Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”
Some insist that when God said God will make a “helper” for Adam (referring to Eve), God indicated females will forever give “submissive assistance” to males, with “the female functioning in a submissive role under the leadership and authority of the male,” i.e., submissive and subordinate.
Such a view is known as the “complementarian” view. A more precise description is “hierarchical complementarian,” as there are non-hierarchical complementarian views that do not involve such subordination or one-way submissiveness.
Other words typically come along with the expression of the complementarian view, such as “male and female were created by God as equal in dignity, value, essence and human nature,” but there is always a “but” or other caveat eventually when the view is expressed and, at bottom, the complementarian view is one of subordination and submissiveness for females and leadership and authority for males.
It is advocated by a variety of organizations, most vocally by various Southern Baptist Convention-affiliated groups (not all of them) and The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. It is opposed by others, including CBE International.
Of course, a “helper” is not necessarily one who is subordinate and submissive.
Walk up to a police officer on the street—there to be a helper to you—and describe to the officer how he or she is your subordinate and must be submissive to you. Add in how you are the authority over the officer. Good luck!
Dr. Linda L. Belleville, a highly respected professor of religion, theologian, and scholar, explains that all nineteen occurrences of ezer in the Old Testament are about “assistance that one of strength offers to one in need (i.e., help from God, the king, an ally, or an army). There is no exception.”
She goes on, “fifteen of the nineteen references speak of the help that God alone can provide.” (citing, for example, Psalm 121:1-2: “Where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord, the maker of heaven and earth.”).
God, of course, is not subordinate and submissive to those God is helping.
Thus, the “helper” Genesis 2:18 describes is one created to relieve man’s aloneness “through strong partnership,” in the words of Dr. Belleville.
Complementarians also frequently quote 1 Corinthians 11:9-10, sometimes chopping off the last part of verse 10 and often using select translations, such as this from the NASB:
“man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head”
They do so to imply that this “symbol of authority” is one indicating that men or her husband is the authority over her. But here are examples of other translations of 1 Corinthians 11:9-10:
So there is disagreement over the appropriate translation. Should we use this verse to declare women subordinate to men?
What about submission? Ephesians, in the passage directed to husbands and wives to which complementarians point, begins with “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (5:21) That submission between husbands and wives are “to one another” is often left out or downplayed in complementarian assertions. Ephesians 5:21 is, again, an indication of a helper in the nature of a “strong partner,” not a subordinate.
And 1 Corinthians 11:11-12, the very next verses in 1 Corinthians after the ones to which complementarians like to point, says:
Amen.
complementarian view: “‘submissive assistance … with ‘the female functioning in a submissive role …’”: https://cbmw.org/uncategorized/summaries-of-the-egalitarian-and-complementarian-positions/
https://www.cbeinternational.org/
Ezer section and after: Linda L. Belleville, “Women in Ministry: An Egalitarian Perspective,” in Two Views on Women in Ministry (Revised Edition), ed. by Stanley N. Gundry (series editor) Grand Rapids: Zondervan (2005), page 27; 33-35 (rule over)
Also see: http://margmowczko.com/a-suitable-helper/
What about verses in Biblical books with highly disputed authorship (like Ephesians and 1 and 2 Timothy)? Many ask if they should they be used to insist that women be subordinate to men in the face of many other passages in the Bible to the contrary?
“Head” (kephalē in Greek) in 1 Cor 11:3 most likely means a sense of (a) source oe beginning (as in headwater) and (b) first representative of (non-hierarchical) (as in head of a line of kids at school).
It probably doesn’t mean a sense of (c) authority over (as in head of a company) or (d) a physical head (as in the head on your body).
#1) You can see in the rest of 1 Cor 11:1-17—- the context — that Paul is talking about(a) source and (b) representation (the glory of, dishonor, etc.) the whole time, not authority.
Here’s the text with an (a) or (b) after each time talking about source/rep below; some are both:
“5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head (b) — … 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God (b); but woman is the glory of man (b). 8 For man did not come from woman (a), but woman from man (a); 9 neither was man created (a) for woman, but woman for man (a). 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. [v. 10 is a mystery and translated 30 different ways. Notice that Paul uses the actual word for authority here, indicating that if he meant authority in v. 3, he could have used the word for authority, not head.] 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. (b) 12 For as woman came from man (a), so also man is born of woman (a). But everything comes from God. (a) …”
So the text is emphasizing source and representation.
#2) Paul uses the normal word for hierarchical authority in 1 Cor 11:10, just 7 verses later (exousian). If he meant such authority in verse 3, he could have easily used that word. Instead, he used kephale, indicating he meant something different. Verses 10-12 are unclear but may very well mean that a woman is to have hierarchical authority over her own self; it’s just that she’s not independent of man like man isn’t independent of woman.
#3) God is not “the authority over” Christ. Christ is God (see John 1). So, “authority over” can’t be the meaning.
God is “the source of” / “representative of” Christ, as God is one God existing in three persons, the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and Christ came to us, to Earth, from God. “Source of” / “representative of” also fits the rest of the 11:3 (man is the source of woman (Eve coming from Adam’s side here; Adam created in “our” likeness here) and the rest of chapter 11.
#4) Interpreting v. 3 to mean man must have authority over women is inconsistent with Ephesians 5:21 (“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”) However, the interpretation of (a) and/or (b) above is consistent with the instruction to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
#5) The order of pairings in verse 3 also suggests it is not authority / hierarchical.
#6) See below
#7) See below
Updated: Added the cite to Ephesians regarding submission; note re 1 Cor 11:3.
Added: Argument that kephale does not mean source in Ephesians 5:23 (not sure it the premises here are true): (1) Only Liddell and Scott, a dictionary of classical usage, lists this as a possibility. Many of L&S’s references are far outside the NT period (centuries before Paul) and meanings of words change over time. (2) Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker (2000; page 541-42) do not cite source as a possible meaning; standard dictionaries for NT study. (3) Grudem has published it is a very rare possible meaning. See Recovering Biblical Manhood and Woman, 425-68. (4) Some commentaries reject it as a possible meaning. See Best, Ephesians, ICC 535, and Lincoln, WBC, 42: 368-69. This isn’t a particularly impressive argument, given history.
——-
It’s obvious that kephale in 1 Cor 11:3 does not mean “authority.”
1 Cor 11:3 says “But I want you to realize that the head [kephale] of every man is Christ, and the head [kephale] of the woman is man and the head [kephale] of Christ is God.”
Notice it says “the head [kephale] of Christ is God.”
Your claim is this means “the authority over Christ is God.”
God is ** not ** “the authority over” Christ.
Christ *is* God (see John 1). God *is* Christ. To assert God is the authority over Christ is heretical.
God and Christ are one in the same. They are not one having authority over the other.
You can see this plainly in John 1. See, e.g., verse 1: “… the Word was God.” And verse 18: “… the one and only Son, who is himself God ….”
So, “authority” can’t be the meaning of kephale in 1 Cor 11:3.
C
Third, the context of 1 Cor 11:3 indicates it is used there in the sense of source / representative, not authority over.
1
Before leaving John 1, I will note for you the following regarding the nature of Christ as *source* of man and the *source* of all things, as well as Christ as *representative* of God (e.g., light, making known) and God as the *source* of Christ (e.g., coming from, relationship):
John 1: “2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness ….
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, … 12 … to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. …
… grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.”
2
The context of the passage in which 1 Cor 11:3 resides is a theme of *source* and *representative*.
****** “Head” (kephalē in Greek), viewed in context there, means a sense of (a) source (as in headwater, like beginning of or origin of) and (b) first representative of (non-hierarchical) (as in head of a line of kids at school).
It doesn’t mean a sense of (c) authority over (as in head of a company) or (d) a physical head (as in the head on your body).
Here are several reasons:
#1) You can see in the rest of 1 Cor 11:1-17—- the context — that Paul is using a metaphorical word play on “head” (kephale) to talk about (a) source and (b) representation (the glory of, dishonor, etc.) the whole time, not authority.
Here’s parts of the text with an (a) or (b) after each time talking about in the sense of (a) source or (b) representation below (some are both, I just mark one):
“….. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head (b) — … 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God (b); but woman is the glory of man (b). 8 For man did not come from woman (a), but woman from man (a); 9 neither was man created (a) for woman, but woman for man (a). 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. [v. 10 is translated 30 different ways. See below for comment on it.] 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man (b), nor is man independent of woman. (b) 12 For as woman came from man (a), so also man is born of woman (a). But everything comes from God. (a) …”
So the text is emphasizing source and representation. The passage is about source and representation.
#2) Paul uses the normal word for authority in 1 Cor 11:10, just 7 verses later (exousian). If he meant authority in verse 3, he would have used that word. Instead, he used kephale, indicating he meant something different.
Verses 10 is unclear but likely means that a woman is to have authority over her own self (her own physical head); it’s just that she’s not independent of man, just like man is not independent of woman.
Notice that Paul seems to use head in v.10 in the literal sense, meaning authority over her own head, her own self.
#3) “Source” / “representative” fits the rest of v. 3.
God is “the source of” / “representative of” Christ, as God is one God existing in three persons, the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and Christ came to us, to Earth, from God.
“Source of” / “representative of” also fits the rest of the 11:3. Man is the source of woman (Eve coming from Adam’s side here).
Christ is present at the beginning (see John 1). Adam is created in “our” likeness in Genesis (i.e., including Christ’s).
Thus Christ is the source of man.
#4) Interpreting v. 3 to mean man has authority over women is inconsistent with other parts of the Bible.
“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Ephesians 5:21
As to sexual relations, a husband ‘does not have authority’ over his body—his wife has authority over him. 1 Cor 7:4.
Deborah had authority over many men. Judges 4-5.
Jesus told Mary to tell the disciples what the Word wanted them to do. John 20:16-17; Matt 28:9-10.
Female prophets speak for God to men and women.
There are many instances in which women have authority over men, given by God, in the Bible. See https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
Interpretation that of v. 3 to mean that man must have authority over women is inconsistent with these and other parts of the Bible.
But the interpretation of v.3 in which kephale/ head means the sense of source / representation is consistent with the rest of the Bible, including John 1, the instruction to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ,” etc.
#5) The order of pairings in 1 Cor 11:3 also suggests it is not authority/ hierierchical. If Paul had meant “authority,” he would have most naturally put it in order of God-Christ, Christ-man, man-woman. Instead the order is in order of appearance in flesh on Earth, as in their source/representation on Earth: Christ-man, man-woman, God-Christ.
Christ created Adam on Earth, then Eve, then Christ born.
#6) Ephesians 4:11-16:
“11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
14 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. 15 Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head (kephale), that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
Note that verse 15 indicates the believers (the church) is the body of Christ and that Christ is the kephale. Then, verse 16 explains that “from him” (i.e., from the kephale) the whole body … grows ….” Again, this indicates kephale means source.
#7) Before leaving John 1, I will note for you the following regarding the nature of Christ as *source* of man and the *source* of all things, as well as Christ as *representative* of God (e.g., light, making known) and God as the *source* of Christ (e.g., coming from, relationship):
John 1: “2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness ….
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, … 12 … to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. …
… grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.”
D
Greek lexicons:
The Liddel, Scott & Jones lexicon, one of the respected lexicons of Ancient Greek, “does not give “authority” or “leader” as meanings of kephalē. It does, however, give “source”, “origin” and “starting point” as possible meanings ….” See, e.g., https://margmowczko.com/lsj-definitions-of-kephale/>
E
Early church fathers, for example:
“Athanasius (296-373), bishop of Alexandria, quoted from the First Creed of Sirmium which states,
For the Son is the Head, namely the beginning of all: and God is the Head, namely the beginning of Christ . . .
John Chrysostom (c. 349 – 407) was adamant that “head” doesn’t mean “leader” in 1 Corinthians 11:3. He said that if we take “head” with the sense of governing, the passage won’t make sense and it will lead to false ideas about Jesus Christ, which is his primary concern. (Homily 26 on First Corinthians)
Cyril (376-444), Archbishop of Alexandria, in De Recta Fide ad Pulcheriam et Eudociam wrote:
… [Adam] became first head, which is source, … Since Christ was named the second Adam, he has been placed as head, which is source, of those who through Him have been formed anew …. Therefore he himself our source, which is head, has appeared as a human being. … Because head means source, he establishes the truth for those who are wavering in their mind that man is the head of woman, for she was taken out of him. Therefore as God according to his nature, the one Christ and Son and Lord has as his head the heavenly Father, having himself become our head because he is of the same stock according to the flesh.
(See Patrologia Graeca 76, pp.1336-1420.)”
See https://margmowczko.com/kephale-and-male-headship-in-pauls-letters/
F
God, throughout the Bible, asks women to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men. Here are 20+ passages in which God does so. https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
Jesus, the Word, asks women to go, tell assembled men what the Word revealed to the women and what the Word wants the men to do. See, e.g., John 20:16-17; Matthew 28:9-10.
It is a direct contradiction to what God asks of women to demand that women and girls do the opposite of what God asks of them, demanding that women and girls be silent and subservient to men. You have bought into a twisting and misconstruing of a handful of sentences, like 1 Cor 11:3, in trying to uphold a tradition of man.
G
You cite Philippians 2:1-11, but you didn’t quote it. Here it is:
“Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.”
What you have missed, in a major way, are these three things: (1) Christ is God. (2) Christ “made himself” and “humbled himself ….” Christ decided to become human. Christ decided to go to the cross. Christ decided to become obedient to death …. Christ decided …. Christ had the freedom to decide and to make decisions about his own self. (3) v. 5 says “in your relationships with one another”: Any voluntary service or submissiveness is a two-way street. Indeed, Philippians 2:1-11 reflects what Ephesians 5:21 says, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” I pointed this out in my response. But you ignored it.
H
(i) No one says men and women are identical. Individual men and individual women can choose to submit and serve one another. This is obvious. And this can be in different ways at different times. They can decide. And yes, when Jesus prayed, he was not only having a conversation with the Father but also with himself.
(ii) Even ultra-conservative Churches of Christ scholars recognize the Holy Spirit is properly worshiped and prayed to, too. See, e.g., https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1102-is-the-holy-spirit-worthy-of-worship (“But Professor Cottrell, whom I respect though not always agreeing with him, then says: “there are no biblical examples or precedents for addressing the Holy Spirit directly in praise or prayer.” With due respect, we believe the evidence introduced above demonstrates otherwise. Besides, if one cannot directly praise the Holy Spirit — either in song or prayer — how is such worship to be rendered?”).
I
On culture v. scripture: The vast majority of people in the Churches of Christ are not taking their views on the question of girls and women being excluded from service functions in the church, etc., from scripture.
Instead, they are taking their views from their culture — the culture of their church, e.g., the patriarchal traditionalism of their church.
In other words, they take their views not from a close study of scripture, but instead from what has been and is normalized in their church culture —- e.g., from what the preacher does and says (and, sometimes more often, doesn’t do and say) and from what the good people who came before them and who are around them in their congregation or other CoC congregations do.
And, for most people in the CoC, the culture of the CoC is the original source and the primary reinforcer of their belief and practice in this regard.
J
Church leaders, even those who agree or suspect that it is wrong to exclude women and girls from all or some of the service functions from which they are excluded, often do not speak up due to fear. The fear seems to include several types of fear — (a) economic fear (e.g., fear of losing a job, fear of becoming unemployable in a large swath of the CoC, fear of donations to the church declining, …), (b) social fear (e.g., fear of being thought of poorly in the community of their social circle, fear that friends in the congregation will leave, fear of being excluded from area-CoC events, fear that they and/or their family will be left out of current social circles, ….), (c) fear of mismanagement exposure (e.g., fear of the answers to the question of why this wasn’t raised by them before now, fear of being viewed as negligent towards others by not raising this before), (d) fear of time requirements (e.g., fear that raising the issue will require lots of their time and effort), (e) fear of lack-of-knowledge exposure (e.g., fear that raising the issue will involve Biblical discussions for which they are unprepared), … others.
K
More on kephale and head: People sometimes miss Ephesians 1:23 and 4:16, both of which suggest that kephale in 1:22 and 4:15 means “head” in the sense of source (such as a head of a river or head of a line of kids). Ephesians 1:23 explains Christ’s body is the church and Christ is the fills that body and everything (thus the source of the church), giving contextual insight into what kephale over or above all in verse 22 means, and 4:16 explains it is “From him, [(Jesus)] the whole body … grows and builds itself up in love …,” giving contextual insight into the source (from him) nature of kephale of 4:15 (“… we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the kephale ….”).
A failure to engage Ephesians 1:23 and 4:16 might explain seeing only authority in Ephesians 5:28-30 (“… husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church because we are members of His body”). And it might explain why some miss that after (a1) establishing that Christ is the source of his own body (e.g., 1:23, 4:16, 5:23) and (b1) emphasizing Christ is the savior of his body (5:23), Paul emphasizes that (a2) a husband is the kephale (source) of the wife making her just like his own body (“own bodies … himself … his own flesh”) and (b2) husbands ought to love, nourish, and cherish her as his body, as the husband’s body, as she is part of his body, doing so just like Christ does his body, the church, “because we are members of His body.” (5:28-30, 33)
L
For additional scholarship in the Churches of Christ tradition, see:
Gary T. Burke, God’s Woman Revisited: Women and the Church (Eugene, OR: Luminare, 2019), https://www.garytburke.com/ (I have this but haven’t read it yet)
John Mark Hicks, Women Serving God (2020)
Sara Gaston Barton, A Woman Called: Piecing Together the Ministry Puzzle (Abilene: Leafwood Publishers, 2012)
Rob Coyle, The Silencing of God’s Woman: How the Bible Has Been Misunderstood and Misused to Hold Back and Oppress the Female Voice in the Church (2017)
Jay Guin, Buried Talents: In Search for a New Consensus (2007)
Carroll Osburn, Women in the Church: Reclaiming the Ideal (Abilene, TX: ACU Press, 2001) (I found this more difficult to read than many of the others)
Jennifer Schroeder, https://www.mosaicsite.org/main/2020/2/28/a-journey-of-inclusion-part-1
Also see (arguing for exclusion of women and girls from speaking, teaching, leading, etc., in the assembly and some other roles or functions in the church based on their sex):
Everett Ferguson: https://www.amazon.com/Women-Church-Biblical-Historical-Perspectives/dp/1939838193 (surprisingly stunted Biblical analysis and lower quality writing than one would expect from a professor with a PhD and years of experience)
David Shannon: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/polishing-the-pulpit/id1442265834?i=1000425142504
John A. Fewkes: https://www.amazon.com/As-All-Churches-Participation-Leadership/dp/1721072950
Cynthia Dianne Guy, What About the Women? A Study of New Testament Scripture Concerning Women, (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 2005)
Also see (arguing for partial exclusion of women and girls from teaching, leading, etc., in the assembly and some other roles or functions in the church based on their sex):
Renee Sproles, On Gender (2019), https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Bible-About-Women-Matters/dp/194992100X
Tim Archer: http://www.timothyarcher.com/kitchen/women-in-the-assembly-of-the-church/
**
M Other articles and material
https://www.christianitytoday.com/scot-mcknight/2020/october/worst-translations-all-in-one.html
***
N Misc
Discussion re Jewish view: https://www.amazon.com/Woman-Factor-ebook/dp/B00NIQJP1S
**
Note that arguments that Jesus submitted himself, so women must, or the eternal submission of Jesus, etc., ignores that Jesus consented on his own volition. He was allowed, but decided not to do something or to do something. In this question, men and other people are prohibiting women and little girls from speaking, leading, and serving. This is very different from a woman, girl, man, or boy deciding they, personally, are not going to do or are going to do something. In this question, men and other people (people in the congregation, the preacher, etc.) are forcing women and girls. They are prohibiting them, not giving the women and little girls a choice. This is a kind of argument that asserts control over the bodies of women and girls, requiring them to sit them, to be silent, not to serve, etc. In order for something to be consensual, the person in question (here, women and girls) have to have a meaningful choice in the first place. Arguing that those women and girls could go elsewhere — i.e., can leave your congregational body — is not giving such a choice.
**
A discussion regarding kephale: https://thisbrother.wordpress.com/2015/08/11/ancient-bible-scholars-weigh-in-on-the-meaning-of-the-word-head/
**
Discussion regarding how ancient Jews viewed women, scholarly: https://hebraicthought.org/gender-study-real-lives-women-men-bible/
***
On reasons, among other things, I think
(1) it is a sin and immoral to discriminate against women and girls in the church, to support prohibiting them from any role or function in the church,
(2) lots of scripture asks women and girls to speak to, teach, lead, etc., men, in an assembly and elsewhere, and the two passages used to prohibit them are being misused, and when we block women and girls from serving (loving!) God and from serving (loving!) their neighbor with their service, we are blocking what Jesus (God!) asks,
(3) it harms little girls for the long-term for preachers, elders, and church members to discriminate against them, their mom’s, their female friends, and other women in the church,— those little girls being discriminated against and watching their moms, etc., be discriminated against, etc., Sunday after Sunday harms them psychologically, physically, and spiritually, for example, and
(4) discriminating against women based on sex is like discriminating against black people based on race, and asserting they are God-ordained does not make it right.
****
1 Cor 11:3 doesn’t say “… Father is the head of Christ.” It’s “… κεφαλὴ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ Θεός,” translated “… God is the head of Christ” or the like.
This is a strong indication that κεφαλὴ — head — is in the sense of source and/or represented by, as in headwater or head of a line of kids at school, and not in the sense of authority over or other hierarchy, as in head of a big company. The Bible teaches Christ is God and comes from God, and Christ represents God in the world, etc. (see, e.g., John 1:1-18; 1 Cor 11:4 et seq), not that God is the authority over Christ.
1 Cor 11:3-end speaks of source and representation in relationships, not authority over in relationships.
In other words, interpreting “head” to mean authority over in the first part of 1 Cor 11:3 (man or husband is the head of women or his wife) contradicts John 1 and the theme of the balance of 1 Cor 11 and makes the last part of 11:3 heretical, calling God the authority over Jesus when Jesus is God.
Humans can agree to operate in a hierarchy (for example, people do this with their business partners or spouses; we are partners in our practice or marriage, not ordained as one having authority over another, but we agree to do some things I ask my partner(s) to do and I agree to do some things my partner(s) ask me to do, we agree between us that one or the other will be in charge of certain things; this is like Jesus doing the will of the Father on Earth, for example), but there isn’t God-ordered hierarchy in authority between categories of people (as in not white over black, as in Curse of Ham, as in not male over female, as in hierarchical complementarianism and patriarchal traditionalism, etc.).
Complementarian is a relatively new term in popularity and is not differentially descriptive (there’s non-hierarchical complementarian which is descriptive of the vast majority of egalitarians) but was urged and adopted to replace hiearchialist, which is more accurate but was felt to be a bad brand in the 70s etc. Post-1960s/70s, people don’t like to speak now about hierarchy among categories of people b/c of how being a bigot, racist, sexist, etc., is viewed generally
*****
Grudem article arguing that “head” means “authority over”: https://www.dropbox.com/s/m5dhcrtsz60dbrx/1985%20-%20Grudem%20-%20Does%20kephal%C4%93%20%28%27head%27%29%20mean%20%27source%27%20or%20%27authority.pdf?dl=0
Cervin article analyzing Grudem’s article and finding “the quality of ‘scholarship’ which he exhibits in his article is so poor that I can only draw two conclusions: either he has deliberately misrepresented the facts, or that he is so blinded by his ideological position on women that he is incapable of seeing the facts as they are. I am inclined to the latter
conclusion, and it seems to me that Grudem has come up with these examples simply because he wants them to mean ‘authority over’ or ‘leader’ so as to bolster his interpretation of Paul.”: https://margmowczko.com/wp-content/uploads/Cervin-ao_does_kephale_mean_source_or_authority.pdf
Cervin also urges consideration that kephale in the New Testament means preeminence.
***
Some, like Denny Burk — see, e.g., https://www.dennyburk.com/what-does-it-mean-that-god-is-the-head-of-christ/ —, try to argue that kephale in 1 Cor 11 and Ephesians 5 means “authority over” point to Col 2:9-10 (e.g., ““For in Him all the fulness of Deity dwells in bodily form, 10 …and He is the head over all rule and authority.””). Burk quotes 2:9-10 out of context, which naturally invokes our modern use of “head” to mean authority, like head of a company. But what Burk does not tell his reader is that just flip back one page to the beginning of the letter to the Colossians and one can see in context that the reference in Col 2:9-10 is to Jesus begin the source of rulers and powers, not authority over, as such things were created through or by him. See, for example, Col 1:16, “For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.” (NIV), “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:” (KJV) In other words, reading Colossians like the letter it is, Paul has already said what he is referring to is the creation of — the source of — rule and authority.
Some, like Burk, do the same thing for Eph 1:22, quoting it out of context as“And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church.” First, the first part of that sentence says that Christ has everything under subjection—he is the authority over all things. Then it says something else in the next sentence. That gave him as kephale over all to the church. What does that mean? Burk leaves out the next sentence, Eph 1:23, which explains that what is being referred to is Jesus as the source over — or above — all other things of the church. The church is his body (indicative of him being the source of it) and he fills it in (again, indicative of being the source of it): “And the church is his body; it is made full and complete by Christ, who fills all things everywhere with himself.”
Please open and read the link below.
It provides an imperative explanation as to the meaning of the word “head.”
This summary blows away the complimentarians’ wishful thinking that men are the designated “rulers” of women. Sorry, guys. I understand that you wished to exalt yourselves in this way. It was an ego-boosting time, albeit rather pathetic, time for you.
If “you’re up to the task,” read on:
https://margmowczko.com/head-kephale-does-not-mean-leader-1-corinthians-11_3/
I don’t think this is a very comprehensive view of submission. If you are going to write about submission, then you really need to look at the entirety of Scripture, not just pick and choose those that support your point. Doing that can be viewed as Scripture twisting. You have some really good points, but I would have liked to see you incorporate Colossians 3:18 into your argument which says, ” Wives submit yourselves to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord”. When you look up the meaning of the Greek word that is used here, you find that submit means to yield to, to be subject to, to obey. Women are called to be submissive to their husbands, not all men. Their husbands are called to love their wives as they love theirselves. If both husband and wife are fulfilling their roles as described by God, they will have that “ezer” type of relationship.
Hi Heather,
Thank you for your comment.
Your specific points appear to be that (a) wives are to submit to husbands (Col 3:18) & (b) if “both husband and wife are fulfilling their role as described by God, they will have that ‘ezer’ type of relationship.'”
This article does not contest either of those and seems to make the first one and much of the second one, if I understand what you are saying.
The article points out that husbands are to submit to wives, and wives are to submit to husbands, too. It’s not a one-way street, which most complementarians do not acknowledge or barely or secondarily do. And the article says this two-way street for husband and wife is another indication of the “strong partner” (ezer) relationship.
The article states “Ephesians, in the passage directed to husbands and wives to which complementarians point, begins with “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (5:21) Again, an indication of a helper in the nature of a “strong partner,” not a subordinate.”
This article isn’t intended to be a comprehensive view of what submission to one another between husband and wife looks like in individual homes, but it does seem to address your specific complaints.
Blessings to you,
Steve