What is the message of 1 Corinthians 11 wrt women?

[McCulloch]

[...] I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. [...] [Man] is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake.[...]
However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.
1 Corinthians 11 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Question for debate: What is the message that the writer is trying to convey about the relation between men and women? Ensure that your answer takes into account textual, theological and cultural context.

[OnceConvinced]

Sounds like, by our standards, Adam and Eve were just shacking up in Eden, and not married at all.

Yeah.

As for the whole "sex=marriage" thing, it boggles my mind. The consequences are absurd. Apparently, I'm some sort of adultering bigamist or something.

Well it would certainly make you a fornicator in the eyes of the Christian, which really is the same sort of thing, just a different label.

For that matter, consider the case of a woman losing her virginity to a rapist; are they married now?

That's a good question. But it may explain why there is that law in the OT commanding that rape victims marry their attackers. I never really thought about that one though as a Christian. Rape would be something different again though and is still something condemned.

Frankly, virginity is a fuzzy concept and any claim that it's a virtue is deeply confused.

Agreed

Doesn't the law do the same thing?
No sex, no official marriage right?

Well to me the act of sex was "married in the eyes of God". The ceremony was "Married in the eyes of the law".

The day will come,
when ALL will be convinced.
Stay tuned!

Do people ever get tired of insisting that? People have been expecting that day to come for 2000 years now and it still hasn't. St Paul even expected that day to ocurr within his life time. At this rate, pigs will have evolved wings first before that day arrives.

Pigs will fly, too.

Yep. I can just hear them grunting on the runway right now, getting ready for take off.

[Thought Criminal]

Well it would certainly make you a fornicator in the eyes of the Christian, which really is the same sort of thing, just a different label.

I'll try not to take this too personally.

That's a good question. But it may explain why there is that law in the OT commanding that rape victims marry their attackers. I never really thought about that one though as a Christian. Rape would be something different again though and is still something condemned.

Well, there are Christians who would insist that a woman impregnated by force should be compelled to have her rapist's child, so it's along the same lines of evil.

Well to me the act of sex was "married in the eyes of God". The ceremony was "Married in the eyes of the law".

You're calling me a bigamist again...

Yep. I can just hear them grunting on the runway right now, getting ready for take off.

Honestly, I don't understand why he keeps demanding that science disprove an entirely unsupported story.

Sigh. People have been expecting that day to come for 2000 years now and it still hasn't. At this rate, pigs will evolve wings first before that day arrives.

Yes, the end times are near. Again. Still?

TC

[JoeyKnothead]

After TC said Adam and Eve were fictional.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim?
What scientific proof can you provide to show they were not real people?
I'll answer it for you.
NONE!

What scientific evidence do you have to support your claim they were real folks?

[JoeyKnothead]

Why do you pretend by putting the James Bond story
and the Word of God at the same level?
How will any Christian take you serious?
It's supported by the Word of God.
The stamp of truth.
I will take his word over yours
any day of the week and twice on Sundays!

By what means are you able to determine the Bible to have 'the stamp of truth'?

[Word_Swordsman]

Paul also taught that in Christ there is no difference between Male and Female

But Paul also taught that women are the glory of man and man is the glory of Christ. Being an unbeliever, I am willing to admit that Paul contradicted himself or that maybe the writings were not authentically Paul and were certainly not inspired by God.

How do you deal with the apparent contradiction?

This needs to be cleared up at least in the minds of fellow Christians. There is no contradiction at all. The contradiction was birthed by taking a verse out of context. The reference is apparently Galatians 3:26-29 "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. [27] For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. [29] And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

The context is concerning the group of people not held by the law, but those who by faith obtain a promise made to Abraham. Anyone, whether Jew, Gentile, slave, free, male, female who embraces that faith Abraham demonstrated is an equal heir of promise. All of faith in Christ are in Christ as one body of believers separate from those under the law.

I am no less an American than any other American citizen, one with America and one in America, heir to the established in-common benefits of our Republic, though I don't have the same privileges, responsibilities, power/authority as a US Senator, city cop, or any other figure of government. It's a matter of order within any societal organization. The body of Christ is a societal organism, a colony if you will of the Kingdom of Heaven, having a governor (Holy Spirit) sent by the originating king (Jesus), with an expected organizational governance. A major difference between males and females in the Kingdom of God was established in the Bible, placing the man over a woman, but responsible under God, commanded to love his wife.

Now it was concluded by one there was a contradiction with 1 Cor. 11:7-9 "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. [8] For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. [9] Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man."

Paul wrote that well within Jewish doctrine, the concept carried from Genesis concerning the origination of woman. The finest output from the man was the woman, taken from his body. Adam was the image and likeness/glory of God, while woman was man's glory. The word "glory" comes from the Gr. doxa, used in a wide application range through scriptures, both literally and figuratively, also translated honor, praise, worship.

Paul established a cohesive doctrine of the proper God-ordained relationship between men and women within just those two passages that agree in substance, plus others that clearly define the organizational arrangement of God to man to woman. That is not a teaching that a woman has no direct access to God, but deals with a married man and woman in Christ.

[Word_Swordsman]

I will add that the notion of a traditional Christian marriage, which is essentially BDSM without a safeword, is one of the very worst things about Christianity.

This is both insulting and a gross misunderstanding of the idea of traditional Christian marriage. While the Biblical instruction to wives is to be submissive and to learn from the husband, in no place is there any indication that abuse of that trust and submission by the husband allowed or hinted at. In fact, in light of the cultural context of the time, Christianity might be looked at as a step forward for the recognition of ordinary women's recognition as people. Love your wife, albeit in a paternalistic patronizing way, as a lesser vessel.

I'd say it's entirely accurate, and any insult is well deserved.

TC

As Christ is the head of His Body (the Church), so is the man in Christ the head of the family within Christianity. I will point out that Jesus was not given to totalitarian rulership over His disciples, themselves free to get up and follow or depart. Nothing has changed about that relationship from Jesus to believers, given His last act toward us was to give His life for the Church. However, no relationship with Jesus would be possible over the long haul if a disciple persisted in abusing that relationship, as Judas did. Jesus loved His disciples, yet demonstrated in the Jesus-Judas relationship He could deal with a disciple not loving Him well. The other disciples who stayed with Jesus remained in a voluntary relationship throughout their lives, none a slave of Jesus, called by Jesus His "friends", not servants. The idea of "submission" is no more or less threatening than a US ambassador keeping a correct relationship with the US President. He is free to step down if he can't submit to the President's policies. As long as the two agree and perform as needed, that relationship lives. The idea is the President aligns himself with a person who already shares the same objectives, so "submission" is both literal and necessary. I think the skeptic's concept of submission is based on a 100% negative assessment of a vital attribute of strong relationships.

[Word_Swordsman]

I use it in recognition of who Christ is in relation to God and his own life.
"I have not come to do my own will but the will of him who has sent me."
In that we serve and are not here to be served. The marriage between two people in Christ means they become one flesh. It would cause friction if both pulling in different directions. It would be easier if in disagreement over something to let the man have the final say.This avoids confronation and antagonism and even resentment. A man needs to feel supported as does a woman. I think alot of marriages would fair better if they could instead of fighting make ground rules.

There's friction in all relationships because, regardless of the talk about "one flesh", these are still two different people, and they have minds of their own. Pretending you don't have a mind doesn't work because you still have your own thoughts and needs and ideas. You can't avoid all arguments by conceding in advance; all you do is ensure that you won't be happy because your needs are being ignored. All submission is abuse and this is a recipe for misery.

I retired from federal government, wanting to insert a principle I learned there that would possibly explain this relationship of "submission" versus "individuality". I held a high enough position that when on a committee for solving a problem that I often had a working answer based on experience and what would fit within agency policy. Our committees often included a majority of young people with little experience, needing committee experience. I put aside seniority powers and just listened to other ideas. The key to agreement was in letting other people come up with kernel ideas to be developed into mature ones. Along the way I asked questions that steered ideas in a positive direction, in many ways the ideas seeming to completely originate from the less experienced participants. Without the questions based on experience and knowledge of the subject, it might have been unlikely those kernel ideas would have floated. As a result a final operational plan emerged that all participants could equally share in success as a committee accomplishing its task. I figure most began to realize a timely success was made possible by wisdom from folks that had passed that way many times before, but it was important the "old timers" not take a large share of credit.

With that in mind maybe a fresh look at Paul's doctrine will make more sense of this issue of his true message in Corinthians. Being a Pharisee he knew how the Jews had departed from Moses, subjecting women to a lower estate than God prescribed throughout the Tanach. What Paul taught was actually heresy to most any Jewish leader, seen as a liberation of women, yet in a way not offensive to Jewish converts understanding the Christian's relationship to Jesus Christ. I give Paul credit for being the first male "women's lib" advocate, putting the woman back in a rightful position woman had when first given to man. Jesus put believers in general back into Adam's position as a free human without curses over them, and made possible the perfect relationship between man and wife as before the fall. Nothing is said of that first woman, while yet without sin, as being a slave, a possession, or in any way not having a voice.

Now jump with me to Paul's address of the churches. He commanded the women to be silent in the sanctuary assembly, but take note he explained the women could raise issues at home by "asking" her husband about something said. There is nothing written to indicate husband and wife could not "debate" any issue after the husband offered his answer. Paul advised women elsewhere to essentially "save" her husband by being sanctified around him, totally dedicated to God, her "communication" being holy. I take that to mean the wife was to guide her husband by inclusion of questions over what men said in a meeting. In that way I like to think of the woman as taking the mature position of us "old timers", skilfully steering the thoughts of her husband until both husband and wife share the same opinions of importance to both. All along the way the wife benefits by listening, suggesting, questioning, while learning how her husband thinks through problems, and by that the husband reaps a better marriage.

Where there is no resentment and division there is harmony. I believe marriage where the man is in control and the woman is allowing this, then it works better for both partners.. I do not agree to this type of submission where the man abuses his wife in any shape or form. She must never submit to evil.

The alternative is to recognize that you're both adults, capable of deciding for yourselves and of working together to negotiate a solution that works for both of you. There may well be some things that one spouse is more qualified to handle than the other, or simply more interested, but this is something the two decide for themselves on a case-by-case basis, not by unilateral surrender.

As in my work case above, all committee members realized they were adults, I have no doubt. Never once did we approach a matter on the basis of negotiation. Negotiation might be advantageous between two committees. Let me pose an example of why negotiation in a marriage decision is not the best first approach. Let's say a couple discovers they are consistently spending 25% more money than they earn. The husband might have his eye on a new fishing boat, the wife on a diamond ring. Without intervention both will likely buy what they can't afford because of bad habits. Negotiation might result in an agreement the husband will buy a large truck inner tube to fish from, and the wife will settle for an "Arkansas diamond" made out of quartz. Neither will likely be happy. The intelligent approach is to clearly identify spending habits, then set up a budget that will control the purse. So far no negotiations should be involved. Next comes a plan for saving towards desired goals. Each retains their own goal. Savings are allocated equally in two separate savings accounts. No negotiation there, just a simple wise course of action. When each reaches their savings goal, each buys what they really wanted. Still, no negotiation, both happy.

In a Christian marriage each partner is supposed to be obedient to God's word, both equally constrained. If both obey God they will enjoy a harmonious marriage and will see prosperity and health. But if one goes their own way regardless of the basis of their marriage, disharmony results. Paul never indicates the husband has the choice irrespective of his wife. He approached that by linking the relationship to Jesus and His Church. Jesus could have become king by acclamation at one point in His ministry when His popularity score was highest, and put the people serving Him with the finest of goods, but instead died for sinners, buried in a borrowed grave. The husband is commanded to be willing to do the same for his wife, lay down any "king of my castle" attitude, loving his wife like Jesus loved us. Jesus led by example and word, carefully explaining the Kingdom principles in parables that related spiritual knowledge to everyday life, showing remarkable patience, putting others first. The Christian husband can't stop with his wife, also commanded to so love his neighbor as he loves God and himself.

[Evales]

I am no less an American than any other American citizen, one with America and one in America, heir to the established in-common benefits of our Republic, though I don't have the same privileges, responsibilities, power/authority as a US Senator, city cop, or any other figure of government. It's a matter of order within any societal organization. The body of Christ is a societal organism, a colony if you will of the Kingdom of Heaven, having a governor (Holy Spirit) sent by the originating king (Jesus), with an expected organizational governance. A major difference between males and females in the Kingdom of God was established in the Bible, placing the man over a woman, but responsible under God, commanded to love his wife.

Thanks, though I haven't participated in here the concept of being one in the eyes of God yet being different was quite confusing me. But the way you have described it helps a lot! Btw I am interested in what you think submission in marriage would entail

[Word_Swordsman]

I am no less an American than any other American citizen, one with America and one in America, heir to the established in-common benefits of our Republic, though I don't have the same privileges, responsibilities, power/authority as a US Senator, city cop, or any other figure of government. It's a matter of order within any societal organization. The body of Christ is a societal organism, a colony if you will of the Kingdom of Heaven, having a governor (Holy Spirit) sent by the originating king (Jesus), with an expected organizational governance. A major difference between males and females in the Kingdom of God was established in the Bible, placing the man over a woman, but responsible under God, commanded to love his wife.

Thanks, though I haven't participated in here the concept of being one in the eyes of God yet being different was quite confusing me. But the way you have described it helps a lot! Btw I am interested in what you think submission in marriage would entail

My take on submission in a Christian marriage is two people made "one flesh" in submission to God and in effect one to the other, with a slight leaning of woman submitting more to the man for the biblical reasons already discussed as pointed out by Paul the apostle. The idea of submission is very important for all Christians, both male and female. There are several variants of submission.

1 Cor. 16:15-16 "I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,) [16] That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboureth."

That is a general call for submission of all Christians to people like Stephen's household, extreme workers in the gospel. My wife and I gladly submit much of our existence to a few people like minded that advance the gospel greatly. In that submission we learn deeper levels of submission within our own home. My wife works her business while I am retired, study the Bible heavily, and teach/preach as called upon. She gladly defers most theological issues to me, though she can knock my socks off with a word of wisdom that trumps my troublesome maleness. I gladly submit to wisdom from her or anyone else showing the wisdom of God, especially when I let the world interfere with obtaining it myself. I feel like it's like a pro basketball team that really counts on their super stars to score, but most of the games prove the lesser team mates made enough difference to change destiny. It would be foolish of me to only trust my own mind all the time, the reason I listen to friends and my wife. Because I do that, they respect my position as elder in the church even though I am not perfect enough to always come through.

Ephes. 5:22 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord."

That's an interesting one to me. We are taught elsewhere that if we can't love our neighbor whom we do see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see. In this verse I locate a context that looks at that a different way, that even as the wife ought to submit to Christ like her husband does, she should be able to gladly submit to her husband too since he is submitted. Here's the rest of that: Ephes. 5:20-33 "Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; [21] Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

I'll break in here. There the Church is instructed that all members both male and female submit to one another in the "fear" of God. That fear is a deep reverence, the basis of such submission. If a man can't trust his fellow saint enough to submit in Christ, he won't likely figure out the submissions God requires in marriage, or even to Jesus. It isn't a submission as in villager to village Chieftain, or slave to master, but an attitude of trust and respect that should be present inside the Christian community a little less profoundly than in the Christian marriage.


[22] Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. [24] Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. [25] Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; [26] That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, [27] That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. [28] So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. [29] For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: [30] For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. [31] For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. [32] This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. [33] Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband."

Col. 3:18 "Col. 3:18-19 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them. is a good parallel verse to the above. That is where we get the basis of teaching that no wife (or husband) is required to suffer abuses. A marriage in which the husband obeys God in all those commandments is always a very blessed marriage. Wives with good husbands like that are very thankful and happy to submit within the biblical parameters.

Learning God's perspective on submission in the family setting helps us correctly view how we ought to respond to the government in power over us. This commandment is partly empowered by a healthy family situation: Hebrews 13:17 "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

If the husband doesn't take great care against marriage abuse he will not accomplish this commandment either: 1 Peter 5:5 "Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble."

When the wife witnesses such growth of humility in her husband, she can learn to trust in her own submission to him, which in effect is her own increasing submission to Christ, even as the whole Church submits to the Head of the Church, Jesus.

I hope that clears it up.