 |  | | | |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
[Previous: Issues of Freedom & Idolatry] Issues of Church Assemblies (11:2-14:39)Regarding Head Coverings (11:2-16)Head Coverings and the Hierarchy of the UniversePaul moves to the next topic, reminding them to hold on to the traditions he delivered to them. But more than mindlessly following the traditions, he wants them to understand the theology behind these traditions (11:2). Paul outlines a hierarchy in the universe. God is the head of Christ. Christ is the head of every man. Man is the head of a woman (11:3). This is not a statement of value or equality. There is no doubt that Christ is equal with God, but God nonetheless has the leadership responsibility in the relationship. Likewise, woman is equal with man, but there are different leadership responsibilities. Because of this hierarchy, Paul says a man disgraces his head if he has his head covered while praying or prophesying (11:4).Likewise, a woman disgraces herself if she has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying (11:5). Paul goes on to say a woman whose head is uncovered is like a woman who has shaved her head (11:5-6), which it is presumed would also be disgraceful. Indeed, nature itself tells us that women should have long hair and have it covered (11:15), just as men should have short hair and not wear hats while praying and prophesying (11:14). Biblical Interpretation and ApplicationInterpretation vs. ApplicationOne of the primary principals of bible study is that there is only one accurate interpretation of a passage of scripture. Furthermore, that interpretation has to ask what that passage meant to the writer and the reader in its original context. Clearly, unless one does some mental gymnastics, the proper interpretation of this passage is that Paul expects the women in the Corinthian church to keep their heads covered while praying and prophesying, while the men should leave their heads uncovered. If this is so clearly the proper interpretation of this passage, why do so many churches ignore this principle? Why do most churches today not require women to keep their heads covered? Interpretation asks what the passage meant in its original context. Application asks what the passage means in your current context. The bridge between these two is the Timeless Principle. Timeless principles are timeless truths . They apply to everyone no matter where in history. Timeless principles are trans-cultural . They apply to everyone no matter what culture. The question is not whether or not Paul meant this for the Corinthians (that interpretative question has been answered. The question is whether or not Paul intended this to be a timeless principle or was this only to be applied to the Corinthians or other 1 st century believers. The Degrees of TransferWe need to be alert to the degree of transfer from the biblical passage to the current situation. Some of the commands in scripture are relevant only to the time and place they were originally given. Others are meant for all times and all occasions. Knowing the “degree of transfer” becomes critical. There are four degrees of transfer found within scripture:
Determining the Degree of Transfer [1]
Corinthians culture & head coveringsIn the 1 st century Greek culture, all dignified women covered their heads with veils everywhere, not just in church. A woman would wear a veil in the marketplace, church, or anywhere where they would be seen in public. The only women who would not wear a veil would be women who were not under the protection and authority of a man. In 1 st century, women did not have the right or the means to work, own property, or live on their own. The culture required that women live under the authority or protection of a man, be it her father or her husband. A woman without a father or husband would have needed to be “adopted” into another household or would be unable, under the traditions of the day, to survive. The only other option for such a woman would be to make a living through prostitution. In this culture, prostitutes would not have worn a veil or any head covering. Timeless principleIn our culture today, women do not wear veils in the marketplace, or when going about their daily activities. Head coverings do not communicate, today, whether or not a woman is under the protection and authority of a man. Furthermore, women have rights today which allow a woman not to have to resort to prostitution if they are not under the authority of a man. Therefore, when looking for the timeless principle, we do not share similar circumstances, meaning this is probably not a moral absolute. But that does not mean that this is an obsolete situation. There are universal principles and normative patterns for us to explore in this passage. Namely, the hierarchy Paul outlines remains a principle. Paul shows the hierarchy of male leadership is rooted not in Greek or Jewish traditions, but in the order of creation (11:8-9). But lest we think this hierarchy somehow makes men more important or have more value, Paul reminds men that that they ought not forge that while woman originated from man (speaking of Eve), all men originated from a woman when they were born, and we are not independent of each other (11:11). Furthermore, all people, men and women, originate from God, and therefore are under his authority (11:12). Furthermore, there is a normative pattern that we can apply in our culture. While a lack of head covering no longer the sign of a prostitute, there are forms of dress which would be the sign of a prostitute. A woman who dresses like a prostitute clearly has no regard for God's hierarchy in the world and is demonstrating an independence from man and from God himself. In other words, the timeless principle is that women should not dress like a prostitute in church, but should wear clothes which demonstrate her willingness to be dependent upon man and upon God. For a “woman is not independent o f man, nor is man independent of woman.” Regarding the Lord's Supper (11:17-34)The Corinthians' divisiveness was affecting not just their interpersonal relationships, but had also affected their church meetings (11:18). When they would meet together and partake of the Lord's Supper, people would cut in line and eat and drink so much that they would get drunk on the wine, while others went without food (11:20-21). Paul is appalled at this behavior (11:23), and uses this issue as an opportunity to teach on the right celebration of communion. Paul begins this teaching by reminding them of the historic roots of the celebration, going back to the night Jesus was betrayed (11:24). He reminds them that this is a celebration which commemorates the Lord's death until He comes back (11:26). He follows with a warning. If you eat or drink in an unworthy manner, you may face discipline, even unto death (11:27, 30). Therefore, it is appropriate to examine oneself and determine why we are coming to the Lord's supper (11:28). Unfortunately, some have taken this “examination” and turned the Lord's Supper into a confessional rather than a celebration. The examination that Paul is dealing with here is merely asking what our purpose in coming to communion. Are we truly celebrating the Lord's death until He comes, or are we using it to selfishly indulge ourselves in food and drink? Paul concludes with the principle: when celebrating the Lord's Supper, we should wait upon each other and not use it as an occasion to satisfy our hunger (12:33-34). Footnotes
[Next: Regarding The Use of Spiritual Gifts]
|
