Greek and Head Coverings

Status
Not open for further replies.

CharlieJ

Puritan Board Junior
Piper/Grudems's Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Ch 5 ( Thomas Schreiner) pages 126-137, long exegesis on 1 Cor 11 with Greek.
Thank you for reminding me of this. Schreiner has a very thorough treatment of the passage available http://www.sbts.edu/documents/tschreiner/RBMW_5.pdf.

Schreiner does think that the covering is a physical shawl. However, his arguments against the hair position are not, in my opinion, very strong. Also, I question some of his linguistic methodology in deciding between a face veil and a back shawl. However, he is an excellent scholar and the treatment is very valuable.

Concerning the preposition, Schreiner reaches his conclusion after having rejected hair as the covering for other reasons. That's fine. I am inclined to agree with him. The context is determinative. However, substitution is one of the primary meanings of that preposition and it (I think) makes sense in the context. People who think that αντι signifies substitution are well within the bounds of the preposition and can argue a good case.

Notice that Schreiner readily concedes that this is an extremely difficult passage. He is committed to doing the best exegesis he can, as am I. The point that I intended to make with my post is that different views on this passage have arisen from a careful study of the Greek text, not through ignorance or prejudice.

-----Added 2/27/2009 at 08:40:24 EST-----

Again... if it's hair he's talking about, why does he recommend shearing short hair rather than allowing it to grow back?
According to the hair position, the flow of thought would run something like this. "If you will keep your hair uncovered (hanging out loose in an unkempt and socially shocking fashion), then why not do something really shocking and shave it! But if it's shameful to have your head shaved, keep your hair decently and in order."

In other words, it is not long hair vs. short hair, as the debate is sometimes framed. I myself probably lean toward the physical covering view, but the hair view is not without its merits.
 

LadyFlynt

Puritan Board Doctor
Until there was a complaint made, most of my posts were quotes of Church Fathers and other Ministers. A good portion more were made towards women. I did not make a dogmatic statement. I made a statement of how I had been taught about that Scripture and am ALWAYS willing to hear out another's point of view on it. It also appears strange that you would pick me out of all the women that have participated in this discussion. My husband, though not directly participating, has been a member of this board as has my father in law in the past AND we discuss any threads I participate in on here. You are not my husband. Women are not subject to ALL Men of the Church or else there would be quite a mess. Please see to your own wife.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
"If you will keep your hair uncovered (hanging out loose in an unkempt and socially shocking fashion)
Uncovered hair cannot be identified with unkempt hair for the simple reason that the man is instructed to pray uncovered. He certainly is not being told to pray with his hair hanging out in a socially shocking fashion.
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
''yet here on the PB we regularly have women who would seek to hammer the issue, lecturing and usurping other men of the church!"
I realize the implications of the post above, but perhaps we should also realize the implications of women upholding what scripture says when men won't do so. Deborah was raised up in a certain situation, and the fact that some women are needing to take the lead on this topic should make us reflect as to why.
 

Archlute

Puritan Board Senior
Until there was a complaint made, most of my posts were quotes of Church Fathers and other Ministers. A good portion more were made towards women. I did not make a dogmatic statement. I made a statement of how I had been taught about that Scripture and am ALWAYS willing to hear out another's point of view on it. It also appears strange that you would pick me out of all the women that have participated in this discussion. My husband, though not directly participating, has been a member of this board as has my father in law in the past AND we discuss any threads I participate in on here. You are not my husband. Women are not subject to ALL Men of the Church or else there would be quite a mess. Please see to your own wife.
Again, the attitude displayed here betrays the very issue at hand. It is a principle of Scripture that you are subject to, not merely this man or the other. I pick out your statement, because as noted in my last post, you have had a history on this board regarding this issue, and very often your statements have indeed been dogmatic and pointed toward the men with whom you would disagree, as I would say your response was to my little aside about Moses. I would never have corrected you if you had not decided to retort in the manner in which you did. That was the problem that sparked it all.

Just because Mark has not felt a need to make a correction, does not mean that your words and demeanor are above correcting. If I see a woman in the church doing things that she ought not, I take it as my brotherly prerogative to make a correction. It matters not to me very much if her husband refuses to do so, for if there were a Christian brother who did not mind his wife engaging in other practices or behaviors that were detrimental to her Christian testimony it would merely be a fault of his, and not a declaration as to its justification.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
It is a principle of Scripture that you are subject to, not merely this man or the other.
:judge:If the board allows a lady to speak, and you willingly participate in the discussions on this board, then you are bound to allow the lady to speak. If you have anything further to say you should take it up with the administration.:judge:
 

Archlute

Puritan Board Senior
''yet here on the PB we regularly have women who would seek to hammer the issue, lecturing and usurping other men of the church!"
I realize the implications of the post above, but perhaps we should also realize the implications of women upholding what scripture says when men won't do so. Deborah was raised up in a certain situation, and the fact that some women are needing to take the lead on this topic should make us reflect as to why.
Since Deborah and Barak were dealing with the external foe of Israel, the Canaanites, it might possibly work better if we were to use this passage to encourage women in taking the lead against worldly institutions where the church has failed, but since these arguments almost always take place within the confines of the body of Christ, not so much.

I do think, however, that Judges 4 gets way too much press in our day for the limits presented by that confining parallel mentioned above!
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
:judge:This thread is about Greek and head coverings; any other discussion should be taken elsewhere. Henceforth irrelevant posts will be deleted.:judge:
 

lynnie

Puritan Board Graduate
charlie-

"Notice that Schreiner readily concedes that this is an extremely difficult passage. He is committed to doing the best exegesis he can, as am I. The point that I intended to make with my post is that different views on this passage have arisen from a careful study of the Greek text, not through ignorance or prejudice."

Fair enough! I apologize for any implication that you or anybody else was not bothering to look past English.

I do think that where we have multiple words in Greek all being translated into one English word- on any subject- confusion can arise. The word "love" is one example in addition to "covering." Then here we have one Greek word translated with two English words ( "tradition", and "handed down"). I always appreciate when my pastor is working through a hard text when he takes the time to check out Greek and Hebrew and commentaries on them before he preaches.

I found that for hub and me, seeing 1 Cor 11 in the Greek was the end of the debate. ( not so at the PB though :) )
 

Mark Hettler

Puritan Board Freshman
If I found that my wife was making corrections of other men on an internet forum, theological or otherwise, I would make some corrections of my own, and would assist her in finding a more productive use of her time.
If I found that my wife was making corrections of other men without wearing a head covering, I would do the same.
 

Mark Hettler

Puritan Board Freshman
Here is a link to something I wrote 25 years ago. Back then I was heavily involved in some borderline excessive charismatic stuff, and 25 years later I don't know whether to be appalled or amused at the way I interspersed citations of charismatic wack jobs along with the citations of solid biblical scholars. But I think that to the extent that my reasoning was based on the latter, it's still pertinent.

http://mhettler.home.comcast.net/papers/headcov.doc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top