liz3564 wrote:This may require its own thread! Very interesting stuff! Do you remember which scholars stated that the writings regarding women were not actually from Paul, but inserted as Paul by someone else? Do we have any idea who would have done this?
I know a lot about this. I'll have to do a "No, Paul didn't hate women" thread sometime and talk about it, but to briefly sum it up:
Most scholars do not accept Paul as the author of 1 Timothy. That isn't my position, but if one is going strictly by majority consensus, 1 Timothy 2:12-15 is not genuinely from Paul. Ephesians and Colossians are also typically rejected as Pauline.
In recent years, a few scholars have proposed that 1 Corinthians 14:34-36 is a later interpolation. The manuscript evidence for this is on the weak side as proposed interpolations go; they base it on the fact that the verses are moved to another location in the chapter in a few MS, not that it's actually missing from any significant MS. But the theory is there. Gordon D. Fee is one such scholar.
That leaves 1 Corinthians 11 as containing the most offensive thing Paul says about women, which is difficult to understand and, even taken at its worst, incredibly tame by 1st century standards. Coupled with his intriguing mentions of a female apostle (Junia), a female deacon (Phoebe), and his high praise for female co-workers and co-laborers in the gospel and female house church leaders, his highly progressive take on sexuality in marriage (husbands and wives own each other instead of husbands owning wives), and Galatians 3:26-28, and Paul actually comes out looking pretty damned good.
Again, I personally don't reject Colossians, Ephesians, 1 Cor. 14:34-36, or even 1 Timothy as Pauline, but what I've just laid out is one way you could go.