#8. Headcoverings and Haircuts

In this episode, author and teacher Jeanie Shaw joins the podcast to break down 1 Corinthians 11 and try to understand what headship, head coverings, and hair cuts have to do with worshipping God at church.

Grab your copy of "The View From Paul's Window: Paul's Teachings on Women" by Jeanie Shaw.

Sign up to receive Bible study guides, handouts, and resources that complement what you learn in this podcast by going to WomenChurchPodcast.com

Transcript

Travis Albritton: 0:01

Welcome back to the women in the church podcast. We take a fresh look, a little bible teaches about women in church. For the ICOC. The lovely Corina, back as always

Corina Espejo: 0:11

Greetings, hello.

Travis Albritton: 0:12

And then Jeannie back for some more, some more punishment, some more pain and punishment for digging into some fun stuff.

Jeanie Shaw: 0:18

Thank you so much. It's great to be with you.

Travis Albritton: 0:21

So we introduced a lot of themes and topics in the last episode. And so if you haven't yet listened to that one, make sure you do because it really is going to set a solid foundation for the things we're going to talk about. In today's episode. We're going to be talking about First Corinthians, which is one of those passages that you probably were hoping we would talk about at some point, when you click to play on one of these episodes.

Corina Espejo: 0:43

It's gonna be so fun. Well, first Corinthians and we might even get to Ephesians a little bit. Let's jump right in Jeannie, help us understand some of the cultural background of Corinth and emphasis and the churches there. All righty.

Jeanie Shaw: 0:57

Well, quarren sometimes we say let's get back to being the Church of the Bible, New Testament Christians in Corinth is definitely an example of something we don't want to imitate as far as a lot of what was going on in the church there. But certainly, it was real. And it was Corinth was a pagan, bustling Greco Roman community. There was not probably as much influence, I don't know is is an emphasis with Temple of Artemis, but there was the temple of Aphrodite and Corinth. You know, there was just incredible amount of idolatry, immorality that really stemmed from that, because a lot of the gods were sexual type of gods, or goddesses, and what is being addressed in this letter, and we can just read through it and see some of the things that are being addressed. Again, division. Wow, that seems to be a common theme, a lot of letters, right? quarrels, worldly wisdom, sinful pagan practices, likes immorality, and idolatry, correction of rejecting Paul as an apostle dealing with order in the church, spiritual gifts, diversity, questions about the resurrection. And the thing about the letter to Corinth, and even the, the pagan lifestyle, there was a lot going on in the church. And there are some things that we just don't know what was going on. Because we're, it's clear from reading the letters that are there that we're missing a letter, at least a letter, there are some questions that had been raised some answers that were referred to, and we don't know what they are. And so it's a little bit of trying to fill in the blanks. We don't know what the Corinthian church had written to Paul that caused him to answer. Sometimes, Paul seems like he's contradicting himself. But that can happen when we don't know the whole story. You know, he tells the church one time that it's better for widows not to marry. Then in another letter that they should, he tells both men and women that each have authority over their own bodies. It sounds like in other places that men have authority over women, but I don't believe that's what he's really saying. But it can be very confusing. And I think what's important to note is, there's a lot of issues going on in the Corinthian church. And Paul is addressing those issues, very specific issues, very specific problems in the church, would it be different in another church with different problems, probably. So you know, any situation like that we can think of culture, I think of a teacher, you're going into maybe a an inner city school where there's not maybe some parental involvement that they would wish, poverty has caused a lot of different inequalities, and then maybe a suburban very wealthy school, a teacher is going to be very different. Going into those two different places. You know, one, there just may be so much disorder, they've got to, okay, nobody's going to talk in the lunchroom, everybody's gonna wear a uniform, you're going to be go through a metal detector, when you walk in. You're very different needs because of what's being addressed. And again, I think we get a hint into some of the things going on in the church in Corinth as we go through the chapter. I mean, for goodness sakes, they're getting drunk at communion. We haven't seen that, to my knowledge. In our modern day, you know, they're bragging about least immorality of not incestual relations. I mean, it's just it's messed up. It's messed up. Culturally, there's a lot going on. Again, it's a city filled with idolatry. I mean, these festivals for the gods and goddesses were oftentimes just pagan orgies. Then there's culturally, we mentioned last time, there's almost like a new wave of freedom that some of the women and Rome felt they were finding their way into the churches that called the New Roman women. And it was kind of a rebellion of sorts against some of the maybe the devaluing that they had experienced for so long. It was based on a very pretentious lifestyle for the women. They were getting into the theater, and they were wanting to show their wealth a lot through what they wore elaborate hairstyles, gold jewelry, it was probably thought not as much modesty as far as Oh, it's too low, dresses too low. It was more the modesty of ostentatious and braggadocious. And, yes, just very vain. And so that was also coming into the church and different ways during this time. And, you know, Paul is a writer, again, he's dealing with a specific situation. He's a specific individual, he's inspired by God, but God uses the backgrounds and personality of the writers. And Paul is is a writer, he's a rabbi. He was well trained as a faricy. He was smart, he was clever, he wrote with irony, subtlety. He use riddles and sarcasm, he used hyperbole. rabbis used often used creation texts, they quoted philosophers of the day, they use contrasts. And I appreciate that. Peter even tells us that some of Paul's writings are hard to understand. And I believe some of them really are some of the things Paul writes about, we just simply don't really know. And I believe we have to be okay with that. We can know what is most important. We can know the importance of one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father was all who is above all, and yet again, I appreciate Peters acknowledgement that sometimes, brother Paul, is not always easy to understand. I'll give you an example in Corinthians in First Corinthians 15, we have this issue of baptism for the dead. What is that? First Corinthians 1529 to 30 says, Now there's no resurrection. What will those do? Who are baptized for the dead? If the dead aren't raised at all? Why are people baptized for them? And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? What is he talking about? Does it really matter? You but we can look at what he the writer was dealing with he was dealing with and talking to the Sadducees, who didn't believe in resurrection and kind of showing them their lack of logic. You practice baptism for the dead, but you say you don't believe in resurrection. Go figure that one out. You know, Paul was he was delivered in his words and his timing. And again, he was inspired by God. But God uses people styles and personalities. As they write. Paul uses sarcasm. Just read through First Corinthians four and you'll see some sarcasm at work. He uses play on words at times, he uses hyperbole. Galatians 522 is an example of this at least Let's hope so. In speak of duty, speaking of judaizers he says I want them to go away and castrate themselves. I think he's using some hyperbole there. Again, he contrasts two philosophies and philosophers of the day and contrast those two Kingdom thinking, he contrasts scriptures to make points which can be misunderstood. If we don't know the style, he's using the points he's making. And I'll just take you back to another of the rights in Galatians, four and five, Paul speaks of Hagar and points back to the Old Testament scripture. And chapter four and verse 30, get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman son will never share an inheritance with the free woman's son. Therefore, brothers and sisters, were not children to the slave woman, but of the free woman. You we could read that in a way that is incredibly opposed to other things that Paul teaches and to the kingdom teaching of Jesus, we could read a completely opposite of the intention to help the Gentiles understand that they have full inheritance and God's promise. And Paul is using, I think, oftentimes, the culture of the day and kind of turning it back on their heads, getting to think about it. Again, perhaps no one had as much influence on the Greco Roman culture than Aristotle, who was philosophizing in the fourth century BC. See, and his views of women stem from the belief that they had, they were really genuinely a mistake that they were genetic deformity. And house coal household colds were built on this. Women were the property of men, and usually uneducated, because they were considered inferior. And, you know, Paul spoke in ways that they would understand, often contrasting the views of the day. I think this was done, and it may have been mentioned already with slavery, you know, he could have commanded it to end. And it's good to think about why did he choose the path he did, you know, and giving various ways of how masters and slaves should interact? I believe he was getting at the heart. You know, we see other times where Paul tells the church to not be Jews, especially in terms of food laws. And yet, then he turns around and tells Timothy to be circumcised. You know, there's different reasoning going on, there was constantly the conflict on how Jewish Christians do things, and Gentile Christians do things. But I believe Paul, and I'm saying this in background to some things we're going to be talking about, I think he works within the cultural mores of the time to try to persuade Christians to think differently to think the kingdom of God thinking, leading them out of their cultural practices, which aren't God's intent, but were the results of the fall of the humankind in the garden. And you I think, this is some of what is going on in what he addresses and the book of Corinthians. And some of the things that are a little bit difficult to understand a couple

Travis Albritton: 11:41

things that you said, really resonated with, you know, thoughts that I've had, or things that I, I've seen to be true, especially being in full time ministry out of full time ministry, every ministry is different. And the problems of each ministry seem to be unique, even though there are some common themes oftentimes. And if you spend enough time in ministry, you'll figure out they're like children, every single one is different, even when you think that they shouldn't be, it's like, yeah, you come from the same parents. And so the things that you emphasize the things that you stress, the things that you're having to deal with, are going to change and evolve and kind of ebb and flow, and things that you thought really needed to be emphasized. It's like now everybody's already on board. And then other areas, you're like, how are you guys still on spiritual milk with this stuff? How long have you guys been disciples. And so even in our own ministering to people, we can see that at work that from ministry, to ministry in person to person, our approach and the things we emphasize and the things that we teach and the things that we correct are going to adapt to the situation and we're using wisdom to do that. We're taking these biblical principles and applying them in ways that are relevant to the situation and helping everyone involved be more Christ like and then also the the point that you made about how especially with First Corinthians and the last letter and there is sometimes answers that we just won't get a scripture that is always encouraging to me to kind of set my my heart at ease that like oh, that's that's actually Okay, is over in Deuteronomy, chapter 29, verse 29, where it says, The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed, belong to us into our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law. And so you know, the things that God has revealed to us, those are things that we can cherish, that we can hold on to that point us to the Creator, and help us understand, what does it mean to really live as an image bearer and to partner with the work he's doing to advance the kingdom. And that's totally fine, that there are secret things, those things belong to God. One day, he explained them to us, but in the moment, he's given us everything that we need. That is encouraging.

Corina Espejo: 13:45

Well, thank you that that all makes a lot of sense. I think for me, I was thinking about when I read this and really making sure I read scripture and I'm understanding what does this mean for me? Growing up in New York, there was a movement within feminism and of course feminism has come in waves and not all of it is bad. I know people hear feminism and they're immediately turned off I want to just help people to understand that as a huge movement that has gone through so many different revisions and waves and it was interesting in New York there was one particular and I'm going to call it a denomination but you can call it whatever you want. But there was a bit of a shift or a split within feminism that they call the Man Eater and they actually built like an entire fashion style on it and I was obsessed with it. I mean they made suits fit the feminine body but it was very like take male clothing and make it look you know very stylish and chic and, but it came from this wave within feminism, this little splinter movement about the ideals of Okay, well in order for women to be empowered, you must step on men. In order for you to you know, assert yourself or make sure that you're valued. Don't be afraid to you know, hit them where it hurts right and there was this kind of an I'm not gonna call it vanity but I think what vanity was for the new Greco Roman woman and and I like how you explained it. If you have at the time Aristotle who is devaluing in a way that would not honor God's ideals, and you have the reaction the response is, well, Hey, wait a minute, we're women now and we have status and we can be a part of the art so we do things let me let me flaunt right my my value. I'm not going to let you rob that for me. Let me let me make sure you know I am woman hear me roar, right? And that vanity for the new Greco Roman woman I wonder if a similarity for me and everybody's got their own different ones. That's what I have to also remember, every community, every person listening, they're all going to have their equivalent to this Man Eater type feminism, right? For me. That was an aha moment for me anyways of like, Oh my goodness, for me, the new Greco Roman woman would be this man need her feminist? Not feminism as a whole. But this particular wave and this particular mindset, wow, it is vindictive. And it is not embodying the heart of God. But I think it was in response to mistreatment to marginalism of women and it just kind of went this other direction that was so ungodly, unhealthy on Christ like, but I just remember thinking, wow, this is something that has been praised as a young woman within the community that I lived in. In some ways it would seep within the church, you know, will Hey, brother, I don't care about you and come in and try and get ahead. Why cuz I am woman hear me roar, right? It's like, Oh, you know, I look at it now. And I'm like, Wow, so cringy. But I gotta say, like, I get it doesn't make it acceptable. But man, does it make it understandable when it comes from women who have felt my parents were upset that I was a girl, they wanted a boy, you know what I mean? Like, that stuff doesn't just come from nowhere. But to be able to deal with it in a way that's Christ. Like, it's humble. It's a huge calling. And I encourage anybody at home, think of that for yourself? What might be the equivalent of the new Greco Roman woman for you? And how can we graciously but firmly say, you know that there's no place for vanity, there's no place for vindictiveness in our church family. And so anyways, I thought about that, as you were talking, and I thought was a really great example.

Jeanie Shaw: 17:14

Well, it goes back doesn't it to Genesis and the desire for fallen humankind to dominate? And that never goes well, in any way. And I think Paul's words to the Philippians and Philippians chapter two, I just read those often because basically, it's, it is the call to have the same attitude is Jesus who lay down his life for us, and really caused us to really have that kind of heart to put another's needs above our own. And that's a different way of thinking.

Travis Albritton: 17:53

But with that, let's go ahead and jump into our text for today. First Corinthians 11, verse two, through verse 16, Corina, you want to read that for us. And lucky for you. We didn't drop a bunch of Greek names in here. Yeah. Read this, like a, like an English speaker here.

Corina Espejo: 18:09

Thank the Lord, my American self, okay. First Corinthians 11, verses two to 16 says, Now I commend you because you remember me and everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. But every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head was shaven. For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair, or shave her head, let her cover her head, for a man ought to not cover his head since he has the image and glory of God. But women is the glory of man. Verse eight, for man was not made from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for a man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman, for as a woman was made for man, so man is now born of woman and to all things are from God, judge for yourselves, is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head and covered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair's given to her for a covering? If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

Travis Albritton: 19:41

Wonderful. So a nice meaty passage of lots of things that are very confusing, and absolutely so what is Paul getting out here?

Jeanie Shaw: 19:49

As we look into Paul's letter to Corinth realizing we don't know all that's going on in the church, sparking Paul's corrections, we can only gather the most likely meanings This isn't easy to understand. And to be honest, I'm sure I don't fully understand it. And maybe Peter had this in mind in the letter he wrote about 10 years after Paul Penn First Corinthians when he said in Second Peter 315 some things Paul writes are difficult to understand. I would amen that. But sandwiched in between a discussion of eating food sacrificed to idols, and then elitism and excessiveness during the Lord's Supper, we have this curious situation mentioned and chapter 11. Are you going to the chapter before in chapter 10, Paul tells the Christians that if they eat at someone's house, that person tells them the meat was sacrificed to idols not to eat it, not because it was wrong for them to eat it, but for the sake of the other person's conscience. You know, the concept of eating meat sacrificed idols, really is pretty foreign to our American culture. And so is the discussion of hair length or hair coverings and worship in chapter 11. There's something that just it's really hard to relate to. And so the challenge I like to ask and try to think about and understand is, what was Paul seeking to accomplish here? What problem? Is he addressing you? Was it a hierarchy issue? Was it a unity issue? Was it an honor and shame issue? Was it a disorder in the church issue? Was there a trend where women were cutting their hair for a reason or throwing off or refusing to be veiled? So let's dive in a little bit to First Corinthians 11. And honestly, scholars are divided on whether the headcovering disgust is a veil, because certainly women did wear them in this culture and other scholars believe because of the context that the covering under discussion is here. And we have historical evidence on both both pieces. You know, historical evidence tells us that veils were of different types for single and married women, and they had different purposes, but lack of veiling was associated with loose morality, and usually prostitution. And honestly, veils for women protected them from cultural disgrace and sexual aggression. And because of the meaning for veils, a married woman without a veil really would be dishonouring, or shaming her husband. And remember, it is a shame and honor culture. And so that makes these issues deeply important. And you know, we should keep this in mind. I do have a whole chapter on veils and their meanings in my book. So you can look at that if you want to want to read more on that. But we can also discern from historical documents that hair was often considered a central part of a woman's anatomy. Women didn't let down their hair in public. And so even when we think back to Mary, wiping Jesus feet with her tears, and drying them with her hair, probably raised quite the eyebrows. And one of the most difficult of honestly, several difficult concepts in First Corinthians 11 is discerning the meaning of head and authority on the head, or what's been called headship. And we'll talk about that more later. But we surmise that this dilemma concerned a practice in the public worship assembly, because Paul discusses praying and prophesying, and he continues with directives about the Lord's Supper. And I might just throw in here that our cultural practice today of observing the Lord's Supper is quite different than it was in Corinth, in that it was a meal. And even just looking at this, it's one example of a way I realized I had, for so many years practice selective literalism, I'd been concerned about the way a woman spoke while ignoring another Paul's concerns in the same chapter, the attitude of division, lack of concern for the hungry with the Lord's Supper, and a failure to discern one's own harboring of judgmental attitudes. Are we as concerned about following this pattern for the Lord's Supper as a full fledged meal? And making sure we don't practice elitism or a lack of concern for the poor, the hungry, as whether men and women are praying and prophesied in an appropriate manner? Why do we easily discount one and not the other? And this just goes back to ways that I think we get used to interpreting an important thing to note that this passage of Scripture assumes that both men and women were praying and prophesying in the assembly. And certainly prophesying can mean various things. Sometimes as an Amos 716. It came as a sermon, Prophet spoke the word of God to the people of God. And first Corinthians 14 mentions words of encouragement or exhortation. But this portion of Paul's letter deals with some issue or problem in the church concerning praying and prophesying for both men and women. Some sort of honor and shame seems to be involved, as it's mentioned concerning men who cover their heads dishonouring their head, and women were prophesying and praying without proper propriety, considers it disgraceful. You may be more was mentioned in the letter or the letters were missing, which Paul refers to in chapter seven. And that's something again to consider. But there's a couple of things to mention in First Corinthians 11, as well, the translation in verse three, the head of the woman is man is likely more accurately translated. And many footnotes in your Bible will tell you, this husband and wife instead of man and woman, the head of the wife is the husband, this would be significant in this, if this refers to veils, and married women weren't wearing them, which would in that culture, likely have brought shame and dishonor to them and to their husbands. But this passage is often been used, and many of our circles that teach that men are over women. And this isn't the context of the Scripture, even if there is some authority involved. It would be in the context of husbands and wives. But more on that when we get to Ephesians five. And we often assume from this chapter, that the custom kind of concept of head shaped must be evident in public worship as it was with the veil, or with hair length. And if we interpret in a more literal way, then long hair and short hair are the determining factors. A woman with long hair is fine to prophesy, or a woman with a head covering is fine to prophesy and pray in the assembly. And a man with short hair is fine to pray and prophesy in the assembly. But is this really what Paul is seeking to communicate? Paul does say, if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off, or her head shape, then she should cover her head. And so I think the question for us is, is it a disgrace for women to have short hair? If a woman shaves her head because it's balding, or because she's in unison with a friend who has lost her hair from chemo? Is that disgraceful today? Or is it committed today? Is it dishonouring for men to have long hair today? Again, in a shame, honor culture, some of these things communicated differently than they do today. But hair length certainly doesn't seem to be the ultimate purpose of the discussion. But something was causing division and problems. And we might not fully know that. But under discussion in the chapter is that sense headcoverings whether veils or hair, were a sign of authority in the public assembly, as the women prayed and prophesied. Do women need a sign of authority today in the assembly? And what even is that? Is it a woman's husband standing beside her as authority? Is it a pulpit? Yo, some of these things think real, you know, is this really what's being communicated? If it refers to husband and wife? What about a single woman praying and prophesying? And what does Paul mean by authority, and chapter 11 and verse 10, it literally says the woman ought to have authority over upon physical head. Paul uses the word cover when he refers to men and authority. When in authority when he refers to women, the exact phrase has authority has often been interpreted in the passive sense. In other words, while wearing a covering, a woman wears the sign of her husband's authority, or honors the authority of her husband, or perhaps men in the assembly, if one doesn't take them most likely usage of the translation of husband and wife. With this understanding, a woman can pray and prophesy as long as she has a sign of authority on her head. However, literally, the Greek text is not passive, and the word sign is not in the Greek text. The active voice reads that a woman possesses or has authority on her over her own head. With this interpretation, it's not the husband's authority that gives woman the privilege of using her gifts such as prophesied, but the authority that belongs to her through the cultural mores of her day and the gifts given her by God, when covered, she has authority over her own head and authority from God, not male authority. Now, personally, I'm not a Greek scholar, and I am relying on studies of those who do know the language well, but interesting, Paul uses the same phrase in First Corinthians nine, speaking of people exercising their privileges, particularly the apostles and chapter nine, four through six, he uses it three times referring to rights of the apostles, do we not have the right to food and drink the right to take a wife, the right to not work for a living? And this is the same phrase used in chapter 11 and verse 10. Is it for this reason a woman ought to have authority over her own head or have a right to pray and prophesy in the assembly. As the apostle of had rights. Paul Express women have that right to pray and prophesy. You our understanding of this meaning is key to how we interpret the passage. If a woman has her own authority from God, then she has that authority to pray and prophesied not one given her from her husband or a man but was showing honor and the husband's authority as she was veiled. As she did so, you this isn't the way I understood this in all my years in the church. And when learning this I've had to examine, re examine and pray because it's different than how I was raised and taught, and how I taught for many years. It's hard to take in, you know, things that oh my goodness, I never knew the hat. I never saw that. I never considered that. And I do realize there are many, and various ways that this is interpreted, and I believe we've got to pray, study, examine our own presuppositions, as we study these text. You in First Corinthians 14, three and 31, and we'll get to that later. But we learned that prophets edify, encourage and exhort. And I know for me for many years, I was so very careful and instructive to have as far as women speaking to speak only in the first person to ensure I didn't step over the line. And it is very, I desire deeply to be respectful in my words, and my attitudes. And while this examination of Scripture has been both deeply challenging, it's also been deeply encouraging. And I'm eager to keep learning. You Another important thing to remember concerning women prophesied is Pentecost, Peter used Joel's prophecy regarding the outpouring of God's Spirit and Joel 228. And then repeated in Acts 216 through 17, I'll pour out my Spirit on all flesh, your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions, even on male and female slaves in those days, I will pour out my spirit. You and this seems consistent, also, the view we've been talking about with Paul's writings in chapter seven and four, where he assumes both men and women have authority over their own bodies. But in the marriage sexual relationship, he calls on both husband and wife to give over the authority that they have over their own bodies to their spouse. And this is a beautiful description of a willing giving of oneself for the sake of another, not focused on a right, someone has because they are an authority over the other. And then chapter 11, verses seven through 12. Looking back to our Genesis study, remembering that men and women were created an image of God. If we interpret this one way, we could surmise that women were not created to reflect God's glory, which we know from so many other scriptures is not the case. And then Paul then connects this reasoning with women and headcoverings. And the angels and because of the angels, and I'm thinking, Wait, what, what in the world? Is he talking about? What is verse 10 mean, because of the angels is for this reason that a woman ought to have a sign of authority over her head because the angels? Now my guest says, We will probably never know the answer to this in our lifetime. And we may even with all the, the thinking that scholars have done, we may all one day, hear from Paul, you kidding, that's not a goal, what I was talking about, I don't know, you know, there are several possibilities mentioned. One is because angels, you know, we're sittard present at the assemblies and and honoring them. Another explanation is, Ben, because there was there's mentioned of the NIF alights and thinking that there was when angels had actual sexual relations with human women, and, you know, maybe not attempting of this to happen again. There's also a thought because angels can there's a lot of ways words can be interpreted, but the word Angelo's also can mean messengers, and certainly during this time of Paul's writing to the church in Corinth, there were messengers known as the Wakanda. Most again, I thought, I put in my book, it sounds like a reptile somewhere, but but these were actual assigned messengers to come in incognito to these public assemblies, and, you know, really kind of report what's going on. It was a way to keep things in order so many times, you know, perhaps something could be shut down because of that, who knows. But it was always important to Paul, that the church shine is a bright light in the world because he wanted as many as possible to be saved as do we. And so perhaps, you want to do ensure that these messengers that came in did not see something that would cause them to go and report this is a group of unveiled women, a Loose Women, and it is very ungodly. So we don't really know. But after paws directives on how men and women are to pray in prophecy in the assembly, and what's often been interpreted to say that men must have authority in the assembly. Paul then says in verse 11, almost as if to contrast that conclusion, nevertheless, in the Lord. Nevertheless, it's a word that really can show contrast, like however. And he says, women, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman, for as a woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. We're the Corinthians forgetting they all came from God, what was the problem being addressed? Again, we're not really sure. This conclusion of woman coming from man and man warned from woman and everything coming from God, as well as the things we've discussed. More personally lean me more away from a hierarchal interpretation of this passage. The context of this passage seems to be concerned with cultural shame and honor and public speaking and the assembly with a reminder that we're interdependent of each other.

Travis Albritton: 36:02

And what I think you just touched on there is super key, because just a couple chapters, really First Corinthians nine, Paul is really laying out his whole mindset about why he's giving these directives in the first place, right, is that the way we interact with one another, and the way that we are a light in our community matters. And if there are things that we're doing, even if they're permissible things that are a stumbling block from people coming to know, Jesus, then those are things that we need to lay down and surrender, and be willing to not engage with, if it's going to hurt somebody else. So that's such a huge theme in First Corinthians. And so it totally makes sense. That that is also flavored throughout First Corinthians 11, that maybe there are things that in that time and place and culture were expected. And it would be really weird and counterproductive for them to say, you know what, we're just gonna throw this off. That That makes a lot, a lot of sense.

Jeanie Shaw: 37:03

And one of the things we said we'd mention is an again, that is debated is, it's debated by many scholars, what is the meaning of the word head, when it's used in the scriptures about women, scholars really are divided, of whether it means origin, or source, or whether it means has some kind of authority behind it. And most of the biblical Greek lexicons use it with, I think, all but twice, use it, where it's used with some meaning of authority.

Travis Albritton: 37:40

Greek lexicon is like a, like a Bible Dictionary, but for Greek words,

Jeanie Shaw: 37:44

yes, yes, it is. It's, it's Yes, it takes the Greek words and wonderful gives their meanings. So yes, thank you. You know, and, and looking at these, again, it has in Greek, about as many meanings as it does in English, because we can use head for a lot of different things. I'll just read you some, some different places where it's used, there are so many more, but it can kind of show the, the way it can be used differently, you know, if what we just read, if the origin of every man is Christ, the origin of wife is her husband, and the origin of Christ is God. You know, there can be different meanings. Again, it can be the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. And certainly, that can make much sense. But we also know the Father, the God the Son, and that woman was created from the side of man. So it can also be read, I think just as easily as source or origin. In chapter 11, and verse 12. It seems more cohesive to me with this, this particular understanding where it says so as a woman came from man, so also man is born a woman, but everything comes from God, because again, he's talking about birth here and where something comes from kind of the origin she used in First Corinthians 1221. I cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you nor again the cathar lay to the feet, I have no need of you. Well, I think that would be pretty clearly talking about a body part, not an origin or source or authority. Ephesians 415, rather, speaking to the truth in love, where to grow up in every way into him, who is the kuffar lay into Christ? Now is Jesus our authority? Absolutely. But the context of of this seems like it would really fit with origins well to grow up in every way into him who was the origin into Christ. Growing up stems from beginning place. But again, you can see it's difficult because it can be used either way. Ephesians 523, could be both ways. For the husband is the head with some kind of authority of the wife is Christ is the head authority of the church, his body in his himself, its Savior, or the husband is the origin of the wife is Christ as the origin of the church, his body and his himself its Savior. Again, we know that something so mashed because the husband and is not the savior of the wife. But that that's a hard one to know. It could be interpreted several ways. Colossians 118, he is the kafala of the body, the church, he is the beginning, the first form from the dead, and then everything he might be preeminent. That could be and he is the head as far as authority of the body, the church. Yes, true. But then it goes right on to say he's the beginning the firstborn, and that's where origin seems to fit more to me with the context, he is the origin of the body, that church, because the next sentence, Paul is actually talking about origin. He's the beginning, the first one from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. Seems like the second sentence is building on the first galoshes to 10 and you have been filled in Him who is the key fillet of all rule, and authority. You know, this, certainly the context is talking about rule and authority of Christ, and how were filled in him. And so certainly that can be the meaning, but could also be, and you have been filled in Him who is the origin of all rule and authority, because all order comes from God, who created order out of chaos, it's really hard to no clashes tonight teen and not holding fast to the Kahala from home, the whole body, nourished and knit together through his joints and ligament grows with the growth that is from God. You're not holding fast to the authority, from home of the ball whole body nourished and knit together through his joints and ligaments grows with a growth that is from God, or not holding fast to the origin or source, who the whole body, nourishing it together through its joints and ligaments grows with the growth that is from God. And again, that could be interpreted either way. But growth does have a beginning and an origin. But also Jesus has authority. Hebrews 1121, by faith, Jacob, when die, blessed each of his sons of Joseph's bowing and worship over the folly of his staff. Now, you know, there I don't think that head of his staff that could folly of his staff had authority. But it was the kind of beginning point of the staff, the head of his staff, so we could just see from that little sampling, that it's not so easy to interpret in the context, sometimes can be used both ways. So I think we have to give a lot of grace on that. And again, scholars for years can't, can't come to a conclusion on this. It's also difficult to do that. And I think we have to go to the principles we know are true of how we are to treat one another. And even just looking when Jesus having all authority, what did he do, he laid down his life and he gave it. So regardless of how we might see it and define it, it's all going to end up in a self sacrificing humility and love for each other.

Travis Albritton: 43:48

So just to kind of recap real quick. This idea of kephale head, as Jamie entioned is typically ranslated, are meant to, to say ne of two things, one is uthoritative, like we think of he head of a company. That oesn't mean the CEO is a more aluable human being than the erson working on the production ine. But they they have a ertain amount of authority in eing able to determine what's he best course of action, hat's the best path forward, ight? Because that is that is ind of a straw man argument hat is used to to paint isciples that hold that view in negative light of what you're ust trying to like, keep your humb down on women. And that's hy you're landing on this articular interpretation, which s totally not true and naccurate. And then the other ay is this idea of origin or ource like the head of a river, ight? There's a there's omewhere this river has riginated from, and we see the iver but we're pointing back owards its head or its source. nd Jeannie did a phenomenal job f walking through all these ifferent ways that could follow s translated in the New estament and these letters and ow Paul uses it in different ays. And here's the maddening hing. It might it probably does ot mean the same Thing onsistently over and over gain, we have to use context lues, we have to use literary ontext, we have to try and iece out what was his intent in sing this word in this way, hat makes the most sense, but hen also recognizing the way hat makes the most sense to us ight not have made the most ense to him or to his original eaders. And, and that can be ery maddening. So headship is efinitely the big conversation round First Corinthians 11. hat's the big takeaway that we ypically have when it comes to omen's roles in the public ssembly, we look at first orinthians 11. And that kind of nforms some of our church ractices like the idea of the toic man standing in the ackground. So if the woman haring says something that ounds a little too assertive, hat at least she's, you know, orrowing authority from the man tanding behind her. Which, gain, is always been very nteresting, because who gave im authority? Right? Where does uthority come from? Is it nherent in the fact that you're person to a certain extent ver creation? We see that in enesis, right. But over one nother, that's definitely more f a Genesis three fallen world heme than in Genesis two theme. o what are we to make of that? oes man have authority simply ecause he has a Y chromosome? e lucked out in the genetic ottery? Or is there something lse at play? If you're rustrated by the lack of larity, Welcome to the world of iblical scholarship. And the onversation has been happening or hundreds of years, that e're pretty late to the party n as as a denomination and as a ovement?

Jeanie Shaw: 46:35

Yeah, I mean, certainly, authority is not a bad word. You know, there is certainly authority in the scriptures. And yeah, there really can't be any kind of order without some kind of authority. And you biblically, certainly, it seems clear that elders have authoritative role in the church. And you mentioned, you know, the example I'd mentioned of man stoically standing behind, you know, it's it's very interesting, you know, if one of the elders asked me to speak the congregation, or was fine that I did, you know, I could say, No, I won't do that. Because I'm, I'm under authority, when he's just asking me to do it, you know. So it's kind of interesting. And I think that's where the questions arise, you know, is that we do hold to the fact that in the public assembly, there is an authority, is it enough that for instance, and elder in the order of worship just to soak, okay, this woman is doing this part of the service? Or is teaching this or is teaching this class, the church leadership knows about it is in full agreement with it, and there doesn't have to be anybody standing there or any visible sign? Because it's just, it's, it's no, no, you know, if she were to, if a woman were to get up and on, authorize, so to speak, and start taking over, and that's where we'll get into First Timothy two, that's another thing altogether. But it's, I don't think that would be right if a man got up and did that either. So again, we'll do some more cultural things when we get to Timothy as well. But again, these are, I don't take these lightly, because this is the word of God we're dealing with. I want I don't want to mess up with that. I want to get it right. But I asked myself a times is this what Paul is really? Is he wanting us to get this practice just right, the same as it was here in this or is there something bigger? That he's really pointing to? Is that the way we are treating each other? Is that the respect we have for each other? Is that the Unity that's there? Is it again, respect whether it's the part of women respecting authority, which, with the new woman, that was a big problem? There was a disrespect? I don't think we know the answer to all these questions. I just don't think we know them all. And I wish it was clear. And I don't really understand why it's not. But perhaps Paul is wanting us to look at the transcending principles that are of utmost importance that are most important when some of these things of practice are not real clear. Again, if we're going to take it literally, then we do need to go into the worship service. And there's no men bonds for men. No braids for women, no gold. Men do need to be lifting their hands when they pray, and not be angry. So again, this is where the we've got to really think through are we picking and choosing what we're holding to? Or is there something bigger?

Travis Albritton: 50:09

One that comes back to the hermeneutics conversation we had a couple of weeks ago, right? So if you're coming into this asking the question, What did a church service look like in the church of Corinth, at least as it should have been happening? And we must do that and hold to it in the same with the same rigidity and commitment that temple worship was done in the Old Covenant? Or is it more of a theological hermeneutic? Is that a better tact to understand what is the heart of God here, and what is called trying to communicate about who God is, and how we should imitate that with one another. Or perhaps this is a place where that trajectory hermeneutic makes sense where we're Paul is pointing us towards something in the future. And we're trying to trace the path of this arrow that he's cutting through the Scriptures, starting back in Genesis in creation, moving through the problems of the church in Corinth, towards what the kingdom of God needs to look like on earth. And which one of those you use? Will color the answer that you come up with? Absolutely. And so so it's just very, it's very helpful to just recognize that, because then we can, like we talked about, be aware of the blind spots that we can have when we have those different approaches. Now, there are some other things that some other observations we can make, that I think can be helpful and try to figure out well, what, what would be permissible, acceptable, or, you know, encouraged practices within the public assembly? And I think the first one, and this is something that, to my knowledge most people agree about, is in verse five. Paul says, Every woman who prays or prophesies with their head uncovered dishonor, dishonor your head. There's an assumption here that women are praying and prophesying in the public assembly. Now there's some issues with how they're doing it. But that is not disputed. It's it's not, you can't do these things because of this headship. It's the manner in which you do these things needs to change.

Jeanie Shaw: 52:09

Absolutely, yes, I think that's a very important point to bring out because they were praying and prophesying in the public assembly, you know, that can be forgotten

Travis Albritton: 52:20

sometimes. Now, a word that we don't throw around very often is prophecy. I think growing up in the ICOC. And even as a disciple, I always thought is kind of like this fortune teller idea of, you know, God speaks to you in a dream and tells you about something that's going to happen. So you go and tell everyone else, this is what's going to happen. And we do see some of that in the Old Testament. So how should we interpret this word prophecy? Or the idea that women are prophets in the New Testament church? What what would that entail to prophecy in a public assembly?

Jeanie Shaw: 52:53

I think prophecy is often talked about is speaking the message of God, witnessing for him and to him. So we know that Anna is an older widow was prophesied in the temple, continually I doubt that she was just there alone all the time. I don't know what all that means. We know that the lips daughters prophesied, that was something that was known. It happened in the temple in public places, you know, we don't use this word a lot. And, you know, I it's much more than just the, the foretelling of the future that some of that was part of some of prophecy in the Old Testament, for sure. But there were prophets of God who spoke the words of God to people. And so again, not coming up with, you know, this is I'm speaking what God is saying here.

Travis Albritton: 53:52

One thing that I think is something we can say pretty definitively other than the fact that women did prophecy is that there isn't any indication that they had to like hedge the things that they were saying, to make them palatable, because they were women. It seems like Paul is giving not permission, but really encouraging men and women equally to share words of instruction, encouragement, the message that they have been given. And there doesn't seem to be any condemnation of that, apart from this headship interaction that we're pulling apart. And so if we're looking at a potential church practice, then that would mean like if you invite a woman onto stage, to to share a communion message or welcome or to do anything like that, that it might not be the case that we need a man standing there in case she says something definitive from a scripture. Yes, that if we actually look at how Paul kind of lays out the importance of each of these things, prophecy actually comes above teaching, as far as weightiness and how seriously we should take it. And so so it's certainly not a small thing. To say women are encouraged to prophesy in the public assembly. And even though that's not a word that we use, often, our contexts would certainly say, it should not be condemned that women should be silenced, and not allowed to speak to the assembly. Part of the other complication with this is the way that they did church is very different than the way that we do, right. And this is gonna be something we're gonna talk about towards the end, when we get to practical application, it's like they didn't have auditorium seating, they didn't have one person elevated behind a podium, that we attribute a lot of authority to, as a part of their normal public worship, it was much more hellstrip style. And so so even the posture of how people are seated and displayed, we give cultural weight to and so that's not something that we can discount or ignore. And then the other thing that I've always thought is interesting, an interesting observation is that the medium that is used to communicate something has authority or not. So if a woman goes up and shares what she's learned in her quiet time, from the stage, saying, This is what the scripture means this is what it means for us. This is what it means to follow Jesus, you know, that could very well be seen and has been interpreted in the past is having authority over domineering over, but if that same woman wrote it as a blog post, or put it in a book, and a man read, it's those exact same words that would not be seen as authoritative. And so it, I'm not saying these things to like, cast out and be like, well, we should just question everything, but just just to observe some practices that we have, that if we think them all the way through, we might need to reassess some of them and make sure that we're coming from a strong theological foundation. And we're not just adopting things that have been passed down to us. Not that that's a bad thing. Paul even says, I'm really glad that you accepted these traditions I passed down to you, in the beginning of this passage we read, but that doesn't necessarily mean we need to embrace them wholeheartedly. exactly the way they've been given to us without having some additional critical thought.

Jeanie Shaw: 57:05

Yeah, you know, it's it's interesting, there was a woman I think her name was Selena home, and I'll have to double check if that's the right one, but and restoration history in 1800s, she was asking that question, because she was prophesied, she was in a her a different setting. She was very gifted in that area, and people would come to listen, and then there was a point when, you know, was told her she couldn't do that anymore. And she said, so what precisely is the number that I have to get to to where then it becomes a public assembly versus private. And that was interesting just to hear that response and kind of brought Is this really the issue that we're talking about? a wheelchair, this has been super encouraging to me. Over the past few months, I've had invitations from numerous churches to do teaching days. And as the first time I'd ever taught, and group of men and women, it's probably been about six or seven times now doing that, and it's been very natural. And there's been great feedback. And you know, again, I strive to be respectful. But and I don't want to say anything, I don't have something to say. But that is a big change. From where, you know, we we were, and there have been a number of changes going on, and really grateful for that. I really am.

Travis Albritton: 58:40

Amen. Amen to that. Well, I'm glad that you get to come and share with us. I know that we're both very grateful for that. Yeah. So wrapping up here. One other thing that I know is, is an important thing for us to discuss is towards the end of this, Paul will make some pretty definitive statements. Very clear, it seems commands with a lot of weight behind them. Which is very confusing, because when we actually step back and think about it, is that really, like, Is that really true? So I'm talking about verse 13, through verse 16. I'll just read this again. Because it's been a while since we read it. judge for yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him. But if a woman has long hair, it is her glory, for long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice, nor do the churches of God. So okay, timeout. So, the very nature of things, if we're going to take this, as it is written, is Paul saying, in nature, haven't you observed that women have long hair and men have short hair? Isn't that the natural thing that you've observed? And I mean, the obvious answer is Well, yeah, if you go get your hair cut consistently as a man, you go and have someone cut it off. Otherwise, we got a bunch of Samson's running around with lots of long hair. So it doesn't seem like that natural observation comes by natural means. And then he says, basically, if you want to argue this point, there is no other practice. This is it. This is not just what I'm telling you to do. This is what is observed across the board period in all the churches. So are you about that?

Jeanie Shaw: 1:00:31

Yeah, I'm thinking maybe that was in that other letter. That we don't have? Because honestly, I really, you know, this is very confusing. I'm not quite sure. The point Paul is trying to make here. If we are taking this literally, then women who have short hair, you would not be reflecting what is natural, you know, what does that mean? Then if the you look better with short hair, or you are undergoing chemo, and you don't have any hair? I don't think we know what this means. I think we're missing some, some pieces of the puzzle, because I've never heard an explanation that is satisfying. You know, I've heard some people say, use this to say, yes, women are supposed to have long hair. And men are supposed to get haircuts. Is that really?

Travis Albritton: 1:01:26

How long is long enough? Yeah, exactly. What does that mean?

Corina Espejo: 1:01:30

Yeah, it seems super far off from the overarching theme of Jesus. It's like, Huh, like, yeah, it seems odd.

Travis Albritton: 1:01:37

Yeah, most Bible scholars attribute this to Paul finding ways to emphasize the points that were made previously, which is sometimes maddening part of his rhetorical style, where he'll appeal to things that are eternal, for situations that are temporary, or circumstantial, or cultural. And we just got to take that on board is Yeah, sometimes Paul is not being he's not speaking in the direct fashion that we would typically hope that he would. And he's pulling all these different literary elements together to communicate something that would make sense to the Corinthians. That to us, is like reading Greek, quite literally. So we've covered a lot of ground Corina, do you want to take an attempt at assembling some practical takeaways, some things that we've learned, that we can build on as we continue to move through the rest of Paul's writings?

Corina Espejo: 1:02:30

I can I can give it a try, you'll probably have to fill in some gaps. Yeah, I think for me, the first takeaway is, as we read particularly this kind of a passage where it seems like we're missing some context. Number one, it sounds like just be very careful, like for me, my my nature say, Okay, well, what is the modern day equivalent of the veil? Like, what does that mean? And we may not know, and it's okay to kind of move on from that. And stick to the theme, the overarching themes that we do know about this, this text about the letter as a whole. There are other things that we can gather, for example, again, we do need each other and whether we're talking about authority, or order, at the end of the day, it seems like Paul wants to make sure we don't forget that you know, this this term, all things are from God, that not only do we need each other, but we need God and a lot of our unity and practices and the way that we do things, it's got to come back to that heart. For me, those are my two major takeaways. I'm sure there's so many others, and it's hard when you know, you have a text where you're not going to know what would the modern day and I think even to about the long hair, and how difficult that's going to be nowadays for even like Asians where you know, the top knot wasn't just a fashion statement, it might be a symbol of honor and authority within a man for a household or Maori people, right, and Pacific Islanders. And I think, what do they do with that we don't have to know because at the end of the day, we were not gonna know some of these really difficult contexts. So be patient, be patient with the text. And don't be so quick to pull from prescriptive practices within the scriptures. But stay true to the theme stay true to the heart of God,

Travis Albritton: 1:04:11

I think that's spot on. And to contextualize this for our own public worship services, or on Sunday services where you know, we have three songs and a welcome and then a slow song message. And it's not that I've never been to a service before. It's it's very clear that men and women were both very active in these early public assemblies. In the early church, there was the expectation that was the norm. Okay, and so that should continue to be the norm. It should continue to be the norm that men and women are singing together, they're encouraging one another. They are lifting each other up, they're sharing the things that God has given them to share. But doing it appropriately with respect and humility, and not in a domineering fashion. And the other thing to take on board too is we should be very careful about putting too many of our eggs in this basket. of this is what First Corinthians 11 says so therefore, this is our practice, we can certainly take a lot of clues from First Corinthians 11. It's a very important passage we tried to understand answering this question biblically. But let's be very humble, and very cautious about over emphasizing flavors of interpretations of certain words. and allowing that to start dictating what we do, especially when those practices go directly against what we see modeled in Jesus. And in what we know, our posture should be as disciples of mutual submission of love and kindness, and compassion for one another, and not seeking to dominate one another. One of the stories that I think is a really good kind of bow tie for this whole conversation is as Jesus is going to the cross, and the apostles are arguing about who is the best, who is the greatest who is who is the leader of the apostles. And Jesus is like, Guys, you've totally missed the mark here. Don't be like the world that says the person with the most power is the most important. Make sure that you're focused on serving one another. That's what matters. That's what a true leader is. Let's make sure that any church practices we adopt is consistent with that heart. And that's all I got.

Jeanie Shaw: 1:06:30

That's a great wrap up.

Travis Albritton: 1:06:31

I like that awesome. So again, our call to action if you haven't yet, make sure you sign up for our newsletter. Go to women church, podcast calm, and we'll give you a study guides for these passages. And these episodes, you can go deeper in your own Bible study. We'll let you know about new episodes as they come out, and any future announcements we need to make or things that we're doing in the future. We'll make sure you tune back in next week. We're going to continue our study of First Corinthians 14 as we continue to move forward and learn more about what Paul has to offer when it comes to answering the question. How do women and men worship and serve together in the kingdom of God