Sermon Tone Analysis

A Heart Fully free - fully submitted to God

head coverings (esv)/propriety in worship (niv) / To honour God (msg)

1 Corinthians 11 is known to be one of the most difficult passages to interpret and one of the easiest to twist.

This is mainly due to a tradition of mis-interpretation of some key terms, but mostly due to our ignorance about certain first century social customs and their meanings.

but as we read it carefully, its clear that Paul carefully guarded against one major misinterpretation of his teaching,

Paul did not want us to misuse this passage to justify the subordination of women to men in the church.

He did not want us to think that women are less significant, less able to contribute to ministry .

Women did pray and prophesy in first century Corinth and Paul clearly affirmed their right to do so, and so must we...

The misinterpretation of these verses so often has hindered peoples joureny in faith and clouded the real heart of the matter of identity and appropriate worship.

So lets begin by reading and we pray God gives us revelation where revelation is needed to see the issues Paul is addressing, the correct cultural context and the wisdom to relate that to our every day.

Read 1 Corinthians 11:1-16

ok so has that got your backs up ??? ladies????:

(Eerdmans)Related to the preceding, the overall thrust of Paul’s argument is not to require the subordination of women; nor, however, does he require women’s equality.

That is why some of what he says sounds “subordinationist” (e.g., 11:7–9), while other parts of the same argument sound “egalitarian” (e.g., vv.

11–12)!

Paul’s agenda is different: to promote conciliation in a volatile situation.

For Paul, the matter does not have to do with the equality of the sexes or “women’s rights” but with how believers (women and men) are to embody their eschatological identity in everyday life in ways which are historically responsible and socially constructive.

In relation to the Christian gathering, this means a practice of worship which respects the differences between the sexes (and other differences as well) and allows such differences to be incorporated into a more profound unity.

is not to require the subordination of women; nor, however, does he require women’s equality.

That is why some of what he says sounds “subordinationist” (e.g., 11:7–9), while other parts of the same argument sound “egalitarian” (e.g., vv.

11–12)!

Paul’s agenda is different: to promote conciliation in a volatile situation.

For Paul, the matter does not have to do with the equality of the sexes or “women’s rights” but with how believers (women and men) are to embody their eschatological identity in everyday life in ways which are historically responsible and socially constructive.

In relation to the Christian gathering, this means a practice of worship which respects the differences between the sexes (and other differences as well) and allows such differences to be incorporated into a more profound unity.

so the main issues that come out of this usually surround the

head coverings (esv)/propriety in worship (niv) / To honour God (msg)

Barton, S. C. (2003). 1 Corinthians.

In J. D. G. Dunn & J. W. Rogerson (Eds.),

Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible (p.

1338).

Grand Rapids, MI

“head of a woman is the man!”

“praying with or without head covering being dishonourable”

So lets look at those , but lets not come into this ignorant remember the last few weeks?

Paul has been teaching and correcting the Corinthians and us themes of - not being a stumbling block, everything permissible not beneficial, idol worship, identity and who has authority -sits on the throne of your heart?

I talk a lot! not always eloquently

I get most hurt when someone mis trusts my heart - draws a conclusion of my motivation when they know me and have experience of me but come to a wrong ill meaning conclusion .... makes me think don’t you know my why would you think that of me????

But similar i think for Paul and indeed our reaction a lot of the time to God: we have been walking through Corinthians , previously acts we are getting to know Paul are’t we???? so lets not jump to the wrong conclusion

OK so lets get some understanding - remember this is a letter specifically to the Corinthians Christians, in response to some specific issues they were having

The overall point of Paul's argument is not to deem women inferior,v 7-9, nor does he require women to be equal to men v 11-12

Paul’s agenda is to bring peace to a volatile situation .

For Paul it’s not about equality of sexes or women’s rights, but how believers, men and women are to embody their identity as free followers of christ in every day life.

In ways that are historically responsible and socially constructive - relation to today.

So to set the scene....

Previously talking about where they shop, eating that market meat or the all you can eat buffet - we don’t equate that to us no longer buying meat from a butcher or grabbing that halal kebab on a Saturday night

In relation to this setting in Corinth.

These 16 verses he is talking about a practice of worship which respects the differences between the sexes in a way that allows these differences to create a deeper unity and focus on God. the thing is they were fully engaged in worship.. but again complete freedom unguarded led to problems.

At no point does Paul infer that women cannot minister he is talking about when you (men and women) pray and prophesy

in the first few verses, (the head of woman is man)

Most modern commentaries /commentators agree that Paul is not establishing a hierarchy here .

Instead he is reaffirming that a distinction exists between men and women, man and Christ and Christ and God

Here we quibble over the reference “Head” in the modern sense as an abusive authority and rule .

Here it is used int he 1st Century sense of source , impartation of love, wisdom and strength.

Ephesians picture of marriage

Yes women and men are different

Genesis 2 picture Adam as the source of Eve, just as Christ the creator is the source of mankind, and God as Father the source of the son.

So note Woman is no more inferior to man in their differences than Christ is inferior to God! Difference this is not about discrimination but necessary to be mentioned because of the way the Corinthian church were incorrectly exercising their “freedom” in worship in particular this issue of gender distinctions -

Why do you wear what you wear? predominantly because you like it over the need to express culture or belief.

am i wearing anything that shows submission to anyone or joining to God or something that deotes a sign of respect?

Why married women do you wear a wedding band

The head coverings whats the deal lets understand the cultural significance for that time:

1 .

1st lets get ment out of the way: or were you so set on the idea of women being under authority that you hadn’t noticed that Paul addressed what the men did with their head!

Men - not to have head covered v 4 -Paul may be referring to a head covering used in Roman religious practice.

Socially elite believers may have continued to wear such head coverings when gathering for worship.

If so, they brought attention to themselves and may have ostracized those who felt socially inferior, causing division in the church community.

( I am the idol glory to me not God, causing others to stumble..)

such a little thing of exercising freedom that causes so much contention.

2 so the issues with the head being uncovered, cut or shaved!women hair and head covering significant for different local cultural groups;

with uncovered head - cultural practice

Grecian women assumed a veil or covering upon marriage as a sign of being joined, no longer available covenant of marriage ..... much like our wedding ring.

- so to Paul it would be un christian to lay this aside - me being abandon in worship to cast aside my wedding ring?

head shaved: some cases considered sexually revealing and a distraction to men - temple prostitutes identified as having shaved heads - Paul didn’t want people looking in from the outside assuming that the Christians also had their temple prostitutes.

dishonors her head Indicates that a woman dishonors a man when she takes on the appearance of a man.

11:6 to have her head shorn or shaved In Paul’s day, a woman with an uncovered head may have been considered sexually revealing and thus a distraction to men in the context of worship.

Paul therefore recommends that women should wear head coverings to avoid such issues

Erdmans commentary states

But the anxiety may be related to other factors as well.

Fiorenza (1983: 227), for example, points to a range of evidence showing Greek women in the mystery cults engaging in acts of worship with their heads uncovered or their hair hanging loose or both: “Such a sight of disheveled hair would be quite common in the ecstatic worship of oriental divinities.…

Disheveled hair and head thrown back were typical for the maenads in the cult of Dionysos, in that of Cybele, the Pythia at Delphi, the Sibyl, and unbound hair was necessary for a woman to produce an effective magical incantation.…

Flowing and unbound hair was also found in the Isis cult, which had a major center in Corinth.”

Against this background, Paul may be concerned that the gatherings of the Corinthians are becoming indistinguishable from those of pagan idolaters.

Whatever the precise details (cf.

Fee 1987: 491–530), it is clear that Paul resists this innovation and seeks to reimpose the conventional symbols of gender differentiation for the sake of good order, while at the same time providing arguments that will not detract from women’s legitimate authority and, more positively still, will encourage the Corinthians as a whole in their worship, in the company of the angelic hosts, of the one true God.

One area where (at least some of) the Corinthians are exercising their freedom has to do with gender distinctions.

When one reads between the lines, it appears that Christian women prophets—perhaps the women “holy in body and spirit” of 7:34 (so MacDonald 1990)—are expressing their new authority by disregarding conventional symbols of female identity and subordination.

As people who have been remade by baptism as God’s new creation where “in Christ” there is “no male and female” (Gal 3:27–28; cf.

Meeks 1974), they are praying and prophesying with their heads “uncovered.”

Once again, therefore, the question Paul is addressing has to do with the appropriate embodiment (both individual and social) of Christian identity (cf. 1 Corinthians 7).

In this case, the women’s sense of new identity expresses itself in innovation relating to the head: specifically, letting their hair down and/or removing their veils (the matter is debated; cf.

Wire 1990: 220–23), and so “uncovering” their heads (11:3–5).

Because the head is a symbolic location of authority, and hairstyle is emblematic of status and group affiliation, such innovation seems to be causing contention in the church and perhaps also in the wider society.

It represents a challenge to conventional patterns of authority which assume a hierarchical and patriarchal order of “headship.”

But the anxiety may be related to other factors as well.

Fiorenza (1983: 227), for example, points to a range of evidence showing Greek women in the mystery cults engaging in acts of worship with their heads uncovered or their hair hanging loose or both: “Such a sight of disheveled hair would be quite common in the ecstatic worship of oriental divinities.…

Disheveled hair and head thrown back were typical for the maenads in the cult of Dionysos, in that of Cybele, the Pythia at Delphi, the Sibyl, and unbound hair was necessary for a woman to produce an effective magical incantation.…

Flowing and unbound hair was also found in the Isis cult, which had a major center in Corinth.”

Against this background, Paul may be concerned that the gatherings of the Corinthians are becoming indistinguishable from those of pagan idolaters.

Whatever the precise details (cf.

Fee 1987: 491–530), it is clear that Paul resists this innovation and seeks to reimpose the conventional symbols of gender differentiation for the sake of good order, while at the same time providing arguments that will not detract from women’s legitimate authority and, more positively still, will encourage the Corinthians as a whole in their worship, in the company of the angelic hosts, of the one true God.

So the best way we can reconstruct the situation is that some Christian women in Corinth were so excited at the freedom they had in christ to participate in worship that they overreacted .

some misuse head and add a touch of male chauvinism

If they could speak out, as men had always been able to , then they were like men and so they would look and act like men! sound familiar??

Paul is horrified and probably frustrated, didn’t these women realize that God created Male and Female?