Wives and Daughters Praying

If a Christian man is to be the spiritual leader of his household (Eph. 5:22-24; 6:4), what about others in the family (incl. females) leading prayers at mealtime, bedtime, or in family devotionals?

With biblical directives concerning male spiritual leadership understood,¹ it might be helpful to note the distinction between corporate worship (e.g., 1 Cor. 14:26), worship training (e.g., Luke 11:1-4), and “worship” activities outside the corporate assembly (e.g., Acts 27:35). There are certain things regarded as unacceptable in a mixed worship assembly yet appropriate outside the assembly, particularly in the home (e.g.,  1 Cor. 11:22; 14:35). 

Training our children in the way of the Lord is a long-established divinely-enjoined duty (Deut. 6:5-7; Prov. 22:6; Eph. 6:1-4).²  Christian women are not exempt from being “teachers of good things” (Tit. 2:3) and engaging “in supplications and prayers night and day” (1 Tim. 5:5). In order for a mother’s children to “rise up and call her blessed” (Prov. 31:8), it would seem they need to witness her engaged in spiritual activities. 

While the Bible lays out general guidelines, it does not reveal specifics about how to train children for spiritual service. They learn by observation, instruction, and doing. Here is where we start getting into matters of personal judgment. Conservative Christians would object to a woman taking leadership in a corporate worship assembly, but in the home each family must decide how to implement biblical principles without neglecting or violating the Lord’s expectations.

In my family, I lead the prayers when we pray together. Everyone understands my leadership role. However, when my girls were little and wanted to say a prayer before a meal or at bedtime, we allowed them to talk to God as an innocent child and as part of their spiritual training, then I would follow with a prayer on behalf of the family. Not everyone would agree with this (some stricter, others more lenient), but I consider it a judgment call each family has to make. I would not be comfortable with a woman leading a family prayer instead of her husband when he is present, although this seems different than a husband and wife praying together. 

Obviously we don’t want to send the wrong message or leave the wrong impression, but neither do we want to establish regulations for God that he has not dictated. This is one of those areas where we genuinely seek to be pleasing to God and try to avoid unnecessary extremes. 

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ 1 Cor. 11:3; 14:33-35; Eph. 5:22–6:4; Col. 3:18-21; 1 Tim. 2:8-15. See K. L. Moore, “A Woman’s Service in the Church,” Moore Perspective (27 December 2014), <Link>.

     2 See K. L. Moore, “Train Up a Child,” Moore Perspective (7 Oct. 2015), <Link>.

Related Posts: The Bible's Radical View on Women, Questions Concerning the Role of Women, Jesus Couldn't Be a Priest 

 

Image credit: https://www.dreamstime.com/illustration/family-prayer.html

May We Pray to Jesus? Should We Pray to Jesus?

     Historically very sincere and intelligent Christians have come down on either side of these questions with varying degrees of dogmatism. Our purpose is to examine the most commonly asserted arguments both for and against, and carefully consider what is and what is not supported by the evidence.¹

THE UNDISPUTED NEW TESTAMENT MODEL FOR PRAYING:

     Prayer in relation to the Triune Godhead: (a) addressed to God the Father (Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2; John 15:16; 16:23; Eph. 1:3; 3:14; 5:20; Col. 1:3; 3:17; Jas. 1:5); (b) in the name of Jesus (Eph. 5:20; Col. 3:17; cf. John 14:6, 13, 14; 15:16; 16:23, 24, 26; 1 Tim. 2:5; 1 Pet. 2:5);² (c) the Spirit makes intercession (Rom. 8:26-27).

     The Example of Jesus: addressed his prayers to the Father (Matt. 11:25-26; 26:39-44; 27:46; Luke 10:21; 23:34, 46; John 11:41; 12:28; 14:16; 17:1, 5, 21, 24, 25; cf. Heb. 5:7). Obviously he would not have prayed to himself. But neither did he pray to the Holy Spirit. The Instructions of Jesus: taught others to pray to the Father (Matt. 6:6, 8, 9; 7:11; Luke 11:2, 13; 18:7, 13; John 15:16; 16:23).³

THE JOHN 14–16 PASSAGES:⁴

     Contextually Jesus is speaking directly to his immediate apostles, and not everything he says or promises on this occasion is universally applicable (e.g. 13:14; 14:25-26; 16:13). John 14:13-14 says, “And whatever you ask in my name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask [me?] anything in my name, I will do it.” There is a textual variant in v. 14, and some manuscripts include the word “me” and others do not. While the UBS Greek NT committee gives its inclusion a “B” rating, a definitive case about praying cannot be made based on whether or not the word was in the original. For inclusion of the word “me,” see ESV, NASB, NCV, NET, NIV, NLT, NRSV, HCSB. For omission of the word “me,” see ASV, KJV, MEV, NKJV, NLV, RSV, TLB, YLT.

     Were the disciples to ask the Father in the name of Jesus, or ask Jesus in the name of Jesus? If they were to ask Jesus, was this to be a prayer to him after his ascension, or a face-to-face request prior to his ascension? The only certainty here is that Jesus is involved in the response – in conjunction with the Father (15:16) and the Spirit (16:13) – irrespective of the one to whom the request is directed.

     In John 15:16 we read, “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you.” John 16:23-24 states further, “And in that day you will ask me nothing. Most assuredly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have asked nothing in my name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full.” The expression “in that day” refers to Christ’s impending resurrection (vv. 16-22). The apostles had become so reliant on Jesus, he now instructs them to direct their petitions to the Father in his name.

     John 16:26 says, “In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you.” Again, “in that day” is a reference to Christ’s forthcoming resurrection (vv. 16-23). Before “that day” Christ does pray for them (17:1-26), and after “that day” Christ continues to intercede (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1). It is difficult to find any clear modification of the New Testament model for praying in these passages.

RELEVANT TEXTS BEYOND THE GOSPELS:

     In 1 Timothy 1:12 Paul writes, “And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry.” If the apostle had said, “I thank Ananias for having taught me the gospel,” would it ever be mentioned in a discussion about praying? Is Paul expressing internal gratitude or voicing an actual prayer? Does this written statement provide sufficient proof that the well-established model for praying in the New Testament should be altered?

     In 1 Timothy 2:5 we read, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In prayer do we communicate to Jesus or through Jesus? Either way, is Jesus on the receiving end? While Jesus, as mediator, grants us access to God (Heb. 4:16; 10:19), should we then be content to simply direct our prayers to him instead of to the Father?

     Note 1 Thess. 3:11, “Now may our God and Father himself, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way to you”; and 2 Thess. 2:16-17, “Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and our God and Father, who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace, comfort your hearts and establish you in every good word and work.” Although these passages are sometimes labeled “prayers,” they are actually recorded statements expressing the collective desire of Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy for divine providence. Do these affirmations provide sufficient proof that the well-established model for praying in the New Testament should be altered?

     In Revelation 5:8-10 the Bible says, “the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying: ‘You are worthy …’” In this literary sea of metaphors, “the prayers of the saints” are brought before the Lamb; thus praying to Jesus could be inferred. Nevertheless, unless clear teaching occurs elsewhere in scripture, should we be quick to embrace a doctrine or practice that is only or primarily found in such a highly symbolic narrative? In 8:1-4, “the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel’s hand.” What literal doctrine or practice on earth are we willing to base on this symbolic text?

OTHER RELEVANT TEXTS AND OBSERVATIONS:

     What about the prayers addressed to “the Lord” (Matt. 9:38; Acts 1:24; 2 Cor. 12:8; cf. Eph. 5:18-19; Col. 3:16)? Is the title “Lord” in these passages applicable to Jesus (Acts 1:6, 21; 2:36; etc.) or to God [the Father] (Acts 2:20, 25, 39; 4:24; etc.) or to both (Acts 2:34; etc.) or to the Spirit (2 Cor. 3:17-18) or to all three? Is the Aramaic expression maranatha in 1 Corinthians 16:22 an exclamatory “prayer” or an emphatic “assertion”? Grammatically it could be either marana-tha, meaning “O Lord come,” or maran-atha, meaning “Our Lord has come.” Whichever position one wishes to take, scholarly support can be found.

     What about conversations within a vision? In Acts 7:59-60 we read, “And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on [God] and saying, ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.’ Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not charge them with this sin.’ And when he had said this, he fell asleep.” Since Stephen actually saw Jesus (v. 55) and then spoke to him (vv. 59-60), would this be comparable to someone conversing with Jesus while he was on earth? Does this establish a precedent for praying to Jesus in normal circumstances?

     In Acts 9:10-16; 22:17-21 Ananias and Paul speak to the Lord and are spoken to by the Lord. Both of these conversations took place during a supernatural visionary experience. Do they provide a pattern for praying under normal circumstances? Revelation 22:20 says, “… Even so, come, Lord Jesus!” The revelation to John is visionary (1:10; 4:1-2; 9:17), in the context of which he also speaks to a heavenly “elder” (7:13-14) and a “mighty angel” (10:9). Does the unusual circumstance of a dialogue within a heavenly vision establish a precedent for normal prayer on earth?

     Jesus is deity (John 1:1; 10:30; 20:28) and is therefore worthy of worship (Matt. 2:2, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9, 17; Mark 5:6, 22; Luke 8:41; 24:52; John 9:38; Heb. 1:6; Rev. 5:8-14; cf. John 5:23). While this impressive collation of scripture references seems to provide a powerful testimony about worshiping Jesus (inclusive of prayer?), we need to be careful about assuming that all of these accounts of “worship” necessarily involved a recognition or understanding of Christ’s divine nature. After all, it took the Lord’s own apostles quite some time to figure this out (John 20:28). If simply paying homage or earnest respect was the intent of those who did not yet comprehend the deity of Christ (e.g. Mark 5:22; 7:25), not all of these examples convey what many have assumed. Worship that is insincere (Mark 5:6; 15:19), or blindly offered in ignorance (Acts 10:25; 14:18; 17:23), or misdirected (Matt. 15:8-9), is not the same as properly acknowledging and venerating deity.

     More importantly, we must not be imbalanced (and therefore unbiblical) in our perception of Christ. Is he divine or is he human? Jesus Christ is fully divine (John 1:1; 20:28), and he is also fully human (John 1:14; Heb. 2:9-18; 5:7; 10:5, 20). To exclusively or primarily emphasize one to the virtual exclusion of the other is not biblical (cf. 1 John 4:2-3; 2 John 7). After his resurrection and ascension, and in view of the coming judgment, Jesus has not ceased being a “man” (Luke 24:39; Acts 17:31). At the end of time, the Father-Son relationship remains intact, all “to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:9-11), while Jesus forever remains subject to the Father (1 Cor. 15:23-28). The affirmation in 1 Timothy 2:5 is, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

     While Jesus is certainly worthy of worship due to his inherent divinity (Rev. 5:8-14), there is still a clear biblical distinction between God the Father and God the Son, and Christ’s brotherhood with humanity must not be ignored (Heb. 2:11-18). We should honor Jesus’ repeated and consistent emphasis on exalting the heavenly Father in view of his own subordination (John 4:34; 5:19, 30; 6:38; 7:18; 8:29; 14:13, 28; et al.). Accordingly, biblical instruction regarding prayer (to the Father in Jesus’ name) remains unchanged.  

CONCLUSION:

     In my humble opinion the controversy and division over this issue is most regrettable. It appears that many on both sides have expressed certainty without sufficient biblical grounds, and at times have even grasped at straws to construct a seemingly definitive (sometimes emotive) case from the unprovable. While I am fairly confident in my own understanding, I hesitate to be dogmatic for the following reasons. First, the deep respect I have for good brethren with whom I disagree, and the well-reasoned arguments they present. Second, my awareness of my own limitations and fallibilities. Finally, and most importantly, much of the information is just not as clear and straightforward as I would prefer.

     While there are some New Testament passages that seem to suggest praying to Jesus, the overwhelming weight of biblical evidence unquestionably affirms praying to the Father in Jesus’ name. May we pray to Jesus? Perhaps. Should we pray to Jesus? Probably not. Should we publicly pray to Jesus in our church assemblies with brethren who are sensitive to this matter? No.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ For reasons in favor of praying to Jesus, see James L. Gardner, “Should We Pray to Jesus?” in The Patience of Hope: First and Last Things in Thessalonians. Ed. David L. Lipe. Henderson, TN: FHU, 2014: 384-89; also Wayne Jackson, “May a Christian Address Christ in Praise or Prayer?” <https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1024-may-a-christian-address-christ-in-praise-or-prayer>. For reasons against praying to Jesus, see Gary Workman, “Jesus and Prayer,” in The Person and Life of Christ. Ed. Eddie Whitten. Bedford, TX: Brown Trail Church of Christ, 1983: 115-30; also Robert R. Taylor, Jr., “Shall We Pray to Jesus?” Taylor Publications, 2011. What about the testimony of ancient ecclesiastical writers? In support of praying to Jesus, bro. Jackson cites Joseph Bingham (Dictionary of Christian Antiquities 1:576ff.), who “introduces passage after passage from the early ‘church fathers’ which demonstrate that the primitive church unhesitatingly offered worship to Christ, in both hymns and prayers.” Against praying to Jesus, bro. Workman cites Everett Ferguson (Early Christians Speak 143-44), concluding: “A perusal of history reveals that uninspired writers of the early centuries did not think it was proper to pray to Jesus” (116).

     ² Further on the significance of “the name of Jesus,” see John 1:12; 2:23; 3:18; (15:21); 20:31; also John 14:26. Jesus himself operated in “the name of the Father” (John 5:43; 10:25; [12:13]; 17:6, 11, 12, 26).

     ³ While the “model prayer” is addressed to the Father, some would point out that it is a brief but not comprehensive model; additional passages (e.g. Jas. 5:14) add other details.

     ⁴ Unless otherwise noted, all scripture quotations are from the NKJV with added words and/or textual variants [in square brackets], emphasis added with bold type, and capital letters modified to lower case when the translation does not require capitalization.

Related Posts: Tempted As We Are, God Answers Prayer

Related Articles: Jason Hardin's When We Pray in Jesus' Name

Image credit: http://blogs.nsb.org/jonathanalexander/files/2014/01/praying-hands.jpg

God Answers Prayer

     From 1 John 5:14-15 the Christian learns at least four things about prayer: (1) God hears my prayers; (2) he answers my prayers; (3) this is something in which I can have “confidence”; and (4) the Lord's answers are according to his will, not mine.¹

     It was probably during the period recorded in Acts 20:1-3 that the apostle Paul produced Romans and 2 Corinthians. Two prayers are mentioned in these epistles which serve as good biblical examples of how prayers are answered.

     Paul’s letter to the Romans was written approximately AD 56/57 before he traveled to Jerusalem with a benevolent gift from various congregations. Apparently he had some concerns about what might happen when he got to Jerusalem, but instead of worrying about it he prayed about it and encouraged others to pray for him as well. In Romans 15:30-32 at least three specific prayer requests are made: (1) that Paul may be delivered from unbelievers in Judea; (2) that his service may be acceptable among the Jerusalem saints; and (3) that he may come to Rome with joy. By reading Luke’s historical record of this visit to Jerusalem and subsequent events, we see exactly how these petitions were answered. 

     According to Acts 21:17-20a, the brethren in Jerusalem received Paul gladly and rejoiced in his ministry. It seems that this part of his petition was answered with a resounding “yes.” However, the apostle’s service was not accepted unconditionally. While numerous Jews in Jerusalem had come to believe in Christ, many of them viewed Paul with suspicion, as though he were a traitor to his nation and cultural heritage. His effectiveness and influence among them, therefore, were compromised by this misguided perception.

     In order to show that he had not completely forsaken his people or his past, Paul agreed to carry out a customary ritual in the temple (vv. 20-26). But his attempt to please his Jewish kinsmen led to further complications. He was falsely accused, dragged out of the temple, and nearly beaten to death by unbelieving Jews (vv. 27-33). Fortunately he was delivered from these attackers (vv. 33-34), as per another of his prayer requests (Romans 15:31), yet not without a great deal of distress and suffering. As a result of his arrest in Jerusalem, he was sent to Caesarea (spending two years in prison) and then on to Rome. Paul had prayed that he might come to Rome with joy, but when he finally arrived after several near-death experiences along the way, he was in chains (Acts 28:16). 

     Did God answer the three petitions of Romans 15:30-32? Apparently so. Did he answer them the way Paul wanted? Apparently not. No doubt Paul desired that his service to the Jerusalem saints would be received without reservation, but it wasn’t. He likely would have wanted his deliverance from unbelievers to be void of pain and distress, but it wasn’t. Surely he would rather have come to Rome as a free man, but he didn’t. Nevertheless, as a prisoner in Rome, looking back on these ordeals, Paul had to admit: “the things which happened to me have actually turned out for the furtherance of the gospel” (Philippians 1:12). God’s way may have been harder, but it was so much better.

     If Paul’s service in Jerusalem had been accepted unconditionally (as he wanted), the chain of events which eventually took him to Rome likely would not have occurred; consequently so many would have missed out on the Lord’s great blessings through the ministry of this dedicated apostle. The point is, Paul's prayers were answered by God, not necessarily the way he wanted, but obviously so much better than he even knew how to ask.

     Another of Paul’s specific prayer requests is recorded in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. He struggled from what appears to have been a physical malady (“a thorn in the flesh”), concerning which he pleaded with the Lord no less than three times that it might be removed. God’s answer was not “yes,” or even a “qualified yes,” but an absolute “NO.” Thus Paul continued to suffer from this infirmity for the rest of his natural life. But notice his attitude. He didn’t cry, “God hasn’t answered my prayer!” He didn’t complain that God’s answer wasn’t what he wanted. Paul graciously accepted this negative response and acknowledged that the Lord’s way was even better than that for which he had asked. This physical “thorn in the flesh” kept him humble, which ultimately contributed to his spiritual salvation (cf. Proverbs 16:18). It caused him to depend more on God and less on self. It made him a much stronger person. 

     The lesson is simple: God answers prayer. He answers prayer according to his will, not mine. He doesn’t always answer according to my expectations, and his ways are not always the easiest. But I can be assured that his answers are always the very best answers. Even when I don’t get exactly what I ask for, I know that God has something much better in store!

     “Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen” (Ephesians 3:20-21).

-- Kevin L. Moore

Endnote:

     ¹ This is a revision of the original version that appeared in The Exhorter 4:1 (Jan.-March 2000). All scripture quotations are from the NKJV.

Related articles: Mike Bensen's When Did Jesus NOT Pray?

Image credit: http://prayinghisword.com/sites/default/files/hands%20praying.jpg

Female Head-coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (Part 3 of 5): Brief Exegesis of Verses 2-10

     ⁽²⁾ Now I am commending you because you remember all things of me and are retaining the precepts just as I delivered [them] to you.¹ The commendation is to “you” (plural), i.e. the specific audience to whom Paul is writing (cf. 1:2). These “traditions” (NKJV) or “ordinances” (KJV) or “teachings” (NIV) had been handed down to them by Paul’s personal instruction (3:2), in a previous letter (5:9), and through a personal representative (4:17).

     ⁽³⁾ But I am desiring you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is head of woman, and God is head of Christ. The contrast here indicates something new that Paul had not previously addressed, introducing the entire section about the relationship between God’s hierarchical arrangement and social decorum. The metaphoric use of the term “head” (kephalē) is “of superior rank” (cf. Ephesians 1:22; 4:15; 5:23; Colossians 1:18; 2:10, 19). Of the three occurrences of the term kephalē (“head”) in this verse, only the first has the article appended (“the head”), indicating the greater sense in which Christ is the head of man. The absence of the article with the other two uses of “head” may suggest that man is head of woman and God is head of Christ in a different way.

     ⁽⁴⁾ Every man praying or prophesying having [something] down upon his head disgraces his head. The context confines “every man” in this verse not simply to every man in the universe or even to every Christian man but to every Christian man praying or prophesying, and perhaps even further to every Christian man at Corinth praying or prophesying. Praying means to communicate to God, and prophesying means to proclaim a divine revelation (a gift not conferred upon everyone, 12:10, 28). Seeing that Paul ends each phase of his argument with a mention of women (the main topic of concern), his allusions to men are probably to bring out the contrast with the women. The setting here is not restricted to a corporate worship assembly; the observations would apply to any situation where praying or prophesying was done.

     ⁽⁵⁾ But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered is disgracing her head; for she is one and the same [thing] as the one having been shaved. Contrary to popular opinion, since the women are said to be doing the same thing as the men in the previous verse, a corporate worship assembly cannot be in view here (cf. 14:34-35). Because no particular setting is specified, these observations would apply to any situation (e.g. all female gatherings) where women could legitimately engage in praying or prophesying (see Acts 2:17; 16:13; 21:9; Titus 2:3-4). In light of v. 6, the covering here appears to be an artificial headdress in addition to her hair (consistent with societal norms). Even in gatherings restricted to females, especially in the context of spiritual activity, the customary emblems of modesty and decorum ought to be maintained. Just as shorn hair on a woman was considered disgraceful in this culture, the removal of the customary head-covering was regarded the same. A woman who ordinarily has her head covered in public should also (especially) cover her head while engaged in observable spiritual activities.

     ⁽⁶⁾ For if a woman is not being covered, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is dishonorable to a woman to have her hair cut or to be shaved, let her continue to have her [head] covered. This reinforces the argument of v. 5. If one thing happens to occur, then consistency should follow. The present imperative, “let her continue to have her head covered,” indicates further that the limited setting of a corporate worship assembly is not the exclusive focus. At whatever times it was considered indecorous for a Corinthian woman to have short hair or to be shaved, a respectable Corinthian woman was to have her head covered as often.

     ⁽⁷⁾ For indeed a man is not obliged to be covered continually, being the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. Apparently for a man in Corinth to habitually wear a head-covering would in some way obscure or diminish the image and glory of God which he reflects. This is the opposite of v. 6. Paul is not saying that a man is to never have his head covered, but rather he is not duty-bound to continually or habitually have it covered.

     ⁽⁸⁾ For man is not out of woman but woman is out of man; ⁽⁹⁾ for also man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man. The creation order is introduced here to further emphasize gender roles (cf. 1 Timothy 2:11-13). The head-covering, in this particular cultural setting, is linked to the principle of female subordination, and female subordination is tied to the order of creation, but the head-covering itself cannot be traced back to the garden of Eden.²

     ⁽¹⁰⁾ On account of this the woman ought to have authority over her head: on account of the angels. While the statement begins with dia touto (“on account of this”), does it point backward or forward? The demonstrative pronoun touto (“this”) is singular, indicating a solitary reason, and it naturally connects to the expressly stated reason in the same sentence: dia tous aggelous (“on account of the angels”). Paul is saying, “On account of this … [namely] on account of the angels.” Otherwise the last phrase is left hanging with no attachment to the rest of the sentence.³

     The woman ought to have exousia over her head. The word exousia means (a) freedom of choice, right; (b) ability, capability; (c) authority; (d) power (BAGD 277-78). The words “a veil” (RSV), “a sign of” (ASV), or “a symbol of” (ESV) do not appear in the original text, and the insertion of any of these significantly alters the sense of what the inspired writer has stated.

     Paul employs the term exousia eleven other times in his extant letters to Corinth, and in each case it is used in the active sense, i.e., the person has or exercises the authority rather than being passively submissive to it. Every time the word is used in 1 Corinthians leading up to 11:10, it has the connotation “freedom of choice” or “right” (7:37; 8:9; 9:4, 5, 6, 12, 18), not to mention synonymous expressions (7:39; 8:9; 9:1, 19; 10:29). Granted, in the immediate context the apostle has indicated that women are in a position of submissiveness, and the head-covering appears to have been a distinctive indicator of this status in first-century Corinth. Nevertheless, v. 10 says what it says, and it should not be modified or embellished to force Paul to say what we might expect him to say.

     The basic idea of submission is to willingly sub-order oneself or to put oneself under the authority of another. In this sense submission is not forced but one exercises personal freedom in choosing to submit (cf. Ephesians 5:21-24). In the three chapters leading up to the head-covering discussion, Paul has been discussing Christian liberty. While recognizing that a child of God may have the right to do certain things, this freedom must be exercised responsibly and in consideration of others (8:9; 9:18; 10:24; 10:32–11:1). When Paul goes on to say that a woman ought to have exousia over her head, surely he means this freedom of choice is to be used in accordance with all that he has just written.

     The angels have freedom to choose yet remain in their rightful sphere of subjection (Psalm 103:20). In the proper use of their freedom God is glorified (Revelation 7:11-12). Likewise, if a woman was nothing more than a subjugated slave, forced against her will to submit to man, she would not be a glory to him. It is only when she has the freedom of choice (exousia), and exercises that freedom to fulfill her submissive role, that she avoids disgrace and is truly the glory of man.

     Admittedly what Paul affirms in v. 10 is not what one might expect. Rather than building upon the previous arguments, this verse appears to stand on its own. While it is linked to the exousia theme of the preceding chapters, if readers are attuned to the chiastic structure of the paragraph (see Part 1), this verse is recognized as the centerpiece of the immediate discussion.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise indicated, all scripture quotations in English are the author’s own translation.

     ² If the head-covering itself is tied to creation, as some have maintained, then God’s people should have observed this convention since the beginning. The evidence for this, however, is lacking. There is no record that Eve wore a garment over her head; the Lord initially clothed Adam and Eve alike (Genesis 3:21). No specific examples are found in the Old Testament of what is alluded to in 1 Corinthians 11. The Law of Moses contains no explicit head-covering legislation. With the exception of the present text, the New Testament is silent on this topic. The creation-order argument is about gender roles rather than specific clothing regulation.

     ³ The expression dia touto is used elsewhere in Paul’s writings to point forward: cf. 4:17; 2 Corinthians 4:1; Romans 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 3:5; Philemon 15.

Related posts: Female Head-coverings Part 1, Part 2, Part 4, Part 5

Image credit: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEig89cuL1xSg4pLUw4Q1ORvq7EXDtTVOGz1bPxzmb-RkTxVFnNFITj2Vy_K6xWIK729iBFzimM5VmTTf8_Wg3st5bXDQ2fqofzDMB81JAZI_fK7CmMPcytFID0q_G9dDFZgZ-J6a_LVF6o/s1600/praying_hands_bible.jpg