Paul is a male Chauvinist

Mr. Aribisala. Hope you will also be bold enough to state that Apostle Paul was also homophobic. It is not enough to state only for the cause that offends us - the man spoke against large swaths of people he couldn't understand. His was simply xenophobia.

It's refreshing to see someone question the bible.

i'm happy at the article. most christian should realise that many the teaching the apostles of christ gave are just their personal interpretation of the scripture which could not always be true, cos they are humans and are open to flaws. it is a pity that most christians have taken their opinion as God's very words.

Dr. Aribisala: Please note that, for all his flaws, Paul crafted some of the most influential, inspirational and brilliant passages in the Holy Bible, including the great message on love in 1 Corinthians: 13

Well, this is the first time I am hearing this from a pastor. i have always felt some things in the Bible are outdated such as women's roles. They dont resonate with modern times. One thing that I fault in the whole thing is that if Paul is chauvinistic and allows his sentiments to cloud his judgment, why shld we follow his doctrine so blindly? Why shld we find churches on them? Why shld we even believe the Bible at alll? Mr Aribisala shld answer this...

Well now, Mr Aribisala, have you written your own politically correct epistles?

If Paul, being the ignorant one as claimed by the the omniscient Aribisala,is the one that brought the gospel, of which Mr. Aribisala is a beneficiary, to the gentiles, then I want to be ignorant also. @Enrique: Paul worked, most of his life, in strange lands and with strage people. What could be xenophobic in that? remember he rebuked apostle peter once about eating with gentiles. what could be homophobic in this? Paul never showed fear of people nor strangers. I had loved some articles of Mr Aribisala, those that have some edifying traits. but the past three editions are complete rubbish - destroying what is existing without building a better one. Mr Aribisala, what edifying lesson is to be learnt from this bin-bound article? pls give us what is edifying and beneficial, and not something that shows how "knowledgeable" you are about scriptures. If Paul is not God, you are not God's vice either. so if Pauls' teachings are not sacrosanct, what makes yours infallible. All scriptures are God's breathed, and they are useful for correction.

Paul's doctrine kinda depicts the mode of worship for the Muslims.Most of the instructions of Paul as evident here are majorly practiced by Muslims.I see such a thing line between Christianity and Islam.

Paul is a male chauvinist? Premising the article on the title bespeaks doublespeak: the word chauvinist denotes a man. Except the intent was to convey him as homophobic - which is unfounded. The biblical passages reeled off are, sadly, out of context. Read literally, without reference to the times, they can't be understood. The Corinth of those times ain't the same today. To do justice to Paul requires rigour. One would have to be a polyglot - able to read Greek, Hebrew and German (the bible was the first book off Gutenberg's press)and conversant with Paul's times. In this regard, innumerable commentaries by biblical scholars abound. If religious commentary isn't our turf, let's stay off; even as a polymath. While we may have a right to our own opinion, alas, we don't have a right to our own facts.

Softly...softly...brother Femi Aribisala.I read your articles from far away Virginia each week. But I have found this one to be particularly not in good tatse. The style and content appear disrespectful not just to divine truth but to a man(PAUL)that gave up everything in the second half of his life so he can be used by God to clearly document the canons of New Testament Scriptures especially to non-Jews. I mean no disrespect to you brother Femi. My advise to you is to realize, like I believe you do, that the Scriptures should be interpreted in context and as a part of an organic whole. It may seem nice and intellectually engaging to inteprete and criticize truth and get many feedbacks from an internet audience that is hungry to believe what "makes sense " to them; but what makes sense to an internet audience may not necessarily be truth. Only the Holy Spirit can inteprete the truth of God because He wrote those scriptures through the hands of men and He only can define the context within which each word was written. I beg of you, Femi, use the platform that the Lord Jesus Christ gave you in NEXT more wisely. Many souls need salvation and the old time-tested message of salvation and holiness is still alive and kicking. Preach it from your internet pulpit .And let the Holy Spirit bring conviction to souls that read your weekly sermons....even if you are criticised by men. Seek the Holy Spirit each week you want to write your sermon and let Him guide your hands and your thoughts as He guided you in some of the articles you have written in the past here. No scripture is of private intepretation. We know in parts today and can only see through a veil. Let us not write as if we are God. For only when we see HIM in His full glory...when the mystery of Godliness will have been fully revealed to all creation, then we shall know all things. I love you brother with the love of Jesus Christ! God bless you

Mr. Aribisala, I'm afraid one day, you'll wake up and tell us all that the Bible is a falsehood, full of controversies and cannot possibly be the Word of God. You seem intent on proving that from your articles. Remember, "the letter killeth". You have a platform to reach out for the Lord. You are very intellectual and of course, from your lofty pulpit, no one can argue effectively with you. Use your platform wisely or it might be taken from you. Before you write (speak) contemplate well. Search the Scriptures with diligence but with openness. Be very careful as you write. Don't assume that know it all posture. Others have gone before you and still others are coming after you. Thread softly. This is the message I have for you.

Thank you for daring to voice the questions many of us have always wanted to ask...i don't get some of the things Paul said either and i don't think it's disrespectful or in bad taste to say so.

Job, is that you from long ago in the Bible? Because, you wise Ghaa nii O!

i don't see any reason of contradicting the epistles of Paul,we must use every understanding by the help of the Holy Spirit to read and discern the writings of Paul. We are in the dispensation of the Holy Spirit where the spirit of GOD teaches every man the love of GOD.Calling Paul a 'chauvinst' is not the issue...we are in the race of salvation,this teaching is a controversial issue that needs to implore every understanding before we call the word of GOD and his spirit a liar.Every word of GOD (scripture) is given by inspiration of GOD and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in righteousness.1Tim.3:16.This teaching cannot benefit us anything in the christiandom rather let us use the gift of GOD in us and win souls for GOD not to prove our wisdom,remember that the wisdom of man is nothing before GOD.

Almost all christians believe that the Bible is the word of God, and everything therein is God breadth. Interestingly, I go to church and I see many women set Paul aside. They do not cover their heads. The wives of our pastors preach in the churches and we even have female overseers. Do christians like that really accept the Bible as the word of God? Or are they really acting in disobedience? I ask christians - is the bible and Jesus synonymous, since he was unequivocally declaredly as The Word of God in the gospel according to John?

Brother Job, Thank you for that word of admonish to Brother Femi. May he continually walk in the Light of God's wisdom and not bend to the pressures of acceptance from men. This is not a platform to showcase your dexterity with words it is a gift from GOD to the saving of the souls of men. "Let he that thinketh take heed lest he fall" we shall uphold you in prayers Brother Femi, in all you do!!! God bless you sir! "pass on the torch"

well daddy Aribisala, know ye not that ,paul spoke as a man,if you read carefully he alluded to this in some parts of his writting .like you righty pointed out God is not a respecter of persons ,it still shows women like de late bimbo odukoya attested to that ,like all his followers ,jesus,s men are all but falliable mortals like you and i.

I think you overlooked the fact that the corinthians aren't jewish and they had their doctirines and culture. as far as am concerned, Paul was talking to them and addressing issues based on their culture as well as what the word says. Christianity is not saying don't respect you culture.

Femi, I have always thought of you as the best bible teacher I have ever met. I wait passionately for your next article of faith on NEXT every week, you teach and make clear certain grey areas so for me it was a shock to read your article on Paul. For once,you failed in your research... Paul has his failings, no doubt, but he aint a pig

The question i believe we should ask is; did the apostle paul write everything attributed to his pen? Remeber a group of men sat down during the 13th century and decided the number of books to be contained in our bible. So how sure are we of the integrity of these selected books and letters. The God of creation is incorruptible but same cannot be said of his creation(man) ,who will use the word of God dominate his fellow human beings. Brother Aribisala continue the goodwork.

@Segun Balogun: Why are you so angry?

Brother Adenekan, " a group of men" DID NOT JUST SIT "down during the 13th century and decided(sic) the number of books to be contained in our bible". In the Council Of Nicea in 323 AD, a collection of bishops who had survived many years of Roman persecution and who were thus ready to die rather than compromise the canons of the Holy Scriptures gathered in a Byzantium city called NICEA and prayerfully compiled the works that would today be considered the canons of scriptures. Old Testament Scriptures had been handed down from the Prophets of old and from the Septuagint which was the official Greek translation that even the Lord Jesus sometimes quoted from in His sermons. The Hebrew Scriptures which were already known and sealed in stone and which formed the foundation for this compilation included firstly, the LAWS (TORAH - Moses' 5 books - Genesis to Deuteronomy), then the books of the Prophets (Major prophets - Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah and Daniel: Minor prophets - Nahum, Habakuk, Micah, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Zechariah, Malachi, Hosea etc) then the historical and poetic books (Esther, Nehemiah, Ezra, Job, 1st Chronicles, 2nd Chronicles, 1st Samuel, 2nd Samuel) and lastly the Wisdom books (Psalms and Proverbs and Ecclesiastes).Some old testament works were considered actual historical accounts and social commentaries of Israels' history but not holy-ghost inspired scriptures and so were excluded. For example, works like the book of Jasher, and the book of Enoch, the chronicles of the kings of Israel, and the whole range of books which today are collectively known as APOCRYPHA books. These Apocrypha books are Ecclesiasticus, Chirac, Maccabees, Baruch etc. King James Bible does not include them as Scriptures. The Septuagint which the Lord Jesus quoted from, does not include them. Throughout His ministry, the Lord Jesus never quoted from any of the Apocryphal Books. Because Jesus is the center of all scriptures (he told the Pharisees that all scriptures speak of Him), that principle was used to determine which of the New Testament works were to be included to the Old Testament ones to make up what are today the 66 books. At the time, there were many manuscripts floating around which sometimes confused baby Christians. For example, people would use the names of known followers of Jesus like Nicodemus and Thomas and write books which they would claim to have been written by these men...thereby confusing young believers. These people made money from these uncontrolled texts. The Bishops thus agreed to come together and put a stop to falsehood and so they met in Nicea. In determining the books that would be included in the New Testament, a simple rule was used and it is this:Every work that contradicted the teachings of Jesus and the original works of Moses,the Prophets, the Wisdom and Historical books were discarded. Using this formula, the first three synoptic gospels were included plus the works of John Zebedee(the gospel of John, 1st John, 2nd John, 3rd John and Revelations). John Zebedee and his brother James were direct disciples of Jesus so they knew Him and walked with Him. John's writings did not and does not contradict the Law and the Prophets. So also were the works of Peter who knew Jesus and walked with him and whose writings emphasize holiness, humility and good christian conduct. James and Jude who were his blood brothers - sons of Mary from Joseph's loins also wrote books that were added to the Holy Scriptures. Their writings are practical doctrines that teach you how to avoid theoretical christianity and get real. Then the writings of Paul as well as the great letter written to the Hebrews all completed what became known as New Testament Scriptures. For your information, Emperor Constantine who sponsored the Nicean meeting wanted to insert certain works (like the teachings of the Arians - we shall explain that in another discussion if you want)but this was resisted by the bishops and Constantine had to yield to their position. The Council of bishops told him politely that in matters of theology, he had to let the Holy Spirit determine what is Truth. I went into a bit of detail here so as to let you know that the Scriptures were not carelessly compiled in the 13th century. Even in the Old Testament days, not everybody was allowed to copy scriptures. Trained documenters called SCRIBES were the only authorized people. They would typically specialize in a particular book or prophet untilthey became distictly known for that. Beside each line that they copy, they would note the number of each alphabet in the original and in the transcribed text and ensure that there is a consistency. They would skip 7 spaces between words and two spaces between lines. Even after copying out each page, it would have to be proof-read by at least 2-3 other senior scribes before it is accepted as an official copy...because in the mouth of two or three witnesses, truth is established. This way, the integrity of what is copied and passed down is assured. Let us be careful here regarding the way that we dabble into areas of knowledge for which we are least qualified. Peter warns us to be careful how we speak ill of dignitaries. Paul, wanting to preserve the integrity of the written word even warns that if any angel comes from heaven to preach anything contrary to the written gospels, let that angel be damned.Thank you brother Adenekan and God bless you!

@ Job O. Very enlightening, thanks for the insight.

@Job Orjioke, Damn! are you trying to write ur own epistle? or sumtin?!

Really, Femi I am overwhelmed by this latest article of yours just like the previous editions have always left me feeling devastated, and I don’ think the space provided here will be enough to pour out my disappointment in your misleading writings. Yes, Some of Paul’s instructions may not be directly applicable to this 21st century because its content may have been suitable only for the Jews cultural and traditional standing and of course the building up of the early church as mentioned in the above comments, but its spiritual efficacy, which can only be discerned by the HOLY SPIRIT is undeniable. Please always seek the true spirit of discernment for yours articles, because quoting the scriptures out of context only end up in disaster; like praying for recovery for sick fellows and they instead end up dying afterwards.

@Segun Balogun. You are a shortsighted one. Humanity have only progressed because we questioned religious assumptions. Slavery is supported by the bible if you pull out the correct verses. Aribisala you are a wonderful man for question assumptions found in the bible about roles of women. God will bless you.

@Job Orjioke: Thank you for the interesting details but in summary, Adeyi was right "a group of men sat down during the 13th century and decided the number of books to be contained in our bible".

Thank you for this post.I'm proud to find that there are some Christians who will boldly challenge what is purported to be the word of God/inspired of God. Apart from his chauvinism,Paul was oftentimes illogical found especially in the book of Romans. This just goes to show that Paul was the Founder of Christianity, not Jesus. Well done,sir!

@ Seun Balogun, You missed the important lesson on Peter's rebuke by Paul (Gal 2:12-15). Paul rebuked Peter by asking why Peter would compel the Gentiles to live as Jews. However,Paul was being hypocritical because in Acts 16 : 3, Paul circumcised Timothy,a Greek. True, Paul wasn't homophobic, but he was hypocritical.He said one thing against the Mosaic Law, yet finds refuge in the same Law he condemns.

@Victor Adigun, I do agree with you that context is important in reading the Bible.From the explanation you gave, it shows that the Bible has to be updated because women have a voice now. Not like in the days of Paul were they were to shut up and be seen and not heard.Hence, those passages should be scrapped out of the Bible.But no, they wont be scrapped because the menfolk would want to assert their authority (with the seal of Paul)over women. Where in the Old Testament was it written that women are the glory of men??? Genesis says '...male and female He created them in His own image'. So where is Paul getting his glory-of-man nonsense from??? He even had the gall to say that the woman brought sin to this world, whereas Genesis records that BOTH man and woman sinned before God.

Paul was not a male chauvinist. He couldn't be. You can't belong to an only class. You might as well say: Paul was a man. In his time and space, that was the only way to be. There were no feminists. Even the women agreed with him. Some were more Pauline than Paul himself.

You need to do more research on Biblical history. There is a lot more to the Bible than meets your mortal eye, or is dreamt of in your philosophy. The Bible is not mere history or literature.

@ Chinua Asuzu, you are right! There were no feminists in the time of Paul.How could there have been when feminism didn't take off until recently? Even before the time of Paul,men were the lords and women were property and it got a seal of approval from Yahweh himself (read the Old Testament well). It was the pagan religions who had more respect for women (unlike Judaism),hence they had GODDESSES. The male Jew when he wakes up in the morning, says this prayer : 'I thank you LORD for not making me a woman...' Was Paul not male? Chinua Asuzu, you are the one who needs to do more research on Biblical history. True, it's not mere history (though inaccurate in most of it)nor literature,yet it is full of chauvinism and la-la tales.

@Chinua: You can belong to a class of one. And there are also universal sets. From where we are today; Paul was a male chauvinist, in his days, and today.

@Chinua: You can belong to a class of one. And there are also universal sets. From where we are today; Paul was a male chauvinist, in his days. And today, he is rightly considered a male chauvinist. Definitions do not create facts. Definitions categorise facts. Facts are fundamental and timeless.

Mr. Aribisala, you judge others, condemn them. am not saying they are right but there are biblical ways of doing such. you insult Paul, forgetting he is not Christ and that he is a human being like you! his teachings are inspired by God and surely God would not purposely misdirect billions of Christians. if it was not inspired, i believe it would not have been in the Bible. Lives have been changed, great Christians have made exploits in the faith (i mean the true Christians like A.W. Tozer, Martin Luther and Billy Graham NOT our modern day religious leaders) by the inspiration of Paul's teaching. as i have earlier written, i am seriously afraid of your salvation because you do not accept that Christ came to die for our sins which is the BASIS for salvation. please, i respect you a lot and i was highly touched by your 2 books (why christians dont go to heaven and foolishness of God) but you are beginning to accept heresies. the Devil is toiling with your life. I read your opinion about Paul in your defunct website but after careful Spirit inspired studying of the Bible, I foun out that you are totally WRONG. pls ask God for forgiveness if not, i dont seee you going to heaven.

@ Wole Ayo : Look at pot calling kettle black! You have just done the same thing by judging Mr. Aribisala and saying " I don't see you going to heaven". Who are YOU to make such a judgement? Are you God? Are you the new man in charge of the gates of heaven and hell? If you are, please say so, so we can all begin to kiss your ass. However, if you are mere mortal like the rest of us, then I suggest you should go and read your Bible again and especially seek out passages on humility. You all need to think about being humble...so much arrogance on this page...damn...

Can it be said that Our Dear Lord Jesus was a male Chauvinist for choosing MEN as his apostles after a whole night of prayer? I think the columnist is threading unknowingly the proud but deadly path of heresy. Watch IT.

@Wole Ayo, please send me the url, if any, to the defunct website. Ask yourself, if the writtings of paul as we have it now do not really reflect what he wrote, where do we stand? Can Paul, being inspired by the Holy Spirit, deliberately contradict the old testament then turn round by contradicting himslf? No where in the old testament did we see any comparison between male and female or laws limiting the rights of females. But Paul limits the rights, seemingly. We need the original manuscripts, if possible, to see if there's any contradictions in translations. I submit that Paul never wrote those lines, they were added by people who had other agendas during translation of the bible.

Mr Arinisala: Yes Paul is not Jesus Christ but we (Christians) believe that his writnings were inspired by the Holy Spirit meaning that he was 'him' when he wrote. That said, the issues of Chauvinisim is time dependent. A gentleman in the 1970s would probabaly not be one today and the same could be said about you 500 years from now. As a pastor(?) you would do well to keep to the immutable truths. There are scores of political analysts who can do better work with the politics of any issues (that is the function of the political sections). By the way, Paul could have been a truly bad man and God would still choose to use him. He once used a donkey. The important thing is not the person (that is why till date Men of God are never perfect!) but the God using the man yet many still dont get it. And Mr Aribisala, is this the kind of responses you wanted to achive by this article? Paul was a man of God, used by God - deal with it! My two cents

I cant help but laugh at this article. I cant believe an 'old' man wrote it One, you take things out of context and discard the times Two, you call someone names with no real reason Three, what the heck is a male chauvinist? Like someone pointed out, paul was speaking to the corinthians. The things he mentiond were debatable according to their own customs and he didnt put them down as law. Sir, with articles like this you only come off snarky not intelligent or informed. It is well.

Right, and the Holy Spirit told him to ensure women were treated like chattel abi?

Job and Agacheta, well done and Godbless. I dont think you need to say more on this post. The less you actually argue on this forum, the better.People get easily drawn into and justify 'intellectual' sounding arguments when discussing things of the spirit. We KNOW it is not so. ONLY GOD who is the bank of wisdom and discernment can reveal these things to man. My prayer is that God will open our eyes and minds. Amen.

I believe that,Paul no matter how holy and no matter how many times he was used as God's instrument is still human n as such Fallible! which is y i believe u see d discrepancies in his words unlike Christ,cos he weighs them in order to try making it 'acceptable' to people bearing in mind that times they were in.

Is this column-keeper simply playing a dangerous game of he-knows-not-what or is he playing up to the whole wide world his ignoble ignorance of the truth? What riles is this: 'Rib' now tends towards 'ribald'. 'Let the reader understand' is a recurring theme of Scripture, starting with the Master, Jesus Christ--about Whom the inspired Writings at every point so faithfully testify. Mr. Femi Aribisala has most pitiably taken I Corinthians out of its concrete context. What Paul the Apostle (yes--in spite of Aribisala's sordid submission elsewhere on the matter) set out to do in the book is clear, but only from a reading of that document as a whole. The original language of the New Testament is Koine (common) Greek--the English language of its day--which does not have quotation marks to clarify who's speaking at any point in time. So if you're not diligent but are sloppy like Mr. Aribisala has quite patently been, something (again!) Paul's caveat at 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)--'Study (or, 'do your best') to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth'--speaks to, you will miss the simple fact that Scripture-scribe Paul was quoting from and responding to points raised in some correspondence the Church at Corinth had sent to him beforehand! Now, that gives Mr. Aribisala's little game away, doesn't it? Well, I'm definitely not sorry to pull down this impostor from the pedestal of his self-appointed soapbox. indeed, the Scriptures foresaw every 'ibi' (Yoruba: evil) that Iblis (the Evil One) would be able to plant in the minds of men and so pronounced beforehand at 2 Peter 3:15&16 (NLT): "And remember, the Lord’s patience gives people time to be saved. This is what our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom God gave him—-speaking of these things in all of his letters. Some of his comments are hard to understand, and THOSE WHO ARE IGNORANT AND UNSTABLE have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with OTHER PARTS OF SCRIPTURE. And this will result in their destruction." Q.E.D! Lastly, the material below (please take time to visit the web site; it's quite helpful for ridding oneself of every Aribisalacious--and every other--smear of doubt in the integrity of God's Word) From Daily Devotional available from www.icr.org: Interpreting the Bible August 24, 2009 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:20-21) One basic reason why so many people seem to have trouble understanding the Bible is that they try to "interpret" it to fit their private opinions. The Greek word for "private" (idios) is related to such English words as "idiom" and "idiosyncrasy," and this key passage warns us against any exposition of Scripture which is based on the teacher’s pet doctrinal or behavioral prejudices. A reader or hearer of the Word of God whose "heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing" will be unable to "understand" (Matthew 13:15) because he comes with his mind and heart already bound to his own opinions. The Bible does not need to be "interpreted" at all. In every other New Testament reference to "interpretation," except the one in our text (which means "explanation" or "exposition"), the meaning is simply "translation." The Bible does, of course, need to be correctly translated from Greek and Hebrew into English and other national languages, but that is all. God is able to say what He means, and He wants to communicate His authoritative Word to men and women of obedient hearts, who are willing to devote diligent study to all the Scriptures (2 Timothy 2:15; Hebrews 5:12-14), to obey them (James 1:22), and then teach them to others (2 Timothy 2:2, 24-26) carefully, and clearly, and graciously. To such students of the Word, the promise is: "Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; Then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God" (Proverbs 2:3-5).

2 Peter 3:15-16 (The Message, rendering by Eugeme Peterson): "So, my dear friends, since this is what you have to look forward to, do your very best to be found living at your best, in purity and peace. Interpret our Master's patient restraint for what it is: salvation. Our good brother Paul, who was given much wisdom in these matters, refers to this in all his letters, and has written you essentially the same thing. Some things Paul writes are difficult to understand. Irresponsible people who don't know what they are talking about twist them every which way. They do it to the rest of the Scriptures, too, destroying themselves as they do it."

Thank You dear Sir for helping humans become enlightened. It must be kept in mind that the Nazarene customs of long hair were not Jewish they were Hellenic. The areas around Jerusalem were inhabited not only by Jewish people. Hellenes and Jews for example co-habitated much like Palestinians do today. There was a great mix of all kinds of people from many places wandering around (Egyptian, Persian, Arab, Hellenes(Greek, Pheonician), African, etc. It must be remembered in those territories there existed a motley crew of different people and diverse traditions passed around much like today in a typical city. If you don't know history, it is easy to fall into error by thinking that all traditions came solely from the Jews. For example remember that Samaria was habitated by Hellenic people?