brothers and sisters
Ben and Jo Crick
ben.crick at argonet.co.uk
Mon Apr 15 03:01:35 EDT 2002
On Sun 14 Apr 2002 (16:54:47), vince_endris at hotmail.com wrote:
> Is this the same for all of Paul's letter's where practically every
> modern translation has "brothers and sisters"? Is there any evidence
> that Paul
> think himself to be writing to the women in a church? Would it make
> any difference if we were to know who exactly Paul was writing: the
> whole church or the elders of a church?
>
Dear Vince,
As this is "off-topic" for b-greek I'll confine myself to a few general
observations, then drop the subject: unless you wish to pursue it off-List.
ISTM that in the patriarchal society of which Paul was a member, the male
collective noun or plural pronoun included the female where obviously not
inappropriate. A Jewish man had his "identity" from his circumcision; a
member of the Tribes of Israel, etc (Philippians 3:5). A Jewess did not have
this mark of circumcision; she took her identity within Israel by reference
to her father if still single, and to her husband if married or widowed. Paul
appears to make this point in e.g. Galatians 3:26-29.
Since the growth of feminism in the last 20-30 years, women have demanded to
be made more "visible" in the collective terminology of the Bible. Where we
used to say that e.g. God made promises to "all men", (including all women),
woemn wanted this to be made explicit, not implicit. Some modern translations
of the Bible into English have pursued this almost to the point of fatuaity:
I'm thinking of the New Revised standard Version (RSV) where you can hardly
find the words "men" or "brothers" at all. "People"; "human beings";
"persons"; "brothers and sisters"; etc. Even a construction such as "if a
man... then he..." has become "if anyone... then they...".
So ISTM that modern translators have deferred to the Feminist Lobby in going
to quite extraordinary lengths to use "gender-inclusive" language in all
contexts. I'm not criticising this; just observing it.
Where Paul is obviously writing to the woman in church (to reply to your
question), the feminist lobby doesn't like what he has to say to them at
all! (e.g. 1 Corinthians 11:3-16; 14:34-35). Hence the oft-repeated charge
that Paul was a misogynist. No; just a "Hebrew of the Hebrews" (Phil 3:5).
ERRWSQE
Ben
--
Revd Ben Crick BA CF, and Mrs Joanna (Goodwin) Crick
<ben.crick at argonet.co.uk>
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list