No description available.

No description available.

This paper uses feminist criticism and gender criticism as theory behind an analysis of Paul’s rhetoric. The aim is to make out his intentions of telling women to cover their hair in 1 Cor 11:2-16, in a context where several different cultures meet. The main question is Why does Paul write that women should cover their hair? To give more specific answers I also ask how and when he intends for it to be done, why women should cover their hair when men should not and what it meant for the Corinthians in their context. I argue that the natural differences Paul points out between men and women are not necessarily reason for inequality between them in societal hierarchies. Covering the hair of women in Corinth could be a way of protecting them from being taken advantage of (sexually). The directions Paul gives in 1 Cor apply to the gatherings but does not tell us what he thinks is appropriate in society in general. However, it would make sense for him to tell people not to disturb the societal order by going against the norms and wearing their hair differently outside of the churches.

Albeit that often the only solution left to poor congregations in Africa is the practice of tentmaker ministry, this phenomenon remains problematic. There is a lack of job opportunities in the rural areas, and dividing one's time between the secular occupation and the ministry becomes increasingly complex. In the light of this situation, an (re–)evaluation of the Biblical foundations for being a tentmaker is certainly called for. Studies such as the book of Meggitt (1998), Paul, poverty and survival, stimulated renewed interest in the economic nature of Paul's ministry and the economic classes of the congregations where he ministered. Paul's offering of the gospel free of charge (1 Cor 9:18), and his sacrifice of "becoming a slave", offer interesting solutions for the poverty stricken churches in Africa, and in particular in Botswana. / Thesis (Ph.D. (New Testament))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

Albeit that often the only solution left to poor congregations in Africa is the practice of tentmaker ministry, this phenomenon remains problematic. There is a lack of job opportunities in the rural areas, and dividing one's time between the secular occupation and the ministry becomes increasingly complex. In the light of this situation, an (re–)evaluation of the Biblical foundations for being a tentmaker is certainly called for. Studies such as the book of Meggitt (1998), Paul, poverty and survival, stimulated renewed interest in the economic nature of Paul's ministry and the economic classes of the congregations where he ministered. Paul's offering of the gospel free of charge (1 Cor 9:18), and his sacrifice of "becoming a slave", offer interesting solutions for the poverty stricken churches in Africa, and in particular in Botswana. / Thesis (Ph.D. (New Testament))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

I 1 Korintierbrevet finns två ofta diskuterade avsnitt som med speciellt fokus på kvinnorna talar om ordningen vid kristna sammankomster: 11:2-16 och 14:34-36. Denna uppsats gör en analys av dessa texter och deras behandling i den vetenskapliga litteraturen. Hur ska man förhålla sig till att kompetenta forskare kommer till rakt motsatta slutsatser? Är det fel i argumentationen, i premisserna, eller saknar vi helt enkelt tillräcklig kunskap? Går det att skilja på vad som är omstritt av exegetiska respektive teologiska skäl? Slutsatsen är att bland tre typer av argumentation som förekommer i litteraturen, som jag kallar den värderande, den datainsamlande respektive den konstruktiva, har forskningen en olycklig slagsida mot den första typen. Alltför mycket har skrivits utan att tillföra något av varken fakta eller ideer - man refererar bara till tidigare forskning och väger olika uppfattningar mot varandra. Om man refererar till andra författares tidigare arbeten utan att gå in på argumenten blir forskningen svår att bedöma efter att nya data tillkommit. Alltför ofta är kriteriet dessutom hur väl en teori stämmer med på förhand given teologi, snarare än en värdering av argumentens stöd i fakta. / In 1 Corinthians we find two much discussed passages which, focusing especially on the women, speak of order at the Christian gatherings: 11:2-16 and 14:34-36. This paper analyses these passages and their treatment in the scholarly literature. How should one relate to the fact that competent scholars reach diametrically opposed conclusions? Is there error in the argumentation, the premises, or do we simply lack sufficient knowledge? Is it possible to distinguish between what is contested for exegetical and for theological reasons? The conclusion is that among three types of argumentation in the literature, which I call value judgments, information gathering, and construction, there is an unfortunate imbalance towards the first type. Too much has been written that adds neither facts nor ideas - there is only references to earlier research and weighing of points of view against each other. If there is only references to other scholars' works and no engagement with the arguments, it is difficult for others to reassess the results after new data has appeared. Too often, also, the conclusions are based on a pre-conceived theology, rather than a weighing of the factual support of the arguments.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and compare how the relationship between woman and man is expressed in Genesis, First Corinthians and Second Clement based on a feminist and ideological theory. This paper argues that the relationship between woman and man in all three texts (Gen, 1 Cor and 2 Clem) is equal. It is described that both Eve/woman and Adam/man are created by God, they must unite and become one, and they are in a mutual dependence on each other and God. Through a feminist and ideological theory, the creation story can contribute to understanding 1 Cor in a way where the woman is equal to the man. When the three texts are presented next to each other (heading 2.1.8), their similarities emerge clearly, and both 1 Cor and 2 Clem have eschatological undertones and explain above all that the female and the male belong together. My interpretation is that both 1 Cor and 2 Clem wants to correct incorrect hierarchies that arose in their contemporaries based on using the non-hierarchical order of the creation story to highlight how the relationship between women and men is actually intended. Interpreting the creation of Eve based on Adam's need for her means that Eve and thus the woman is Adam's equal helper. There is nothing in the text to suggest that women should be seen as subordinate to men. The point of the whole pericope is that Eve (created from Adam's bones and flesh) and Adam through marriage and sexual union will become one. What Paul expresses in  1 Cor 11:11-12 appears to be an explanation for the theological meaning of the verses of the creation story. "For just as the woman is from the man, so also the man through the woman and all are from God." Although Eve was created from man, Adam was the one who benefited from Eve's creation. He needed her both as a partner and companion and also as an enabler for humans to reproduce. Exactly how the verses in 2 Clem should be interpreted is unclear among the scholars presented in this paper. But on the other hand, the text expresses that the relationship between woman and man is, and should be, completely equal. The pericope explains how the Lord's kingdom will come when humans actively act according to the message of the text. There is no sign whatsoever of any kind of hierarchy between women and men.

This paper will look at the interpretation and translation of ἀρσενοκοῖται (1 Cor 6:9) in the list of people who will not inherit the kingdom of God. The word is mentioned in 1 Cor 6:9-10, and it has been translated in ways going from “homosexual”, “men who lay with men” and “sodomite” to “a man who lets others use himself or who uses others for debauchery” and “pedophile”. By looking at the views on sexuality, and male same-sex sexuality in particular, pertaining the Greco-Roman society and the Jewish culture contemporary to Paul, and also paying attention to the textual context as well as the context of the congregation in Corinth, the study has its aim set on finding what the word might have denoted to the first readers in the congregation in Corinth, and to Paul. The goal, then, is not to find a translation of the word ἀρσενοκοῖται that is literal, but to find one that is as close to a dynamic equivalent as is possible. This goal will, hopefully, be attained by giving the translation to the modern reader that is the one most likely to connote the same ideas and emotional connotations as the Greek word did in its original context. As the meaning of words change with time and context, there is a need for a translation that can bridge the gap created by that shift of meaning. Building that bridge in the case of ἀρσενοκοῖται is the goal of this paper. When the meaning, or meanings, that is found most likely to have been attained by the ancient readers is found, there will be a critical evaluation of some of the modern translations (and some a bit older) of the word in 1 Cor 6:9 to see if there already exists a translation that can be said to reach the goal of dynamic equivalence, given the meaning that is found most plausible in this paper. The study will argue that that is not the case, and therefore also propose a new translation, one that is argued to be closer to dynamic equivalence than those that has been evaluated. This translation is ”Men who sexually exploit men to gain social powers”. / Denna uppsats undersöker översättningen och tolkningen av ordet ἀρσενοκοῖται, det ord som avslutar 1 Kor 6:9 och är del av en lista över dem som inte kan ärva Guds rike (6:9-10). Ordet har översatts på olika sätt genom tiderna, med förslag som sträcker sig från “homosexuella”, “sodomiter”, “män som ligger med män” till “en man som låter utnyttja sig eller utnyttjar andra till osedlighet” och “pedofiler”. Genom att titta på hur sexualitet, och främst då manlig homosexualitet, sågs i den grekisk-romerska och judiska kontexten på Paulus tid, samt studera ordets litterära kontext och församlingens kontext i Korint, är målet att utröna vad ἀρσενοκοῖται bar med sig för betydelser och konnotationer för Paulus och de första mottagarna i Korint. Vad ett ord betyder är inte alltid statiskt över tid och rum utan förändras ofta, om än gradvis. Det riskerar därför att uppstå en klyfta mellan det som ordet från början innebar samt uppfattades som att det innebar, och hur det uppfattas idag. Den här uppsatsens mål är att överbrygga den klyftan för ἀρσενοκοῖται genom att ta reda på vad det grekiska ordet innebar i sin ursprungliga kontext och sedan ge en översättning som på bästa möjliga sätt ger en modern läsare konnotationer som i högsta möjliga grad stämmer överens med de konnotationer som de antika läsarna fick när de mötte ordet. Detta innebär alltså att målet inte är att ge en bokstavlig översättning av ἀρσενοκοῖται, utan en dynamisk ekvivalent översättning, där läsaren så långt det är möjligt får möjligheten att uppfatta det de första läsarna uppfattade. När den, eller de, meningar det är mest troligt att ordet bar med sig i sin ursprungliga kontext är konstaterade, kommer en kritisk utvärdering utifrån den slutsatsen göras av ett antal moderna översättningar (och några lite äldre), för att se om det finns en existerande översättning som uppnår dynamisk ekvivalens. Det kommer visa sig att så inte är fallet, och en ny översättning kommer därför att föreslås: ”Män som sexuellt utnyttjar män för att vinna social makt”.