Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook  @actscelerate Google+ 

Is a "male covering" for women to minister, a scriptural requirement?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post bonnie knox
If you read very much of her writings, you will see that she holds scripture in high regard and that she is very knowledgeable about scripture. One thing I've noticed is that sometimes her writing does not reveal all the research she has done to arrive at a particular point.
Be that as it may, the nature of the Trinity is a whole 'nother ball of wax. We are not going to solve age old debates by citing one verse in 1 Corinthians. Sorry.
My point in bringing up the Trinity is to challenge Carolyn to ask herself is she is putting hierarchy in the Trinity without realizing it or perhaps in just a cursory way in order to make 1 Corinthians 11:3 fit a preconceived notion that has not really been examined.
A discussion about the nature of the Trinity might best be served in another thread.

Link wrote:
bonnie knox wrote:
Carolyn, I have noticed that on the nash16 website, a Margaret Mowczko is commenting. I have encountered her teachings in other places on the web.
She has stood out to me amongst some of the other adherents of egalitarianism because she is, like we are, Pentecostal.
I think you will enjoy her website. Here is one particular article, but if you have time to look around at some of her other articles, I think you will find a lot of interesting teaching.

http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/separate-spheres-roles-in-trinity-and-marriage-john-5_18-30/


It seems like her trinitary argument is based primarily on 'theology' and not scripture.

In I Corinthians 15, we see that the Son reigns until God puts everything under His feet-- but not God Himself. Then He will deliver up the kingdom to God.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/13/16 11:24 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post bonnie knox
Quote:
Well, pain killers might relieve that kind of emtional pain as well... Not recommending that.


Christ came to restore relationships.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/13/16 11:25 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post A few more words about 1 Corinthians 11:3 bonnie knox
I have read a lot over the last few years with respect to this verse (as well as the whole of chapter 11). I remember Tom Sterbens had sent me a link to one of the late Dr. Kenneth Bailey's teachings on chapter 11. I was listening with rapt attention as Dr. Bailey brought to bear his illustrious scholarship on these passages. With bated breath I waited to hear what he would say about the woman having authority on her head because of the angels. You can imagine how caught off guard I was when Dr. Bailey gave a little chuckle and said, "I don't know what that means."
I'll have to say it was refreshing, though, and I wish more people might be willing to acknowledge that. Cool
Anyway, because I've come across so much material, I don't always remember where I've read what. That can be annoying when I want to go back and find something.
In any case, here is something from Gordon Fee (that was also quoted on a blog I came across) that is in the book Discovering Biblical Equality, which I'm slowly working my way through:
“The earliest extant consistent interpretation of the metaphor in this passage is to be found in a younger contemporary of Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444?), who explicitly interprets in terms of the Greek metaphor: “Thus we can say that ‘the head of every man is Christ.’ For he was made by [dia] him … as God; ‘but the head of the women is the man,’ because she was taken out of his flesh…. Likewise ‘the head of Christ is God,’ because he is of him [ex autou] by nature” (Ad Arcadiam et Marinam 5.6). That is, as with Chrysostom’s understanding of the two pairs (God-Christ, Christ-man), Cyril is ready to go this way with all three pairs because of what is said in verse 8: that the woman was created from the man. Not only was the idea that the head is the source of supply and support for all the body’s systems a natural metaphor in the Greek world, but in this case it also supported Cyril’s Christological concern (not to have Christ “under” God in a hierarchy), just as it did for Chrysostom.” (From “Praying and Prophesying in the Assemblies” in Discovering Biblical Equality. 151.)
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/13/16 11:59 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post 1 Corinthians 11:3 bonnie knox
Here is a quote from Gilbert Bilezikian on this passage:

Sometimes, the word head in this text is carelessly infused with its meaning in the English language to obtain this hierarchical order: God head over Christ—Christ head over man—man head over woman. This top-down vertical “chain of command” would then go as follows: GodChrist-man-woman.

However, such results are obtained by manipulating the biblical text. In order to make the text say what the Scripture does not teach in this passage, its three clauses must be taken out of their original sequence and rearranged. The apostle Paul knows exactly how to structure hierarchies in perfect descending order (see 12:28, for instance). In 1 Cor. 11:3, he is not structuring a hierarchy. In keeping with the theme developed in the immediate context, Paul is discussing the traditional significance of origination. The sequence that links the three clauses is not hierarchy but chronology. At creation, Christ was the giver of life to men as the source of the life of Adam (“by him all things were created” Col. 1:16). In turn, man gave life to the woman as she was taken from him. Then, God gave life to the Son as he came into the world for the incarnation. When the biblical sequence of the three clauses is not tampered with, the consistent meaning of head in this verse is that of a servant function, as provider of life.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/13/16 12:17 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Carolyn Smith
bonnie knox wrote:
Quote:
I disagree with your conclusion about what happened after the fall. God did not predict what what happen. God spoke a curse on both man and woman (and the serpent) because of sin. For the woman, along with the curse of pain in childbearing (not a prediction, but a reality) came the curse of man's domination over her. Not necessarily the best thing, but it IS part of the curse. Adam & Eve had that perfect world thing going, and they messed it up!


God uses the word "curse" with the serpent and the ground, but not on the humans.
The distinction is important because we do not mind at all figuring out ways to lessen the pain of childbirth or finding out ways to make manual labor easier or finding ways to air condition man's surroundings so he doesn't have to earn his living by the sweat of his brow.
Do you hear anyone suggesting that it's not Biblical for the ordained bishops in the COG to conduct their business sessions in air conditioned buildings? Can you see it if the women were arguing that the men shouldn't have air conditioning because God had "cursed" Adam to work by the sweat of his brow?
As silly and extreme as that sounds, that is what it amounts to when we take the verses in Genesis 3 and claim that men must maintain authority over women.


I am really confused as to how you came to these conclusions based on what I've said.

I was not saying that we shouldn't seek pain meds or A/C or anything like that. My point, again, is that God declared what would happen as a result of the fall. I do not see that as descriptive or prescriptive - I see that as a FACT. To this day - pain meds withstanding - there is pain in childbirth. I am not saying we shouldn't examine male dominance over women. I have agreed with you by saying that I don't see why a woman could not mentor or be an authority figure to another woman in ministry.

But the whole "man shall rule over you and your desire will be toward him" is just as alive as the pain in childbirth thing. I am not saying it is RIGHT. But it is a reality. And the male dominance thing and how women react to it is what happened as a result of the fall.

What I have shared with you up till now is just kind of off the top of my head because I have not studied this in depth, as I would need to, to give a more intelligent response. You have obviously studied this way more than me, which is wonderful. It's just not anything I've felt a need to closely examine.

Re: having a covering - male or otherwise - I think that is important because as a minister, pastor, or church, there needs to be accountability. This is important to me because we formerly worked at PTL, and IMHO, that is a lot of what went wrong. The accountability checks and balances were more symbolic than actual. There was no one that would actually say, "No, you can't do that!" And we know how that ended...

To me, the issue goes back to submission/authority (yes, I know, a whole 'nuther thread...) Whatever position I hold, there should be someone who has my best interests in mind, as well as the church's - someone who will call me into balance if I step out of line...someone who does it in love and with respect. (This should be true for pastors, also, male or female.) Or someone to affirm me when I'm right or lift me up when I'm down.

IMHO, submission to authority is not about male dominance - it's about my choice to submit to a male authority. If I submit willingly, there is no need to dominate me. But there we go back to the perfect world scenario, because that is still not always the case if the authority figure has control issues. I do believe in honoring authority, though it's much more difficult if that person has control issues.

Again, I've wandered around to answer you, so I apologize for that. It's been a long day. Smile
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5255
6/13/16 9:38 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Carolyn Smith
bonnie knox wrote:
Carolyn, I have noticed that on the nash16 website, a Margaret Mowczko is commenting. I have encountered her teachings in other places on the web.
She has stood out to me amongst some of the other adherents of egalitarianism because she is, like we are, Pentecostal.
I think you will enjoy her website. Here is one particular article, but if you have time to look around at some of her other articles, I think you will find a lot of interesting teaching.

http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/separate-spheres-roles-in-trinity-and-marriage-john-5_18-30/


Thanks. I will check this out when I can.
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5255
6/13/16 9:39 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Joyce and Dave famousflavius
Joyce and Dave Meyer seem to have it all worked out. Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2399
6/14/16 10:23 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post bradfreeman
Re-read the 1 Cor 11 passage.

The covering (veil) is not for the woman. It's for her head. Who is her head and how does she cover (veil) him? The hair thing is just a cultural illustration Paul is using.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
6/16/16 6:01 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post (L) bonnie knox
Brad, I think there is more than one use of the word head in the passage. There is the literal head, the knob on top of one's neck, and the metaphorical head, i.e., the man is the woman's head. I believe the interpretation you posted earlier is allegorical, and while I don't disagree with your conclusion that each believer is to reveal or unveil Christ, I don't believe that is the correct reading of this passage.
It makes sense to me that in the culture Paul was addressing, it would be entirely possible for a woman to shame her literal head by her actions as well as her husband (or whatever man she was supposed to be showing honor).
I don't think the covering or headship here has to do with authority, though. And I agree with Link that "covering" does not refer to a person.
I enjoyed this video, which is excerpts from an NT Wright lecture. Start at the 6:00 minute mark if you want to hear some of his commentary on 1 Corinthians 11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mwj287xr0uQ&list=PLimp3_MyDabcvxa7omhaxgS5dlMyx4ZY5


bradfreeman wrote:
Re-read the 1 Cor 11 passage.

The covering (veil) is not for the woman. It's for her head. Who is her head and how does she cover (veil) him? The hair thing is just a cultural illustration Paul is using.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/16/16 7:16 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.