Pauline Theology: Ministry and Society by E. Earle Ellis

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Bible-boy, Jul 29, 2003.

  1. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Recently the discussion of a book entitled Pauline Theology: Ministry and Society, by E. Earle Ellis came up in a thread in the Baptist Colleges/Seminaries Forum. I agreed to read a specific chapter in the book referenced above and to engage in a discussion regarding the subject matter. Therefore, I am starting this new thread.

    It occurred to me that others who read the BB may not have read this book or have access to a library in which it is housed. With this in mind I was going to attempt to summarize the book’s third chapter entitled Paul and the Eschatological Woman. However, I found several good book reviews containing accurate summaries and I decided not to attempt to reinvent the wheel. Below you will find one such book review quoted in its entirety (giving proper credit to the author and the source) followed by excerpts from several other book reviews by other biblical scholars.

    Charles H. Talbert of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, NC (not to be confused with SEBTS, which is located in Wake Forest, NC) writes:
    Focusing specifically now on the review of the book’s third chapter, Paul and the Eschatological Woman, one finds that various biblical scholars come down on differing sides of the issues raised by Ellis. For example, Larry McGraw and Aliou Niang of Logsdon School of Theology, Hardin-Simmons University in Abilene, TX write:
    David B. Capes of Eastwood Baptist Church in Memphis, TN writes:
    Wilhelm C. Linss of the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago disagrees sharply with Ellis. Linss critiques Ellis’ third chapter as follows:
    Now that we have several scholarly reviews and summaries of the content of Ellis’ chapter three “Paul and the Eschatological Woman” we can move on to our own discussion of the material. The poster “Baptist Believer” and I agreed to discuss this material in another thread. Of course you are all welcome to contribute to the discussion. However, I will limit my replies to Baptist Believer and hopefully Baptist Believer will likewise reply only to my posts so that our discussion remains focused. Likewise, Baptist Believer and I have agreed not to make this discussion into a personal name calling match or to accuse one another of being “Bible deniers” etc. With all that said… Lets talk!

    [ July 29, 2003, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]
     
  2. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some people just want to add to what God said. Some of these bubble brain, so call scholars, would not know Jesus if they met Him in the street. The miltant femist movement has made great head ways in so call christian education.

    Oh well, let the bubble brains just keep on adding to the bible and I will accept what God said. A woman can not preach, pastor or usurp authority over any man. That is Bible!!!
     
  3. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Bob,

    Thanks for adding my edits to the original post for me.

    Yours in Christ,

    BibleboyII
     
  4. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's the point - it may NOT be Bible. That's what scholars are trying to do. They are trying to undrestand what Paul is actually saying. Many of them, when fully exegeting the Scriptures, are seeing that women actually can have authority over men in certain contexts.
     
  5. timothy 1769

    timothy 1769
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    bah, i was offended just by the title of the book! all this time i thought it was really god's theology, the bible being inspired and all.
     
  6. Speedpass

    Speedpass
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    0
    I checked this book out from the library of the Baptist university I have been attending, upon the recommendation of a good friend and fellow BB poster. I have not read all of it, but this is what I have gleaned so far:

    1)Ministry does not have to be limited to having an official title (Sunday school teacher, committee member, etc) in your local church. Ministry is anything that is done in Jesus' name and for His glory.

    2)The instruction in 1 Timothy 2 regarding women remaining silent, not teaching over men, seems to have its original concept in a husband-wife relationship--not necessarily a proof-text prohibiting women from pastoring churches.
     
  7. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,649
    Likes Received:
    187
    Amen!

    It is my intention to only discuss this book and it’s argument in this thread with those who are reading the book or have it available to them.

    Before we begin, I want to state the presuppositions I bring to this discussion:

    1.) I believe that the Bible is a trustworthy guide to faith and practice for the Christian.

    2.) I believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the only-begotten Son of God. He is the exact representation of God’s nature and character and is the one in whom I have placed my faith, life and will.

    3.) I believe that the Apostle Paul was inspired of God when he wrote the letters collected in the New Testament and that his teaching in fully in line with the teaching of Jesus. Jesus and Paul are not in conflict.

    4.) I believe that the biblical texts we have now are reliable, but our English translations (including the KJV) do not fully express all the nuances of the original languages. Therefore, I defer to the Hebrew and Greek when there are difficulties in interpretation.

    5.) The letters of Paul that are collected in the New Testament were written in the context of a living church in the first century in a culture and circumstance very different from our own. In most situations, Paul was teaching in order to respond to specific issues taking place in the churches. Since our culture is very different, some specific suggestions and solutions provided by Paul in his letters are inappropriate for our culture, yet the principles expressed are valid for today. Furthermore, most of the readers of Paul’s letters in the first century knew or knew about Paul because of his missionary work. There was a certain understanding of his message that was assumed when they read his letters. Since we do not have the same advantage of knowing Paul personally and living within the first century culture, interpreting Paul’s writings is often challenging. In my opinion, the best way to understand a specific teaching of Paul’s is to understand it in the context of all of the extant writings available. In other words, I believe it is very important for the interpreter to understand the broad and pervasive themes of Paul's theology before attempting to interpret his very specific instructions to individuals, churches and the Christian community. It is my conviction that Paul does not contradict himself when expressing principles of faith, ministry and theology.

    Do you have any questions about my presuppositions or would you like to challenge any item?

    POINT ONE:

    On page 54 in the second paragraph, Ellis states:

    “…the Apostle [Paul] is not concerned to lay down rules for society – ‘those of this world,’ as he would put it. He gives his teachings to those who recognize Jesus as the Messiah and himself as the faithful transmitter of the mind of Jesus… While he calls all people to faith in Christ, he directs his apostolic teaching only to the Christian community.”

    Do you agree with this statement? If no, why not?

    Looking forward to your response! :D [​IMG]
     
  8. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scott(and whoever else it may concern). God does not need man to explain what He said. He says it very clearly. Women have NO authority in the church or in the home except what their husbands give them in the home. PERIOD. This is easy and some bleeding heart feminist does not need to add to it.
     
  9. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    And, again, you are reading a human perspective on the Word of God. Several times I have shown how your position is flawed according to the plain teachings of the Scriptures. If you choose to merely take what the KJV tells you without examining the Greek, then more than likely you will believe that women are much lower than men. However, if you research the plain teachings of the Greek (the original language), it is much easier to discover what Paul really meant.
     
  10. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scott:
    Την επόμενη φορά μιλάτε σε με να το κάνετε στα ελληνικά. Δεδομένου ότι αυτή είναι η μόνη γλώσσα που ο Θεός ξέρει, κατόπιν πρέπει να απαιτηθούμε για να μάθουμε και να μιλήσουμε τα ελληνικά μόνο.

    Η ανάλυσή σας είναι serously ραγισμένη
     
  11. Speedpass

    Speedpass
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    0
    Something else I learned:

    Since tongues are considered a spiritual gift , they are not given to all Christians. So all Christians have the Holy Spirit whether or not they speak in tongues.
     
  12. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now that I can agree with! :D I'm still working up a response to Baptist Believer's earlier post. ;)
     
  13. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had a hard time figuring this out. This isn't koine Greek, but modern Greek. I could tell because of the "ellenika" which is the modern name for the Greek language. Also the capital letters, accents, and punctuation are items that aren't found in koine.

    Here's what I can come up with:

    "The next time you speak with God, do it in the Greek. Since this is the only language that God knows, then we are required to learn and speak only Greek.

    Your analysis is serously flawed."

    How'd I do?

    First, your premise is incorrect. Greek was the original language in which the NT is written. To get the best idea of what was intended, we should do our best to understand the actual language that Paul was writing in. My translation undoubtedly differed from yours by a bit, because through the translation, it lost something. THAT is why we must constantly study the original text to see what was originally intended.

    In your desire to make a point, you actually provided me with a great illustration of why it is important to examine the original language. Thanks.

    theos eulogeis <-- koine, not modern Greek
     
  14. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scott said: First, your premise is incorrect. Greek was the original language in which the NT is written. To get the best idea of what was intended, we should do our best to understand the actual language that Paul was writing in. My translation undoubtedly differed from yours by a bit, because through the translation, it lost something. THAT is why we must constantly study the original text to see what was originally intended

    There is your flaw, Scott. Greek is not the original language. God's language is universal. God gave the greeks what they needed and gave the English what they needed and the spanish what they needed. We don't need to go back to someone elses language to understand what God gave us. Your thinking is just flawed in this area. The English word is just as inspired by the Holy Spirit as was the Greek word.

    You missed the point of the illustration totally, also. I noticed that when you responded to me you wrote in English, instead of Greek. Why is that? It is because that is the language we speak. Greek is just "greek to me". He is not important. It is not God's preferred or original language. We don't need it. That is the point.
     
  15. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    The English is NOT inspired! The English we read is a translation of what originally appeared in the Greek! How in the world can you come to that conclusion? Please illuminate me on how the English word is inspired.

    First, I knew that if I wrote in koine Greek, you wouldn't be able to translate it, because you used an online translator to make it Greek. That was obvious because of the sentence structrure and syntax. Second, God's language in the Bible was Hebrew, Greek, and a little Aramaic. Thirdly, I am still having trouble believing that you feel that any English translation is inspired by GOd. Does that mean that if I translate Matthew, then I am inspired? What about a first-year Greek student?
     
  16. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Says who? If God inspired the Greek or the Hebrew, He can verily inspire the English. THINK THINK THINK Don't limit God to just Greek

    That is my point. I used an online translator, because Greek is not my language. God gave me His inspired word in English.
     
  17. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    So which is the inspired English word of God. KJV? NIV? NASB? The Living Bible? The Message? Which one?

    How do you figure? PLease give me the step-by-step's in how God infallibly inspired the English?
     
  18. Jailminister

    Jailminister
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Easy on # 1 KJV

    on # 2 I have no idea how you could believe that the Greek being inspired, how the SAME GOD could not inspire the English. Are you saying that God ran out of inspiration with the Greeks?
     
  19. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, I see. So are you willing to say that the KJV is completely infallible? What is your reasoning behind such things?

    Is the Bible infallible EVEN with references to a mythological animal in Numbers 23:22, Numbers 24:8, Job 39:9, Job 39:10, Psalms 29:6, and Psalms 92:10. Please note that the Hebrew word "na'em" refers more than likely to a wild bull, and many of the verses in which the animal is found refers to brute strength and multiple horns, which this animal would not have.

    And then the next question is this: You have said that a spanish translation is also inspired (and I would assume, also infallible). Which one is that? What is the infallible version of Portugese? What about Arabic? How about Japanese?

    Please fill us in on the answers to these questions, please.
     
  20. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused:

    The early Church adopoted certain documents as accurately reflecting their understanding of authentic Christian teaching. If we are to understand those documents, we have to understand the language and context in which they were written. Is that even a point for debate among Christian clergy?

    Joshua
     

Share This Page

Loading...