate interest in the chapter seems rather to be to institute an edifying order in a local gathering of believers that was decidedly disordered. In the process of doing so he discusses the purpose of tongues and prophesying, how interpretation of tongues and prophecies was to be done, the pre-eminence of the goal of spiritual edification,
and the proper conduct of women in the gatherings.
(3) Early NT manuscripts recognize that these verses don't belong here and relocate them.
From what I've read, doing so is a matter of significant debate among Bible scholars.
(4) There is precedent for claiming an interpolation in the Corinthian correspondence. The scholarly consensus recognizes
2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 as another later non-Pauline interpolation.
Source/sources please. (And not just sources that say what you have here but sources that give concrete evidence of the consensus you claim and the reasons for thinking verses
6:14-7:1 ought to be considered an interpolation.)
(5) The real Paul would never base an argument for church order on the Law of Moses, as 14:34-35 does. Rather, the real Paul teaches that "Christ is the end of the Law (
Romans 10:4).
The phrase, "as also says the law" (verse 34) does not indicate Paul was commanding the silence of women in adherence to the law any more than my saying, "Murder is wrong, as the law of Canada also says," means I think people ought not to murder
because Canadian law prohibits it. Murder is wrong and ought not to be done quite apart from what Canadian law may recognize concerning the moral quality of murder and what that law might prohibit. And women ought to be silent and in order in church gatherings quite apart from whatever the laws of Moses might mandate of women. Why? Paul explains in the passage above from
1 Corinthians 11, and also in
Ephesians 5, and
1 Timothy 2 (see above and my earlier posts), none of which passages rest their rationale upon the Mosaic law.
Of course, the bogus character of both texts clashes with what we know about female leadership in Paul's churches. Here are just 3 examples from
Romans 16:
(1) Paul recognizes Junia as a female apostle, a fact widely recognized by the church fathers.
In fact, the "bogus character" of the texts you've focused on does not clash at all with the "female leadership" in New Testament churches.
Junia may also be Junias. See Radagast's posts earlier in this thread. Whether female or male, how Junia(s) behaved in church gatherings is unknown. And "apostle" may mean "messenger" or "one who is sent" which carries the idea of a missionary rather than the greater sense in which Paul was an apostle.
(2) Phoebe was the minister (diakonos) of her house church
Romans 16:1-2). "Minister" is the primary meaning of "diakonos." Only later, when combined with "bishops" and "elders," does it acquire its hierarchical meaning of "deacon."
See Radagast's post earlier in this thread.
(3) In 4 of the 6 times Priscilla and Aquila are mentioned in the NT, Priscilla is mentioned before her husband! This sequence pattern is unheard of in ancient patriarchal culture. That's most likely because she did the missionary work, while her husband worked as a tentmaker to finance her ministry. But since she arrives in Rome before Peter (See Acts 18:1-2) and establishes a house church there, she looms as the best candidate as the founder of the Church of Rome.
The first time Aquila and Priscilla are mentioned in Acts (
Ac. 18:2), Aquila is named first; when Paul is said to have been instructed by Aquila and Priscilla (
Ac. 18:24), Aquila is named first; when Paul refers to the couple and their house church, Paul mentions Aquila first (
1 Cor 16:9). Only in simple greeting to the two by Paul, is Priscilla mentioned first (
Ro. 16:3; 2 Ti. 4:19). I hardly see good grounds in these instances for thinking that woman stood with equal authority to men in the New Testament church.
