Part Two

NOTE: Footnotes can be read by clicking on the number in the body of the text.

Most of the textual information we have about the role of women in the early church is attributed to Paul.  The three major texts (1 Cor 11:1-16; 1 Cor 14:1-40; 1 Tim 2:1-15) are only supplemented by the incidental mentioning of other women (Phil 4:1-3; Rom 16:1-4, 7; Col 4:15).

Some knowledge of the first century world and, to some degree, the ancient world is crucial in understanding the role women played in the early church.  This involves examining the contexts and objectives of biblical texts, and in some situations, the meanings of words within the text itself.  If the texts are viewed through a 21^st century lens, our perception of them could well be distorted.  

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF 1 CORINTHIANS 

Paul’s tumultuous relationship with the Corinthian church predates the writing of 1 Corinthians. Some of the problems he had with them are apparent from the texts we have, however two or perhaps three other letters he wrote to them are missing. ¹Paul penned the “lost” letter in Ephesus (Acts 19:1-20; 1 Cor 5:9). When Paul visited Corinth (CE 51 or 52) it was the seat of Roman government for southern Greece or Achaia (Acts 18:12-16) and was noted for its wealth, and the luxurious yet immoral lifestyle of its people. ²1 Cor 6:9-11; 8:4, 7. As a Grecian port city, about 48 miles west of Athens, its population was a mixture of Romans, Greeks, and Jews.  Their geographical location provided a fertile field for pagan influences.³The head dress of men and women in the early church may have varied in different geographical locations.   Their Greek heritage fostered an elite attitude, the Roman culture encouraged self-sufficiency, and the Jewish tradition required privileged synagogue worship (Acts 18:7).  Paul’s concern about Christians and their assemblies begins in 8:1 and ends in 14:40. Apparently most of their issues surfaced when they were in some type of group setting—pagan or Christian. 

All of Paul’s letters were addressed to individuals and/or house churches composed of 50 people or less.⁴The objectives of Paul’s letters depended upon the target audience. In Romans, he felt a basic understanding of gospel was essential in uniting a Jew/Gentile church. In Galatians, he opposed a different gospel that could have destroyed entire churches.  The Ephesian letter targeted issues common to the churches in the Lycus Valley. In Philippians, Paul provided an update about his situation in prison and urged them to deal with a selfish spirit.  In Colossians, he addressed their confusion concerning the work of Christ. Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in their Historical Setting. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 41.  While we do not know the location of the meeting place in Corinth, we do know It was large enough for the “whole church” (1 Cor 14:23).  Note:  When Paul wrote the letter to the church in Rome from Corinth, he mentioned that Gaius, his host, had a house large enough to accommodate the “whole church” (Rom 16:23).⁵Mary’s house was large enough for the Christians to assemble there (Acts 12:12). The meeting in Ephesus was upstairs, but the crowd was so big Eutychus had to sit in the window opening (Acts 20:7-12; 1:13). In Corinthians, Paul makes a distinction between “homes” and where they were meeting when they “came together” (1 Cor 11:18; 14:26, 35). For special occasions, dining rooms could be rented at the pagan temples (1 Cor 8:13; Acts 2:40). 

The Corinthian church had been established by Paul, Silas, and Timothy during an 18 month visit there.  At that point, Paul left for Ephesus where he remained for the next three years. It was there Paul heard of the divisions and abuses in the Corinthian church and penned the first letter (5:9)to them with the hope of correcting the factious and arrogant spirit that prevailed in the church. The origin of this letter to Paul is unknown but his writing “I hear” (11:18) and his directions in 11:34 indicate some knowledge of the situation.  The information could have been written by Chole, those who carried the letter to Paul, or perhaps by a group within the church.  Note:  The mentioning of Chole does indicate she was well respected and considered a leader in the church.

While Paul opens letters to other churches with some sort of thanksgiving for them,⁶Rom 1:8; Phil 1:3; 1 Thess 1:3; 2 Thess 1:3; Phile 1:4 this was not the case with 1 Corinthians.  He begins 1 Cor 1:4 by expressing thanksgiving for what God had done for them (“his grace given you”), very quickly affirms they had all the spiritual gifts they needed (1:7), but then straightforwardly addresses their problems. Central to the entirety of 1 Corinthians is relationship.  As God, Christ, man and woman have relationships, so the body of Christians have relationships (11:3).⁷Baptism into the body of Christ brings one into a relationship with fellow believers (1 Cor 12:13, Gal 3:28). The four basic divisions of 1 Corinthians build on this theme and address their lack of respect for others and their need for unity.  This basic theme is underscored by the subordinate themes of submission,⁸1 Cor 14:34; 1 Tim 2:11; Eph 5:21-24; Col 3:18; Titus 2:5. headship,⁹1 Cor 11:3; Eph 5:23. and creation.¹⁰1 Cor 11:8,12; 1 Tim 2:13; Rom 1:19-25

 In the first division (1 Corinthians 1-4) Paul rebukes them for forming factions that chose to follow him, Christ, Apollos, or Cephas.   He emphasizes the importance of identifying with Christ and not men (1:10, 30; 2:2, 26); the importance of Christ as the wisdom of God (1:30);¹¹

The following observations support this emphasis:

1. His appeal in 1:10 is based on the “Lord Jesus Christ.”
2. “Christ Jesus” is the wisdom of God (1:30).
3. It is what he preached (1:23-24; 2:2). 
4. Paul declares “we have the mind of Christ” (2:26).
5. The apostles are “servants of Christ” (4:1). 
6. It is in” Christ Jesus” Paul had become their father (4:15).
7. They “were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ” (6:11). 
8. Widows are to marry someone who belonged “to the Lord” (7:39). 
9. There is only one Lord Jesus Christ (8:6).
10. Paul believes the Corinthian church was his “work in the Lord” (9:1) and the seal of his apostleship (9:2).
11. “Are you trying to arouse the Lord’s jealousy” (10:22). 
12. He is following the example of Christ (11:1). 
13. Aquilla and Priscilla greet them “warmly in the Lord” (16:19).
14. Paul wants them to have the “grace of the Lord Jesus” (16:23).
15. He closes the letter by saying: “my love to all of you in Christ Jesus” (16:24).

In the second division Paul addresses their immorality (5-7).  Legal action among Christians is discouraged (6:1-8) as was sexual promiscuity because it affects the body (church), Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit (6:15-20). 

In many ways the third division (1 Cor 8-10) describes the only ‘right’ of a Christian—and that was the ‘right’ to give up their other rights! This discussion centers around a question Paul had been asked about food sacrificed to idols (8:1). Because most houses were too small for large celebrations, rooms were rented at local pagan temples for these purposes. Some in the church apparently felt eating meat sacrificed to idols on such occasions was permissible while others did not.  Because Paul felt respect was paramount, he opposed such activity (10:21). This lack of respect for others could lead to sinning “against Christ” (8:12) and ultimately cause the weak to stumble (8:9). Knowledge should not determine what one did, but love. Paul declares, “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (8:1).  Paul begins the conclusion to this section by saying, “Therefore my dear friends” (10:14)¹⁴Διόπερ, ἀγαπητοί μου is best understood as a conclusion to conduct in a pagan atmosphere that began in 8:1.  and ends with an admonition to follow his example as he followed “the example of Christ” (11:1).¹⁵James’ opposition in Acts 15:19 is against Christians going to pagan temples where all four prohibitions were practiced. Paul quotes from Exod 32:6 as examples of idols, idol worship, idol food and immorality (1 Cor 10:6-10). Jesus’ servant attitude was seen in his willingness to give up his rights if it meant saving others (Mark 10:45).

The fourth and final division of 1 Corinthians also addresses respect for others in issues of culture, the Lord’s supper, and the assemblies (1 Corinthians 11-14).  The chaos described in 1 Corinthians 14 was just symptomatic of the larger problem. 

Paul concludes the letter by commenting on the resurrection of the dead, providing general greetings and further instructions (1 Corinthians 15-16), and answering their questions about the contribution (16:1) and Apollos (16:12).

In summary and regarding Paul’s concern about their relationships to each other:

1. He was concerned about factions that were following people instead of Christ (1:10-12).
2. He addressed pagan feasts that were causing division (8:1-11:1).
3. He provided advice about issues in the assembly that were causing division including the dress of women when they prayed and prophesied (11:2-16); how Christians were to treat one another in the context of the Lord’s Supper or common meal (11: 17-34); and how they were to have an orderly and edifying assembly (14:1-40).

PAUL’S CONCEPT OF MINISTRY 

Throughout his ministry and regardless of his audience or issues he was addressing, Paul emphasizes transformation.¹⁶The concepts of being formed, conformed, and transformed are central to Paul’s ministry of maturing disciples (Gal 4:19; Rom 8:28; 2 Cor 3:18).  In the book of Romans, he devotes 11 chapters to justification by faith and then states, “not to conform to the pattern of this world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom 12:2).  Christians are to think Christologically, “we have the mind of Christ” (2:16; Phil 2:5), and they are to think as a “new creation,” created in Christ Jesus to be like God.¹⁷2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15; Eph 2:10; 4:24. With this type of mindset, the goals of unity and holiness are attainable (1:2; Eph 5:27).

INTRODUCTION TO 1 COR 11:2-16 

Significantly, Paul does not begin this section with “now concerning” indicating a response to questions as found in 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12.  Having dealt with the conduct of believers among unbelievers, Paul immediately turns his attention to the conduct of believers in the assembly.¹⁸This could have been part of the information conveyed from Chloe’s house and did not need a “now concerning” (peri de).  Their divisive and disrespectful attitudes surface in the assemblies mentioned in 1 Cor 11:2-34 and also in 14:1-40. The text does not indicate the Corinthians were rebelling against Paul’s teachings but rather that they needed clarification in some areas. Largely because of syncretism,¹⁹Corinth was a melting pot for many different ethnic groups in addition to Romans and Greeks.  the Corinthian believers were confused as to the preferred policy on head coverings in the assembly. For example, the Romans were accustomed to covering their heads in worship while the Greeks were not. 

Paul begins his comments with praise for them, specifically in two areas: (1) they had remembered Paul, and (2) they had held to his teachings. After this commendation he begins his comments about women who were praying and prophesying. The issue does not appear to be WHAT they were doing, but rather HOW they were doing it (with uncovered heads).

In the three texts Paul writes about spiritual gifts he does not distinguish between

the gifts that were miraculous and those that were not.  In each case the Spirit had the freedom to bestow them at will (12:11) and there was a correlation between the gifts and the issues facing the respective churches.   The Ephesians needed gifts for leadership and maturity (Eph 4:11-13).  The Roman church needed help in uniting a church composed of Jews and Gentiles and therefore needed non-miraculous gifts that would aid this process (Rom 12:3-8).  The Corinthian church needed miraculous gifts (12:27-31) that would aid in maturing the church (3:1; 14:20) and in evangelism (14:23-25).

NATURE OF PROPHECY²⁰Prophet (προφήτης)  comes from two words: (1) Pro meaning before, and (2) Phemi meaning to tell.

Prophecy was a significant and widespread part of the early church and was practiced by both men and women.²¹Acts 21:9; Acts 2:17-18; 1 Cor 11:1-5. There were several prophets in Jerusalem (Acts 11:27).  Its purpose was for edifying, teaching, exhorting, and strengthening²²Luke expresses how prophecy affectes the church: “Judas and Silas who themselves were prophets said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers” (Acts 15:32). more than predicting the future. While preaching and prophesying could overlap, they were not the same in that prophecy could possess an element of “revelation” (14:30) and could be predictive (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11).²³Paul feels the gift of prophecy was a preferred gift (14:1-5). In Acts 13:1-3 Rom 12: 6-8, 1 Cor 12:28 and Eph 4:11 prophets are mentioned before teachers. 

PRAYING AND PROPHESYING  

Prophesying was considered a miraculous spiritual gift (12:10), as was praying in tongues (14:2, 15).  Otherwise, prayer was not regarded as such. The text does not indicate the gifts (miraculous or otherwise) were gender exclusive.  Both men and women were involved in both praying and prophesying in the assemblies that are referenced in 11:4-5 and 14: 26-33.²⁴1 Cor 14:9, 26; Acts 1:14; 2:42; 4:24; 10:46; 13:3; 16:13.[./mfn] As our further study will reveal, Paul gives no indication he was opposed to women and men²⁴Some have attempted to make the head covering an issue between a wife and a husband because the terms woman (γυνὴ) and man (ἀνὴρ) can mean husband and wife.  Because there is no personal pronoun (his or her), and because the terms in 11:3 do not mean husband and wife, the reference in 11:4-5 is most likely a man and a woman.  praying and prophesying in the Corinthian church as long as they adhered to the cultural understanding of attire, specifically head coverings. ²⁵

Richard Oster, “Women, Diaspora Synagogues (Prosecuhe) and Acts 16:13 (Philippi).” A Festschrift in Honor of Earl and Ottie Mearl Stuckenbruck. David A. Fiensy and Williams D. Howden (eds.). European Evangelistic Society (Atlanta, 1995), 260-299. See BDAG, 878-879. A place of prayer was almost always the same as a synagogue. See Acts 1:14; 16:13,16.

See Randall D. Chestnutt, “Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman Era,” Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity (ed. Carroll Osburn; Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993): 1, 130.

The situation in Acts 16 indicates Lydia had an influence on the activities in what would be called a synagogue. Luke refers to the place of prayer (proseuche: προσευχὴν) rather than the normal word synagogue (synagoge). He also refers to some women being “prominent women” in Acts 17:12. Even though the Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures encouraged women to be involved in domestic duties, this was not true of all women in the ancient world. Historically the role of women in the ancient world was not monolithic, therefore women could have functioned differently in various cultures.

THREE EXEGETICAL ISSUES OF 1 COR 11:2-16²⁶Mark Black, “1 Cor. 11:2-16—A Reinvestigation,” Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity (ed. Carroll Osburn; Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993): 1, 191-218.  This is an outstanding discussion of 1 Cor 11:2-16 and several observations in this article are taken from this source even though not footnoted. 

In order to determine Paul’s teaching in 11:2-16, three issues need to be addressed: (1) the meaning of the word head, (2) the use of head coverings, and (3) the public or private nature of the assembly in 11:2-16.

Understanding “Head”

1. Literal and Metaphorical

The first exegetical issue centers on Paul’s use of the word head (kephale κεφαλὴ).The term is seldom (if ever) understood as “boss/leader” in the Greek context.  It appears nine times in this text—five times five metaphorically and four times literally.  For example, the man who prayed or prophesied with his “literal head” covered dishonored his “metaphorical head” which was Christ.  The woman who prayed or prophesied with her “literal head” uncovered dishonored her “metaphorical head” which was the man (11:4-5).  Note:  While most translations refer to “the woman,” the correct Greek interpretation is “a woman” and “a man” (male and female) and not husband and wife (11:3). This is further supported by the lack of the possessive pronouns (her or his).²⁷

The following are examples of the use of the personal pronouns to indicate whether γυναικὸςor ἀνδρὸς is referring to a wife or a husband:1 Cor 7:2 ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα (his wife)
1 Cor 7:39 ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς (husband of her)
1 Cor 14:35 ἰδίους ἄνδρας (own husband)
Eph 5:33 ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα (his wife)
1 Peter 3:1, 5 ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν (your husbands)
Titus 2:5 ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν (their husbands)
John 4:16 ἄνδρα σου (your husband)
Acts 5:10 ἄνδρα αὐτῆς (her husband) 
Matt 19:5, 9 τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ (wife of him)

  In 11:3 there are three pairs of six nouns—each pair corresponding to the others: 
 (1) man/Christ.
 (2) woman/man.
 (3) Christ/God. 

2. Meaning of Head: Relationship

The most plausible meaning of the word “head” is relationship. The importance of this concept is established in the introduction when Paul declares God had called them “into a fellowship (or relationship JJ) with his son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1:9). Paul’s rabbinic²⁸Paul was trained as a rabbi at the feet of Gamaliel, one of the greatest rabbis in the first century (Acts 5:34-39; 22:3).  Unlike his Jewish contemporaries, Gamaliel had a healthy respect for women. understanding of mutuality/equality from Genesis 1-2 is foundational in his teaching about the relationship of man/woman in 11:3. He is not trying to establish a (patriarchal) arrangement in 11:3 but was only using the hierarchical language of the day to make his point. Defined in this way, the issue of the text is NOT authority.   In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul uses the relationship of the body and the head to teach mutuality.²⁹Carroll Osburn, Women in the Church, Women in the Church: Reclaiming the Ideal. (Abilene: ACU Press, 2001),178-180. The same analogy fits 11:3.  As man was united with Christ and Christ was united with God so woman and man were united.  Christ found his origin in God and that resulted in his honoring God, so the woman found her origin in man and honored him. However, neither implies inferiority.  When viewed in this way and through the lens of 11:8-12, the relationship of 11:3 is one of mutuality/equality and cooperation.  

Paul’s concern in this text centers on how men and women were relating to each other in the assembly.  The failure of the women to wear head coverings and the choice of men to wear head coverings showed a lack of respect for one another and misunderstanding of a proper relationship.This meaning is also supported by following parallel texts which appear to balance the man/woman relationship.

11:9   ἀνὴρ διὰ τὴν γυναῖκα (man created for woman) ³⁰Dia (διὰ)means ‘because of, through or account of.’

11:12 ἀνὴρ διὰτῆς γυναικός· (man is born of woman)

It is true the first woman came from man, but all men that followed came from woman.³¹Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ, 195. “As Adam was the instrumental source of the first woman, so woman is the instrumental source for all subsequent men (including Jesus, Matt 1:16; Gal 4:4).”

Paul further emphasizes equality of men and women by declaring: “But all this comes from God” (11:12b). 

In many ways Paul’s teaching is counterculture to the husband/wife relationship defined by Aristotle (384-322 BCE) that had been adopted by the Roman empire.  This obedient/submissive posture of women to their husbands was based on four pragmatic factors. (1) Men had more education than women. (2) Men had more social experience and exposure than women. (3) The economy was more dependent on men than on women. (4) Women were married to older men at young ages (12-14).³²William Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 213-216. Perhaps this is best illustrated in the teachings of Demosthenes (59.122):³³Demosthenes was born in 384 BCE and was a Greek statesman and orator in Athens. 

For this is what living with a woman as one’s wife means—to have  children by her and to introduce the sons to the members of the clan and of the deme, (suburb of Athens JJ) and to betroth the daughters to husbands as one’s own.  Mistresses we keep for the sake of pleasure, concubines for the daily care of our persons, but wives to bear us legitimate children and to be faithful guardians of our households.

3. 1 Corinthians 7 Supports the Meaning of Relationship

Paul’s stress on the mutuality/equality of men and women does not begin in 11:3.³⁴The mutuality/equality of men and women is shown in his joint reference to “brothers and sisters” (NRSV, CEB, NLT, NIVI) in reference to their calling (7:24) and declaration of time being short (7:29).  He also emphasizes it in 1 Corinthians 7 by using the word “likewise” twice in 7:3-4 as he discusses sexuality and marriage.³⁵

Paul discusses the subject of sexuality and marriage in response to their question (7:1). The following comparisons show the equality of the males and females:
7:2 equal access to sexual activity. 
7:3 equal duties.
7:4 equal authority over the other.
7:8 equal directions for widowers and widows.
7:10-11 equal directions for divorce.
7:12-16 equal directions for believing husbands and wives; if unbeliever leaves, equal directions for men and women believers. 
7:25-28 same directions for engaged believers. 
7:32-35 same directions for the unmarried.

  This theme of mutuality between a wife and husband continues throughout the chapter.³⁶Bartlett, Men in Christ, and Women, 25-26. 

4. Use of Head in Ephesians

In his letter to the Ephesians Paul uses head as relationship.  First, in 1:22-23 the emphasis is not one of a “ruling head,” but a head which causes the church to grow and flourish.  Second, in 4:15-16, the head provides growth, cohesion and oneness—not rule. Third, Paul makes two parallel statements:³⁷For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body (Eph 5:23 ASV). For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body (Eph 5:23 NASB). head of the church and savior of the body (5:21-33)³⁸Andrew Bartlett, Men and Women in Christ: Fresh Light from the Biblical Texts. (London: InterVarsity Press, 2019), 50-53. as he connects head to Christ’s work as savior as shown in sacrifice. The text of Eph 5:21-33 is especially helpful in explaining the man/woman illustration of 11:3.³⁹In reference to slaves, Paul uses “just as” (Eph 6:5). In explaining the responsibility of the husband, he uses “just as” in Eph 5:25 and 5:29.  Regarding forgiveness, he uses “just as” (Eph 4:32). Paul sets the tone for his thoughts in 5:21, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21).⁴⁰A major theme of 1 Peter is submission. Christians are to submit to others (2:15-17). Slaves are to submit to masters (2:18-21). Jesus is an example of one who submitted to ungodly people (2:21-24). In 3:1, wives “in the same way” are to submit to their husbands for three reasons: (1) win them over (3:1), (2) God loves “a gentile and quiet spirit” (3:4), and (3) as example for other women (3:5-6). The husbands are to respond “in the same way” because they are equal heirs (3:7).  If Peter believed women were subordinate to men, he did not say so.  Bartlett, Women and Men in Christ, 114.  Paul’s use of submission is not the same as “authority over.” Submission is self-imposed (reflexive middle in Greek)—not imposed by another.  Paul’s use of head in 5:32 infers a position of unity, service, and sacrifice⁴¹Jesus’ position as head is best explained with one word—Savior! In 5:31 Paul quotes Gen 2:24 to support the unity of the husband and wife. It is through this lens 11:3 should be read.  Jesus is the example to be followed and imitated (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thess 1:6). In Eph 5:25-129, Jesus served the church be feeding and caring for it. as exemplified by Jesus.⁴²Paul uses four phrases to stress the sacrificial work of Christ: 5:25:  gave himself up, 5:28; loved as own body, 5:29-30; fed and cared for her; loved her as himself, 5:33.  Jesus is the source of love and provisions for the church and husbands should be the same for their wives.⁴³Philip Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), 209. ⁴⁴Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, 32-33. Kephale meaning source has been rejected by most scholars.

5. Possible Meaning of Head: Authority

Even though “relationship” appears to be the most feasible way to interpret head in 11:3, some suggest the term could signify authority.  As indicated previously this meaning can be traced back to Aristotle and his definition of the family that was later adopted by the Caesars.⁴⁵Emperor Augustus (63 BCE-14CE) wanted the empire to be more family centered. He made divorce laws sticker and made adultery a crime against the state.  Penalties included banishment and in some cases the husband or father of the adulterer could kill the adulterous wife. He taxed prostitution and made homosexual activity a punishable offense. He adopted the definition of the family from Aristotle in order to improve family values and unite the empire.  His reported last words were: “I found Rome in clay; I leave it to you in marble.” Plutarch (40 CE to 120 CE) fostered the idea that the family needed to adopt the religion of the father.  As applied to our text, this definition of head is based on creation order, Jesus’ relationship to his father, and on two other texts (Eph 1:22 and Col 1:18).  Viewed this way, head has the same connotation as “over”:   Christ is over man, God over is Christ, man is over the woman.  Those who support this view cite Paul’s reference to Jesus as he submits to the father (Phil 2:8).  Indeed Jesus did submit to the will of his father (Mark 14:36) and he came to do the will of the father (John 6:38), but this does not mean Jesus did not have a mutual/equal relationship with his father. Eph 1:22 and Col 1:18 refer to Jesus having authority over the church.  Head can mean authority in both of these texts, but these texts also stress the redemptive work of Christ.  Even if the term in these texts is defined as “authority,” this does not mean the definition holds true in 11:3. Paul could and did use the same word in the same correspondence to mean different things. In 1 Corinthians Paul uses the word body in three ways: physical body (6:19), body of Jesus (11:24, 27), and the body (church) (11:29). Paul uses the term temple in two ways:  church (3:16-17) and individuals ((6:19); and he uses sanctification in two ways:  salvation (6:11) and approval (7:12). As with any word in the Bible, context determines meaning.  Regardless, both texts emphasize love and mutuality.

Summary of the Meaning of Head

In summary, Paul did not view woman as inferior or subordinate to man, but rather in a complementary, mutual, and equal relationship with him.  Paul’s understanding of Genesis 1-2 is definitely not one of hierarchy, but of equality in relationship.  It seems that if Paul had wanted to support a hierarchical relationship, he would have said God/Christ, man/woman, but instead he started with man/Christ and woman/man.  Only after the fall did the relationship change (Gen 3:16) from being mutual to hierarchical. Even though the meaning of head may be questionable, this does not destroy the fact of that both men and women were prophesying and praying in the assembly at Corinth and both men and women were to respect the use of head coverings. 

Use of the Veil

1. Description and Practice

The second exegetical issue of 1 Cor 11: 2-16 centers on the use of the veil⁴⁶In the Greco-Roman world head coverings were used by both men and women.  In the Mesopotamian world the faces of women were covered. The head covering was connected to modesty for married women but in some cases, it did not apply to virgins who were looking for husbands. Hair was considered a “temptation” for young men. The uncovered head of a married woman was regarded as immodest and in such a situation the woman could have been divorced on the basis of infidelity.  Craig Keener and Walton John. (eds). “Head Coverings in Antiquity,” Cultural Background Study Bible: Bringing to Life the Ancient World of Scripture. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016), 2003. —a covering over the head.⁴⁷Roman and Greek women were unveiled in public, but not Jewish women. Jewish women in Palestine were veiled.  Roman women pulled veils over their heads in worship as did the men. Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, 19-47.  In Greek the term literally means “having down from the head.”⁴⁸

Could be “having over the head” depending on how you translate kata.
κατὰ              κεφαλῆς  ἔχων 
down (over) the head having 

Mark Black describes the head covering in the following way:⁴⁹Black, “1 Cor. 11:2-16—A Reinvestigation,” Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, 202. 

It is rather the outer garment simply pulled up from the back and across the head approximately to the ears. The common Latin term for this arrangement was capite velato.  

Even though there does not appear to be a unified practice in the various cultures and locations, there is a general consensus that some kind of head covering was found in both the Jewish and Greco/Roman cultures. Note:  While sexual modesty could be attached to the covering of hair (1 Tim 2:9; 1 Pet 3:3),⁵⁰Testament of Reuben 5:5 “Flee, therefore fornication, my children, and command your wives and daughters, that they adorn not their heads or faces to deceive the mind; because every woman who useth these wiles hath been reserved for eternal punishment.” (2^nd century CE). not all hair arrangements were a violation of sexual modesty. 

As mentioned previously, the church in Corinth represented many cultural streams.   In some cultures, public and private attire differed and sometimes events (religious or secular) determined the manner of dress.  Available evidence indicates women in the Jewish world wore a veil in public and the same could well have been true in the Roman world.⁵¹The Babylonian Talmud Ketuboth 72a states that women who went out with the uncovered head were to be divorced without receiving the kethubah. The same was affirmed in the Mishna (Ketuboth 7.6D) and in 3 Maccabees 4:6. Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones, Aphrodite’s Tortoise: The Veiled Woman of Ancient Greece (Classical Press of Wales; Oakville, CT,2003), 3-4, 11, 88-89, 175.
Benjamin Marx,” ‘Wifely Submission’ and ‘Husbandly Authority’ in Plutarch’s Moralia and Corpus Paulinum” JGRChJ 14 (2018) 56-88.  The original roots of the church were Jewish⁵²In Paul’s hometown of Tarsus, the women wore head coverings. Black, “1 Cor. 11:2-16—A Reinvestigation,” Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, 204. and Paul’s education was Jewish. In Torah, men wore turbans in the temple (Ezek 44:18).  The city of Corinth became a Roman colony in 44 BCE, and in a pagan Roman ritual, only those making the sacrifice had their togas pulled over their heads.  It was only natural that Roman men and women⁵³Romans believed apparel indicated rank or social standing. would have brought this custom into an assembly of the church.⁵⁴“Why is it that when they worship the gods, they cover their heads, but when they meet any of their fellow-men worthy of honour, if they happen to have the toga over the head, they uncover?” (Plutarch, Moralia, The Roman Questions 10). ⁵⁵David W. J. Gill, “The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16.” TynD 41.2 (1990), 245, 248. The covered head indicated one was functioning as a priest—mediating between God and the congregation thus assuming the role of Jesus.   Paul’s concern for both men and woman is supported by the parallelism found in 11:3-5, 7, 10.

11:3
“the head of every man is Christ” 
“the head of the woman is man” 
11:4-5
“Every man who prays or prophesies with his head uncovered dishonors his  head”
“every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors
  her head” 
11:7 and 10
“A man ought not to cover his head”
“the woman ought not to have a sign of authority on her head” ⁵⁶The following are the ways 11:10 has been translated: “symbol of authority” (ESV, NET, NKJV, NRSV), “sign of authority” (ASV), “wear a covering” (NLT), “power on her head” (KJV) “wear a veil” (RSV) and “to have authority” (NIVI).  The lack of uniformity in translations of the text makes understanding it extremely problematic.  Only the word for authority (ἐξουσίαν) is in the Greek text and the translators.  In 1 Corinthians Paul uses this word “authority” (ἐξουσίαν) to mean “rights or privileges” for several things.  For example, it is used in 7:37 as not to marry; in 8:9 a stumbling block; in 9:4 to food and drink; in 9:5 to marry; 9:12 to support.  With the head covering women could exercise their “right” to pray and prophesy (11:4-5).  Some have contended the “authority” was “man or her hair,” but head covering appears to be the best choice given the context and circumstances.

2. Problem of Head Coverings for Men and Women

Quite possibly the Greek women⁵⁷The Greek word for uncovered in 1 Cor 11:2 is ἀκατακαλύπτῳ. The woman in Num 5:18 had her head uncovered (ἀποκαλύψει) as a sign of immodesty therefore indicating she was not in subjection to her husband. According to Torah, the uncovered head communicated something bad or improper. The phrase in Num 5:18 is ἀποκαλύψει τὴν κεφαλὴν τῆς γυναικὸς and the phrase in Lev 13:45 is κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ ἀκατακάλυπτος. A woman with an uncovered head could be accused of trying to seduce a man.  If a wife went into public with her hair down and exposed, she could be divorced with no financial support. (Note: The infected leper covered his head, ἀκατακάλυπτος Lev 13:45).  Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, 29. knew the custom of a head covering but did not want to honor it because they had been taught “everything is permissible”⁵⁸Gill, “The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16,” 258. (6:12; 10;23). Paul was aware of the importance of how others perceived the actions of believers and in Roman society, long hair (as opposed to the shaven head) was a symbol of a wife’s relationship to her husband.   When Paul suggests the bare headed woman was like the shaven head⁵⁹Just as a shaven head of a wife would embarrass her husband so would her uncovered head.  By use of a hyperbole Paul is showing the seriousness of this issue. (Note: The woman’s head could be shaven in a time of mourning (Deut 21:12). of a prostitute, he makes it clear how inappropriate it was (a disgrace) for a woman not to wear a head covering.⁶⁰“Paul uses the ancient debate principle of reduction ad absurdum: If they were so concerned to bare their heads, why not also remove the natural covering, their hair? Paul thereby reduces their insistence to the absurd: the greatest physical shame for a woman was to be shaved or have her hair cut like a man’s.” Craig Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 476.  In 11:4-6, Paul mentions it was as much a dishonor for a man’s head to be covered as it was for a woman’s head to be uncovered.   The man with a head covering dishonored his head, Christ, and the uncovered woman dishonored her head, man. 

A depiction of a worship event preserved in stone (found in the Louvre cn. Domitius Ahenobarus) shows a veiled woman making a sacrifice while the women with her do not have the veil. This is strong indication that the women who were taking an active part in the worship were required to wear a veil—perhaps for reasons of modesty.⁶¹Arguments can be made Paul was referring to hair as a covering and not a veil, but this interpretation is not without serious problems. Payne, Woman and Man, One in Christ, 141-188. Possibly hair functioned as a sexual distraction for the men,⁶²Some contend the veil included a “face mask,” but this is debatable. Even if a woman had a “face” mask, this would not preclude her from speaking any more than it would preclude her from having interaction with people in the community. The veil over than face was not “soundproof.”  and the veil eliminated the issue.  Regarding the assembly at Ephesus, Paul does express concern for women who had braided hair. ⁶³If all the women in an assembly were wearing veils, there would not be a concern about women with braided hair. 1 Pet 3:3 indicates not all women wore a veil in public. The men never wore a head covering regardless of whether they were praying or prophesying or only listening.⁶⁴“Specifically, Paul states that it is during the act of praying and/or during the act of prophesying that men should not be veiled, and women should be veiled.  The necessity of women wearing head coverings is not mentioned if someone else is praying or prophesying.  A man is told to be uncovered only when he himself is praying or prophesying.”  Oster, “Culture or Binding Principle: A Study of Head Coverings, Hairstyles, 432 

According to Richard Oster⁶⁵Richard Oster, “When Men Wore Veils to Worship: The Historical Context of 1 Corinthians 11:4” NTS, Vol 34, 1988, 481-505. strong evidence indicates Roman men covered their heads

in pagan worship.  Because of this, Paul may have wanted men to be differentiated from women.⁶⁶Even though it was possible for men to wear head coverings, this might not have been the custom in Corinth because Paul devotes more time to the women.  This problem of a possible “unisex”⁶⁷Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, 46. “one should not bring reproach upon one’s family or upon the Christian gospel; one should not seek to destroy symbolic gender distinctions by pioneering unisex clothing styles; one should respect custom and do one’s best to avoid causing someone to stumble.” appearance⁶⁸In the ancient world gender was marked by hair and clothes. ⁶⁹Evidence indicates the veil was something that covered the face of the women whereas the men pulled a toga over their heads covering their ears. Paul’s objection to the men prophesying with a head covering is three-fold: (1) it hid the glory of God, (2) it produced a unisex assembly, and (3) it violated creation.  Paul’s solution is simple: women needed to have veils that covered their faces when praying and prophesying and the men were not to pull their togas over their heads covering their ears.  Romans practiced the use of a head covering whereas non-Romans did not. In the case of the Roman Christians, both the men and women would have covered their heads and this gave the assembly a unisex appearance. Paul concludes this was the practice of the churches of God. Richard Oster, “Culture or Binding Principle: A Study of Head Coverings, Hairstyles, Etc” The Church of God in a Pagan World (Delight, AR.: Gospel Light, 1990),427-453. would be solved if women wore head coverings and men did not (11:14).⁷⁰“Neither should the beard be cut from the chin (for it is not superfluous), but it too has been provided for us by nature a kind of cover and protection.  Moreover, the beard is nature’s symbol of the male just as the crest of the cock and the mane of the lion so one ought to remove the growth of hair that becomes burdensome, but nothing of the beard; for the beard is no burden so long as the body is healthy and not afflicted with any disease for which it is necessary to cut the hair of the chin.” Musonius Rufus Lecture XXI (He was a Roman Stoic philosopher who was born 25 CE and died in 95 CE).

3. Glory and the Use of the Veil

The image of God and man are closely tied together. In creation, man was made in the image of God (Gen 1:26) and was expected to be holy as God was holy (Lev 11:44,45; 19:2; 20:7).  The mission of Jesus was to show God in a human form (John 1:18; 14:9). Paul emphasizes the importance of man being God-like (Col 3:10; Eph 5:1), and states in 11:7 that man is to be “the image and glory of God.”

Glory can have several meanings including splendor, radiance, and expectation.⁷¹Head and glory are really two sides of the same coin.” Linda Belleville, Women Leaders and the Church: Three Crucial Questions. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 131. Two translations refer to “glory” (δόξα) as a “reflection of God” (NRSV and Message).⁷²“For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man.” (NRSV) “Man was created first, as a beautiful shining reflection of God” (Message). Paul’s emphasis on the use of the veil for women is tied to his understanding of “glory.” As man is the glory of God, woman is the glory of the man for two reasons, both of which hail from creation.   

(1)  Woman was made from the man and she was to reflect her source (11:8).⁷³

οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἀνὴρ  ἐκ γυναικὸς   ἀλλὰ γυνὴ    ἐξ ἀνδρός

     not for    is   man  out of woman but woman out of man

καὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἐκτίσθη ἀνὴρ      διὰ          τὴν γυναῖκα ἀλλὰ γυνὴ.               διὰ       τὸν ἄνδρα.

    And for  not created man on account   of the woman, but woman on account of the man.

Cukrowski, The Problem of Uncovered Prophets, Leaven 2001. 

 (2)  Woman was created (on account of) for man (11:9). 

Conduct reflects relationship. As the conduct of man reflects on God and Christ reflects on God so the woman’s conduct reflects on man.  In the context of 1 Corinthians 11, a woman without a veil reflected in a negative way on the man.⁷⁴Osburn, Women in the Church,183-184. With her head covered she did not take away from the glory of God seen on the uncovered head of the man (11:7).  Craig Keener makes the following observation:⁷⁵Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, 33. 

Husbands receive glory or shame from their wives, just as Christ receives glory   or shame from the behavior of men.

4. Seven Arguments for Women to Wear Veils ⁷⁶Some of Paul’s arguments made sense in his era, but not necessarily in the 21^st century.

Paul makes the following arguments for women who were praying or prophesying to wear veils (11:6-15; Luke 2:36-37). 

1. The veiled woman showed respect for the men in the assembly (11:6) and the veil allowed her to pray and prophesy.
2. Evidently the women with braided hair were somewhat of a distraction in the worship service in Ephesus (1 Tim 2:9; 1 Pet 3:3)⁷⁷Women dressing in an improper manner could have provided a distraction for the worshipping men (1 Tim 2:9-10). This could also be a problem for women dressing in an immodest manner in a Sunday assembly in the 21^st century western worship service. How would Paul regard short skirts and cleavage in a Sunday assembly of believers? Would he have seen it as a distraction as he did with the uncovered women of 1 Cor 11:5?  and perhaps Paul was indicating unveiled women were a similar distraction.  
3. In 11:7, the men were told not to cover their heads because it dishonored their head (Christ). 
4. There was a common belief that another world was watching so women were to be careful how they dressed. ⁷⁸“and I will sing psalms to thee before the angels; for thou hast heard all the words of my mouth.” (Psa 138:1 LXX) “I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Holy One.” (Tobit 12:15 RSV). Philo, On the Virtues, 74. “In the midst of men and angels, Moses sang his hymns with every kind of harmony and concord, in order that both humans and ministering angels might give heed; that humans might learn thankfulness similar to his own; that angels, as overseers watching, might listen in accordance with their own musical expertise, lest there be any dissonance in his song.” ⁷⁹The bad angels could have been “lustfully” watching the women. Angels are mentioned in Heb 1:14. Paul mentions angels in various texts (Gal 1:8; 2 Cor 11:14; 1 Cor 4:9; 6:3; see Acts 5:18; 12:7,12) ⁸⁰“Because of the angels” (1 Cor 11:10) has always been a challenging text.  The word angel can mean “messenger” therefore this could be a reference to spies sent by the wealthy people to find out what was going on in the assembly. Paul wants the conduct in the assembly not to bring reproach by outsiders, hence the women wore veils as a sign of authority. He does mention some false believers had infiltrated their ranks to spy on the freedom they had in Christ Jesus in Gal 2:4. 
5. Women needed a “sign of authority” on their heads and the veil was the sign.
6. Paul stressed what was (11:13) proper or fitting (prepi).⁸¹1 Tim 2:10; Titus 2:1; Eph 5:3. This argument would apply to Paul’s world and not the 21^st century. 
7. In 11:4-5, the man who prayed or prophesied with his head covered was shameful (καταισχύνει) as was the woman who prayed or prophesied without a head covering (καταισχύνει).⁸²“when he prays or prophesies brings shame on his head; a woman on the contrary, brings shame on her head if she prays or prophesies bare-headed;” (11:4-5 NEB). In chapter 14, Paul uses αἰσχρὸν in reference to a woman speaking in the assembly (14:35). The NEB translates it as a “shocking thing.” Troy Martin has attempted to translate ὅτι ἡ κόμη ἀντὶ περιβολαίου δέδοται [αὐτῇ] as “For her hair is given to her instead of a testicle.”  The translation of περιβολαίου is the crux of his argument. He maintains women were given long hair because its hollow nature would draw and retain semen. If this were the case hair would be considered part of female genitalia, therefore Paul argued was not right for women to display this when praying to God.  However, Martin’s proof for this understanding of περιβολαίον is not totally convincing.  Mark Goodacre, “Does περιβολαίον Mean ‘Testicle in 1 Corinthians 11:15?” JBL 130, no. 2 (2011): 391-396. 

5. Summary of the Use of the Veil

Paul emphasizes the relationship of men and women was to be seen from the viewpoint of the Lord. ⁸³Paul changes the order in 11:11-12 by putting the woman before the man in 11:8.  

“Nevertheless, In the Lord woman is not independent (without) of man, nor is man independent (without) of woman.” (1 Cor 11:11) 

The word “nevertheless” (πλὴν)⁸⁴

πλὴν            οὔτε       γυνὴ   χωρὶς ἀνδρὸς οὔτε ἀνὴρ χωρὶς γυναικὸς ἐν κυρίῳ

   nevertheless either   woman without man      or  man without woman  in the Lord

11:11-12 could be translated as follows: “Nevertheless neither is woman anything without man nor is man anything without woman in the Lord.  For as woman is from man so man is through woman.” Ken Cukrowski, The Problem of Uncovered Prophets, Leaven 2001.

  has the intended meaning of “listen up” or “yes, but” and is followed by “in the Lord” (ἐν κυρίῳ).  In the Greek New Testament the phrase appears at the end of the verse rather than at the beginning and as such serves as a summary statement.  Paul continues his argument in 11:12: “For as woman came from man so also man is born of woman.  But everything comes from God.”  He then concludes his teaching, “Judge for yourselves it is proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered” (11:13) and ends the comments he began in 11:3.  In many ways, 11:11-12 and its emphasis on mutuality/equality provides the lens through which 11:3 is interpreted.

Assembly: Public or Private?⁸⁵Osburn, Women in the Church, 175-176. 

The third exegetical issue pertains to the public or private nature of the assemblies mentioned in 1 Corinthians.⁸⁶Because the early church gathered in houses (maybe some exceptions with larger groups) the categories of “private” or “public” were never an issue.  It is possible the church could have rented a banquet room at a local pagan temple, but there is no evidence in 1 Corinthians the assemblies were in pagan banquet rooms.

1. Head Coverings and Lord’s Supper

Throughout the section of 1 Corinthians 11-14, the word (synerchesthe the church coming together) is mentioned several times (11:17, 18, 20, 33, 34, :14:23, 26). In two cases, the word for “assembly” is used (11:18; 14:23).  In an attempt to harmonize women praying and prophesying in 11:2-5 with the instruction that they remain silent in 14:34-35, some have suggested 11:2-16 was a private assembly and 14:26-40 was a public assembly of the church.  This reasoning lies in the wording of 11:17, “… I have no praise for you…” and 11:18 “…when you come together as a church…”  therefore indicating a shift from a private to public assembly.⁸⁷Scholarship is divided as to whether 11:2-16 is a private or public assembly. Osburn reports a number of men in the Restoration Movement believed it referred to the public assembly. He also quotes George DeHoff: “There is no verse in the Bible which teaches that women must teach God’s word in private. The ‘in private’ is added by false teachers.” (See George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, TN: Christian Press, 1947), 99. Osburn, Women in the Church, 174-175. When the entirety of the text is examined, Paul appears to use this wording to stress the seriousness of division within the Lord’s supper and not necessarily a contrast between the two texts. 

2. The Veil was Not Needed

If a woman was praying and prophesying with only her husband and immediate family present, the veil would have been a non-issue. 

3. The Function of Prophesy

The function of prophecy demanded the presence of others because prophecy was used to convince the unbelievers (14:24), to edify the church (14:4) and to give predications (Acts 11:27-30; 21:10-16).  “But everyone who prophesies speaks to men…” (14:3). Paul instructs the prophets to speak one at a time (14:31) and while a prophet spoke, the other prophets were to weigh (evaluate) what was being said (14:29).  This indicates the presence of more than one prophet.  The church in Antioch had “prophets and teachers” (Acts 13:1) and the assembly in Corinth had at least three prophets (1 Cor 14:29).  Whether Philip’s daughters prophesied as a team in the church at Caesarea or separately is not known (Acts 21:8-9).  Paul’s teaching is directed to “every woman” and “every man” (11:4-5; 14:39).  Viewed in this way, the men and women prophets mentioned in 11:4-5 would have been in a public setting as well.⁸⁸When Paul wants to address an activity that should take place in private home, he specifies such i.e.: asking questions of a husband (14:35) or eating at home before the assembly (11:34).    

4. 1 Cor 11:2 as a Change in Subject from Pagan Assemblies to Christian Assemblies

Assuming the section of 10:31-11:1 concludes Paul’s remarks about eating food sacrificed to idols (8:1), 11:2 indicates a change in subject to issues related to the assembly.   The end of 11:16 and the beginning of 11:17 is not marked with a conclusion such as is found at the end of the discussion concerning food in 10:14 (“Therefore my dear friends…”).⁸⁹The section of 11:2-16 is connected to 11:17-34 with two introductory statements: “I praise you” (11:2) and “I have no praise for you” (11:17).  The two statements indicate Paul was dealing with two problems in the same assembly. The mention of men and women who prayed and prophesied and issues with the Lord’s supper indicate a public assembly of believers. The transition of the remarks about the Lord’s supper (conducted publicly) and the wearing of veils by both men and women is seamless, and as such, indicates the same assembly.   Before addressing the issues with the Lord’s supper (11:17-34), he closes the section by indicating these practices were in other “churches of God” (11:16).

5. Restoration Movement Leaders: Public Assembly 

Early leaders in the Restoration Movement in America saw the information in 1 Cor 11:2-16 relevant to the public worship of the whole church.  A commentary by J. W McGarvey and Philip Pendleton published in 1916, states:⁹⁰J. W. McGarvey and Pendleton, Philip, Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Foundation, 1916), 108, 113. 

Paul has been discussing the disorderly conduct of individual Christians.  He now proceeds to discuss more general disorder; i. e., those which took place in the meetings of the congregation, and in which the whole church gathered…Paul is here discussing how men and women should be attired when they take a leading part in public worship.

Daniel Sommer (1850-1940) who was an early leader in the restoration movement did not believe women should be elders or evangelists, but he did write “If a sister in good standing wish to arise in the congregation and offer an exhortation it is her privilege to do.”⁹¹Octographic Review 44.34 [1901] 1.

SUMMARY OF 1 COR 11:2-16

Succinctly stated, the section of 11:3-15 can be divided into five arguments Paul made concerning head coverings. He appeals to culture 11:3-6,⁹²He appeals to culture and uses the word for shame (dishonors or disgrace) three times in 11:3-6. Head coverings were a problem for both men and women because of the need for gender distinctions.  Paul urges the women not conduct themselves in a “shameful manner. creation 11:7-10,⁹³He appeals to creation using the words “image” and “created” (11:7-10). Because God’s glory should only be seen in the worship assembly, man should not cover his head, but the woman should cover her head so as to not take away from the glory of God. Paul understands anyone in Christ is a “new creation” (2 Cor 5:17). A literal Greek translation is “in Christ new creation” ((ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις). When talking about who the widow should marry (7:39), Paul uses “in the Lord.”  new creation 11:11-12, culture 11:13 (again but from different reasoning), and nature 11:14-15.  Evidently Paul’s teaching on the importance of the veil was based on a cultural situation (1 Cor 9:19-23), and because this topic does not appear in any other New Testament letter, it can be assumed the use of the veil was a non-issue in other churches. When the cultural situation ceased, the command to have a veil ceased. No longer was a shaven head the sign of a prostitute nor the veil a sign of authority.⁹⁴How universal the practices of the Corinthian churches were and how long they were maintained is unknown. Certainly, many changes have occurred in the churches of Christ in the past 125 years.  For example, in the 20^th century some rural churches preferred men sit on one side of the building and women on the other. (Smyrna church of Christ had one entrance for men and another entrance for women.) The preacher was expected to wear a suit and tie, men removed their hats/caps when they entered the building, and women wore dresses or skirts. The communion was covered with a white cloth.

             After Paul dealt with the issues related to pagan assemblies (8:1-11:1), he addresses the issues related to Christian assemblies.  Whether these issues were found in every assembly or whether they were issues in specific house churches or when a number of house churches met together cannot be determined. However, proper respect each for the other is woven throughout as Paul addresses proper attire, the Lord’s supper, and an orderly (non-chaotic) assembly.  Christians are connected to each other, and that one principle trumps their opinions and preferences as they interact with other members of the body.  

Paul is not opposed to women praying and prophesying in the assembly, but when they did so, they were to honor the custom and cover their heads. (Note: This agrees with Acts 2:17 and Acts 21:9.)  It seems if he had wanted them to remain silent, he would have indicated that as he did in 1 Cor 14:34-35. 

The exact meaning of “head coverings”⁹⁵Bartlett, Men and Women in Christ, 142-159.  and whether or not these coverings were used outside the assembly, or whether they were worn by all women—married and single—is unknown.⁹⁶If the women of 1 Cor 11:4-5 had to be married, the large group of unmarried women (1 Corinthians 7) in the church and visiting single prophets from other churches (Acts 21:9) would have presented a problem. There is no proof women prophets in 1 Corinthians 14 were married. Regardless, Paul approves of women engaged in prayer (relationship with God) and prophecy (relationship with fellow believers) in the assembly in the presence of men.  “Who was doing what” is not the issue with Paul but rather “how they were doing it.”⁹⁷In 1 Corinthians 11, both men and women were to dress properly. The issue in 1 Corinthians 14 was a chaotic assembly that had been created by men and women alike. The issue in both of these chapters is conduct and not gender.     

Introduction: Need for Creation Theology

NOTE: Footnotes can be read by clicking on the number in the body of the text.

As I continue to study at this ‘seasoned’ point in my life, I am more convinced than ever that good biblical exegesis, regardless of the specific text, is best done when viewed as part of the whole biblical narrative—beginning with creation.  When viewed this way, the character of God and his original intent for us is the driving force that shapes our study.  

The opening chapters of Genesis establish that, by nature, God is relational and he is also love. As the crowning act of creation, man was formed in his image, and with that the stage was set for the ultimate relationship—God and man. He gave man a responsibility, a helper to complete him, and an earth to subdue and sustain him. With the disobedience of Adam and Eve, God’s original plan for mankind and their relationship veered off course. ¹ Gen 3:15 is the first hint of the Creator’s plan of sending Jesus. See Isa 53:5; Rom 16:20. Gen 3:16-19 describes the post fall world—a world never desired by God.  With few exceptions (i.e. Enoch, Gen 5:22), God’s apex of creation continued to drift away from its creator. Man took multiple wives (Gen 4:19), offered improper sacrifices (Gen 4:2-5; Heb 11:4) and committed murder (Gen 4:8).  Gen 6: 5-6 records the extent of man’s wickedness:

The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thought of the human heart was only evil all the time.  The Lord regretted that he had made humans beings on the earth and his heart was deeply troubled.

Jesus and Creation Theology

After the flood and through Abram God began to unveil a new plan to redeem and bless fallen man (Gen 12:1-3).  For the next 2000 years God’s redemptive plan unfolded until the “time” was right (Gal 4:4) to send his son as the redeemer and savior of his lost creation.  Succinctly stated, the Bible is actually a love story of God for mankind. This is reiterated by the life and words of Jesus, and nearing the end of his ministry he prayed,

Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began  (John 17:5) ²Matt 13:35 (Psa 79:2); John 17:24.

God’s love for his creation is further illustrated when Jesus, referencing the future judgement, declared some were going to an inheritance that had been prepared “since the creation of the world” (Matt 25:31-34). ³The book of Isaiah stressed God and Creation (42:5; 4:24; 45:12, 18; 51:3).  Moses began his prayer with creation (Psa 90:2).

Marriage/Divorce and Creation Theology

With the creation of Adam and Eve, God also created the first family—a man and a woman for life. The importance of a return to the creation ideal is best seen in Jesus’ teaching about marriage. Because of sinful man God made divorce concessions, but that was never his ideal.  When asked about these concessions (Deut 24:1-4), Jesus responded with the original intent of the Creator in the Garden of Eden (Matt 19:4-6).  He followed his quoted response with the interpretation, “So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”  Jesus concluded with the application of the interpreted text: “Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.” ⁴When the disciples were confronted with the original plan in Genesis of a life-long, no divorce option, they reacted by stating “it is better not to marry” (Matt 19:10b) to which Jesus agreed that might be the best the course of action for some people.  Based on his understanding of creation, Jesus taught there were two options: life-long marriage or celibacy.For more information on the dialogue between the Pharisees and Jesus about divorce, see the following book: Jerry Jones, Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage: Seen Though the Character of God and the Mind of Jesus. Joplin, MO.: College Press, 2014

Paul and Creation Theology

Nowhere is the importance of creation better seen than in the writings of the most influential follower of Jesus in the first century—the apostle Paul.  The creation theme permeates his directives to churches and individuals alike seeking to follow Jesus. 

Paul used creation as a basis for Christian character: 

1. Creation took place in Christ (Eph 2:10) and resulted in one being a “new creation  (2 Cor 5:17). Paul taught baptized believers began a new life (Rom 6:4). God did not redo one’s old nature but created something brand new and fresh (καινότητι).  As God had created the world out of nothing (ex nihilo), he did the same for mankind.
2. The “new self” was “to be created to be like God” (Eph 4:24; Col 3:10).
3. Being “holy and blameless” was connected to “creation of the world” (Eph 1:4).

Paul used creation as the basis for conduct: ⁵God was central in Paul’s life. He believed his God was whose he was, whom he served Acts (27:23), whom he sought to imitate ((Eph 5:1), and who was not far from him (Acts 17:27).

1. When Paul dealt with the false teaching on celibacy, he declared God created foods “to be received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim 4:3) because everything God created was  good (1 Tim 4:4).
2. As Paul dealt with the false teachings of Galatia concerning their demand that Gentile believers be circumcised, he said “what counts is the new creation” (Gal 6:15). 
3. When Paul wanted to stress the importance of inheritance for everyone in Gal 3:28, he used creation. Paul declared inheritance was possible for all people (Jew/Gentile), all social levels (slave/free), and is not limited to sex (male/female).  Note: Instead of using the words for man and woman, Paul chose to use creation terminology, male and female (ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ). These are the terms that appear in the ancient Greek translation (LXX) of Gen 1:27 (arsen kai thēlu). There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female(ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ) (Gal 3:28 NIV 2011).
4. When Paul wanted to condemn the Gentile way of life, creation was his basis. ⁶The dependence Paul had on the creation story in Gen 1:26-27 is demonstrated with his teaching in Rom 1:23, 26-27.  When Paul addressed the likeness of God and the image in humans, he used the same vocabulary. In both Genesis and Romans, the words anthropos (human) and eikon (image) are used as well as two forms for likeness: homoiosis (Genesis) and homoioma (Romans). Genesis and Romans use the same words for birds (peteina) and reptiles (herpeta) but they differ in the words for cattle (ktenos in Genesis) and four-footed beasts (tetrapoda in Romans).  Both Genesis and Romans use the same words for male (arsen and arsenes) and female (thelus and theleiai). Paul said the “wrath of God” was being revealed and added “since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities” were clearly seen so people were “without excuse” (Rom 1:18-20).  Paul’s reference to “birds and animals and reptiles” in Rom 1:23 is matched in Gen. 1:30. The Gentiles were accused of serving created things rather than the Creator (Rom 1:25).  As he did in Gal 3:28, Paul used the words for male and female ⁷He used θηλείας twice in 1:26-27. in Rom 1:27 rather than the words for men and women. ⁸26 Διὰ τοῦτο παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς εἰς πάθη ἀτιμίας, αἵ τε γὰρ θήλειαι αὐτῶν μετήλλαξαν τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν εἰς τὴν παρὰ φύσιν,27ὁμοίως τε καὶ οἱ ἄρσενες ἀφέντες τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν τῆς θηλείας ἐξεκαύθησαν ἐν τῇ ὀρέξει αὐτῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους, ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην κατεργαζόμενοι καὶ τὴν ἀντιμισθίαν ἣν ἔδει τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἀπολαμβάνοντες.
5. When Paul wanted his readers to appreciate what God had provided for them, he used the creation of the world as his marker (Eph 1:4) and urged his readers to show their appreciation by living a life of the “chosen.” ⁹John used “creation of the world” in respect of the death of Jesus (Rev 13:8) and the names written in the book of life (Rev 17:8).
6. When Paul addressed a “very religious” audience, he based his preaching on the God “who made the world and everything in it” (Acts 17:22-23).  It was this God who “commands all people everywhere to repent” (Acts `17:30).
7. As Paul dealt with the relationship of men and women in the assembly, he used creational language to solve the issue. Paul summarized the creation of man and woman in 1 Cor 11:8-9.
   
   For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman from man.
   
   After Paul made a comment about angels, he returned to an emphasis on creation.    Prefacing his comments with “in the Lord,” he took the relationship of man and woman back to creation and closed his thoughts by declaring “everything comes from God” (1 Cor 11:11-12).
   
   Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God. (New Revised Standard Version)
   
   But among the Lord’s people, women are not independent of men, and men are not independent of women. For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God. (New Living Translation)
   
   However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. (New American Standard Bible)
   
   The text communicates mutuality and equality in the relationship between a man and woman rather than a hierarchical one. ¹⁰1 Cor 11:11-12 becomes a commentary on what Paul meant about headship in 1 Cor 11:3. With the teaching of 1 Cor 11:11-12 as an overlay of 1 Cor 11:3, the text is seen more as  “relationship” and not “authority.” Paul was using the hierarchal wording of his world but was modifying it by his commentary of 1 Cor 11:11-12. Paul did use “head” as meaning authority in Eph 1:22 and Col 1:18 as he dealt of the contextual issues of both the church at Ephesus (and maybe other churches in the region) and Colossae.  The contextual issues of these two churches were not the issue of the church at Corinth. Respect for other Christians was at the heart of the problem in Corinth.  It is always a mistake to assign a definition to a word without serious consideration of context.  Even within different generations, the same word can take on different nuances. Dictionaries cannot always be the final meaning of a word in every context.
   
   Even though Paul did not use the word “creation” as he addressed the financial  needs of the saints in Jerusalem, ¹¹John Mark Hicks, Searching for the Pattern: My Journey in Interpreting the Bible. (2019), 127. he wrote:
   
   Now he who supplies seed for the sower (reference to creation) ¹²Gen 1:11 and bread for food will also supply and increase your store of seed and will enlarge the harvest of your righteousness.
   
8. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul opposed the heteron, ¹³ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον a different gospel that they were accepting (Gal 1:6-9).  In 5:1, he began describing how they should conduct themselves as people who had been freed from slavery. At the close of this section he connected three important concepts: cross, creation and rule. The cross had provided the “new creation.” He closed by telling his readers to follow this “rule”—cross and new creation.¹⁴Hicks, Searching for the Pattern, 119. The text reads:
   May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ…what counts is the new creation. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule…¹⁵This is the only time rule (canoni) appears in the New Testament and means “measuring.”  (Gal 6:14-16).
   
   For Paul, restoration was a return to the original plan of God, hence he maintained a strong emphasis on creation as his guide. Paul believed God had the power to make a “new humanity” out of two (Eph 2:15), to make people new in attitude (Eph 4:23), and to have a “new self, created to be like God” (Eph 4:24).
   
   Paul also emphasized “time” as he discussed creation.  In 2 Tim 1:9, ¹⁶πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων (“from time eternal”) is the phrase in 2 Tim 1:9 and Titus 1:2.he explained grace had a place “before the beginning of time.”  In Titus 1:2, he explained God had provided the hope of eternal life “before the beginning of time.”¹⁷The only recorded prayer to God in the assembly began by affirming God “made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them” (Acts 4:24). Peter saw creation as a marker in reference to Jesus (1 Pet 1:20) and time (2 Pet 3:4). Peter closed his book with the admonishment for his readers to “commit themselves to their faithful Creator” (1 Pet 4:19). John connected creation with the book of life (Rev 17:8).
   
   When the people of Lystra wanted to make sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas because they saw them as gods, Paul again returned to creation:
   
   Men, why are you doing this? We too are only men, human like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from those worthless things to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea and everything in them. (Acts14:15).
   
9. Evidently Epaphras (Col 1:7) had given Paul information about the immaturity of the church in Colossae (Col 1:28). They had been doing right for the wrong reasons. In an effort to remedy this situation, Paul encouraged them to focus their hearts on Jesus (Col 3:1-3).  As a foundation for his direction, Paul established the importance of Christ (Col 1:18-23) and emphasized that he was even a part of creation (Col 1:15-16).¹⁸Other New Testament books use creation as a foundation. (1) John’s purpose in writing his gospel was to provide a foundation for belief (John 20:30-31). He began his gospel with an emphasis on Jesus and creation (John 1:3). (2) The book of Hebrews is a “word of exhortation” (Heb 13:22) to encourage discouraged disciples (Heb 10:36; 12:1-2). The letter begins with Jesus’ involvement in creation (Heb 1:2).

Paul used creation to demonstrate God’s concern for every aspect of man
Not only did Paul use creation in teaching conduct and character, he used it to show God’s concern for both the spiritual and physical wellbeing of mankind (Rom 8:18-25). Romans 8 stands in stark contrast to Romans 7.  Whereas Romans 7 deals with indwelling sin (7:17, 20), Romans 8 deals with indwelling spirit (8:11). In the middle of explaining the indwelling spirit, Paul expresses anticipation that mankind will be released from its decaying physical nature (8:21).  Even though his reference to a liberated creation (earth) was illustrative of the Christian’s walk (“in the same way” 8:26), it teaches the importance of all aspects of mankind.

Paul used creation to illustrate God’s justification of man
The prayers of Paul supply the best information as to his purpose and execution of his ministry. His words in Eph 1:17-19 vividly illustrate this.  Paul wanted his readers to understand the hope that was connected to their calling, the riches of their inheritance, and the great power for all believers. God wanted to restore what was lost in the fall.  At the heart of God’s plan to reconcile with his creation was the redemption of mankind through the death and resurrection of his son.   Paul’s mentioning of “his mighty strength” (Eph 1:19) is just a reflection of Isa 40:26—and a direct link to creation, 

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.

When dealing with the church as the manifold wisdom of God and an expression of God’s eternal purpose, Paul declared God “who created all things” (Eph 3:9). The same phrase was echoed by John in Rev 4:11. ¹⁹Heb 4:3

Because God is interactive he wants to walk again with his people as he did in the garden of Eden. As a result of the creative power of God (Eph 2:15), Christians have been forgiven, transformed, set free from the bondage of Satan (Col 1:13), and possess a new identity through Jesus. Through the creative power of God, Christians become what God wanted for all his creation—to be like him. Being translated into the kingdom is the restoration and the fulfillment of what was lost in the fall.  The good news of Jesus offered not only liberation, but transformation (2 Cor 3:18). Christians are the recipients of God’s “imputed righteousness” through their entrance into Christ through baptism.

The emphasis on creation in connection with Christians is undeniable. Christians are “renewed in the knowledge in the image of its Creator” (Col 3:10). They are a “work of creation” (Eph 2:10), are “a new creation” (2 Cor 5:17), and are “created to be like God” (Eph 4:24). Paul affirmed the reconciliation of man back to God (the creator) in one body by the cross (Eph 2:16)

Reading the Bible and Creation Theology

Beginning with Jesus’ emphasis on the importance of creation (Matt 19:4-6) to John’s reference to creation (Rev 13:8), the New Testament is filled with the importance of returning to God’s original intent for mankind (Gen 1:27). If we view the word of God through the lens of creation, most likely the 21^st century church will have a better grasp of the paths God desires his followers in the present age to follow.

Conclusion

The creation story in Genesis provides the best insight in the entire Hebrew Bible and New Testament into the mind of God. In these few passages the character and purpose of God are vividly revealed.   Genesis 1-2 tells of a God who was kind and gracious toward his creation. He created a place where he and his created “image” could live and walk together. When man sinned, God did nt give up on him, but provided an avenue of redemption and justification.  God showed both grace and renewal in the stories of Adam, Cain, Noah and the tower of Babel.  From Gen 3:16 onward the story of his determination to redeem mankind unfolds.  Through his unending love, divine power, the sacrifice of part of himself, he will, in time, restore the apex of his creation to a new “Eden” (Rev 22:1-5).

Introduction

NOTE: Footnotes can be read by clicking on the number in the body of the text.

The principles outlined in the first three chapters of Genesis are foundational in revealing the nature of God and his intent for all of his creation.  Significantly these truths continue to be reflected throughout the Hebrew Bible as well as in our New Testament.  This includes an often overlooked but essential perspective on God’s relationship with the apex of his creation—mankind.  Although the information is limited, the guidelines presented within these verses concerning the God/mankind relationship and the man/woman relationship serve as the standard for comparison against which all other teachings on the subjects in the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament must be aligned. 

Creation of God’s House

Genesis is a book of theology—not science—and was written by ancient people in terms they could understand.¹The best explanation of the understanding of the Garden of Eden comes from William J. Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis. (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 2001), 110-122. Restoration of the original plan in the Garden of Eden corresponds to the restoration of the Garden of Eden found in Rev 22:1-5.  Much of Genesis 1-3 is the story of how God created a dwelling place for both himself and man—a place where man could even ‘walk’ with God (Gen 3:8).  God’s original plan was that his “love object”—mankind was to live with him in complete love, trust, and obedience.

Relationship of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden

The information in Genesis 1-3 provides the foundation for Paul’s teachings regarding women in 1 Cor 11:8-12 and 1 Tim 2:13-14.   At the end of each creation, God stated that “it was good.” ²Gen 1:10,12, 25 However, after man was created God declared it was not good for him to be alone (Gen 2:18). The creation story simply states that the woman was created as a suitable helper to the man but that does not indicate a status of inferiority (Gen 2:20). ³Psa 54:14; 118:7; 121:1-2; Isa 41:10. God is seen as a “helper” (ezer). Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals, 128. “When including both the noun and verb forms, there are about 128 occurrences in the Old Testament.  The large majority of uses (72%) are of superior status individuals helping those of a lesser status. Yet, there are a number of examples where the “helper” is either off equal status (18%) or lower status (10%) than the one being helped.  Therefore, the word ezer itself tells us nothing about the status of the individual.  Only contextual factors beyond the word should be used to establish whether the status of the helper is higher, lower or equal to the one being helped.  She was “beside” and not “below” man.   

Consider the following six observations: ⁴Rick Marrs, “In the Beginning: Male and Female (Gen 1-3)”in Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity Vol 2 Carroll Osburn (ed) (Joplin: College Press, 1995), 31. Carroll Osburn, Women in the Church. (Abilene, TX: ACU Press, 2001), 123.

1. Both Adam and Eve were made in the image of God⁵“Woman is created as a companion (neither subordinate nor superior) who alleviates man’s isolation through identity.”  Marrs, “in the Beginning: Male and Female (Gen 1-3),” 20.  and their mandate was to rule the rest of creation. Their creation order is best viewed not as superiority to inferiority but rather incompleteness to completeness. ⁶Osburn, Women in the Church, 118. Eve was created from Adam’s rib but that does not imply subordination and inferiority any more than Adam’s formation after the earth implies he was inferior or subordinate to the earth. 
2. After Adam named the animals, he went to sleep and awoke to see the woman. Just as the animals were brought to Adam, so was the woman (Gen 2:19, 22).    Adam saw quickly she was not like the other animals but was like him.  He responded by calling her woman (ishshah Gen 2:23) which was a play on words because he was a man (ish). By naming the woman Adam put her above the animals and on to his level. Actually Adam named Eve twice, once before and once after the fall.  The first name was similar to his own but the second was more personal in nature.  
3. The woman was referred to as man’s “helper fit for him.” This phrase is relational.⁷Marrs, “in the Beginning: Male and Female (Gen 1-3),” 20. God is referred to as a helper of people ⁸Exod 18:4; Deut 33:7, 26; Psa 20:3; 33:20; 70:5; 115:9-11; 121:1; 146:5. but this certainly does not indicate subordination or inferiority. In the Genesis text “suitable helper” means “corresponding to him,” “equal to” or “like him.”  Adam and Eve corresponded to one another mentally, relationally, vocationally and physically.⁹
   Poem by John Wesley.
   Not from his head he woman took
   And made her husband to o’erlook;
   Not from his feet, as one designed
   The footstool of the stranger kind;
   But fashioned for himself a bride; 
   An equal taken from his side.
   “Eve was not taken out of Adam’s head to top him, neither out of his feet to be trampled on by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected by him, and near his heart to be loved by him.” (Quote from Matthew Henry)  
   Note:  the word helper can have other meanings depending on the context.
4. “Bone of my bones” not only carried the idea of being made from the same substance but conveyed a covenant pledge to the woman (Gen 2:23; 2 Sam 5:1).
5. Becoming “one flesh” was in reality becoming one person (Gen 2:24).  The sexual union was the representation of the entirety of the marriage.¹⁰1 Cor 6:15-20
6. Man was not designed to live in solitude.  He had an upward relationship with God, a downward relationship with the animals, but he needed a horizonal relationship—something neither God nor the animals could supply.

Implications of the Curse

The results of the fall were threefold and would become universal:

(1) Pain in childbirth (painful labor).
(2) The resistance of the earth (thorns and thistles).
(3) Death (dust you are and to dust you return).

 In order to understand the curse of Gen 3:14-19, it is necessary to look at other “curse” texts of Genesis. In two of them (Gen 9:25-27 and Gen 27:29, 40), there was a change in status for Noah/Canaan and Isaac/Jacob.  In the case of Gen 3:14-19, the status of the woman (man will rule over her) and the snake (crawl on his belly and eat dust) changed. The woman was lower than other humans (man) and the snake was made lower than other animals. Because Eve’s status changed after the fall (she was now lower than man and her desire was to her husband, Gen 3:16), she could not have been subordinate in the created state.  Since the fall, mankind has sought to reverse the effects of the curse.  The curse of the land (Gen 3:17-19) has been and continues to be challenged by improved methods in agricultural science.  The medical field constantly challenges the curse of people returning to dust (death).  In a similar way, the effects of the curse of subordination and the resulting “rule and conflict” between men and women need not be perpetuated.  To preserve hierarchy that involves the relationship of men and women is perpetuating the effect of the curse rather than restoring the Garden of Eden relationship. ¹¹footnote 11 Just because the fall produced negative consequences in all areas of life does not mean these consequences cannot and should not be resisted.

Conclusion

The goal for the Christian communities should be to restore the pre-fall world—God’s intended ideal state. When Paul’s explanation of the creation story as recorded in 1 Cor 11:11-12 is studied, it supports an equal/mutual relationship and not subordinate/ hierarchical one.  With the fall, sin entered the world and the original, intended equality was distorted into a power struggle (Gen 3:16).  Male domination or hierarchism was a result of sin and not part of God’s intended plan at creation. ¹²This point is dramatically emphasized as the Pharisees tested Jesus in regard to a lawful divorce (Matt 19:1-12).  Jesus appealed to God’s pre-fall view of marriage (Gen 2:24) rather than the post-fall teaching about marriage and divorce (Deut 24:1-4).    Eve is often considered the antagonist in the ‘temptation’ scenario ¹³“Paul does not draw from Gen 1-3 a universal principle from the historical Eve, but an ad hoc analogy from the later caricature of Eve in the Jewish tradition.” Osburn, Women in the Church, 249. See Randall Chestnutt, “Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman Era” Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity (e. Carroll D. Osburn: Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993): 1.102 “the portrait of Eve as one constantly weeping, ignorant, perplexed, vulnerable to sin, and dependent upon the males around her for insight bears some relation to the way women were actually perceived and treated in the authors’ and redactors’ own times and places.” but the command not to eat of the tree was first delivered to the man.  After God presented the woman to the man, there is no mention of them being separated, and in Gen 1:27 the text shifts from the singular “him” to the plural “them.”  Both were present at the time of the fall. ¹⁴Both were: created in God’s image (1:27), charged with ruling over creation (1:26,28), charged with being fruitful (1:28), received a blessing from God (1:28), given food to eat (1:29), to refrain from eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (2:17; 3:6). Their eyes were opened (3:7). They knew they were naked and made clothes (3:7), were questioned by God (3:9-12,13), received consequences for their sins (3:16, 17-19).[.mfn] The serpent addressed them in the plural, “You must not eat…” (3:1).  The woman responded in first person plural (we) in 3:2. In 3:4 the serpent responded again in the plural, “You will not surely die.”  In 3:6b the man is mentioned as being “with her.” ¹⁴This understanding of the temptation story is important in interpreting 1 Tim 2:14. Eve gave Adam the fruit ¹⁵Marrs,” In the Beginning: Male and Female (Gen 1-3),” 24-26. and he listened to her (3:12, 17) even though he knew that was against God’s directive. ¹⁶“A straightforward reading of Gen 2 seriously undermines attempts to read that chapter hierarchically.” Marrs, “in the Beginning: Male and Female (Gen 1-3).” 31. Both Adam and Eve were equally expelled; he would toil the earth and she would experience pain with childbirth and “her desire would be unto her husband” (Gen 3:15).  The exact meaning of this phrase is problematic at best.  Trible summarized it this way:

The contrast in leadership before and after the fall is shown in the contrast of two texts:
(1) Gen 1:26-28 states both Adam and Eve should “be fruitful and increase in number, fill the earth and subdue it.” This would involve ruling over all creation.
(2) After the fall (Gen 3:16) man will rule over the woman. The fall changed from the joint rule of man and woman to the single rule of man.

Exegesis of the Gen 3:16 is best left to another time.  What is significant to this writing is the intended equality of man and woman at creation and before the fall.¹⁸God’s future and eternal plan is for the re-creation of the Garden of Eden.  In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had access to God and walked with him (Gen 3:8). There was no death or sin (Gen 3:17). The tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were there (Gen 2:9; 3:22), and the Garden was “pleasing to the eye” and was “good for food.” Man had the responsibility to take care of it (Gen 2:15). God’s plan for the future of his people appears to be a re-creation of the Garden of Eden.  Heaven is described as a paradise (Rev 2:7; 2 Cor 12:4) with the tree of life (Rev 2:7; 22:2,14,19). Man will have the responsibility to serve (Rev 7:15; 22:3). “There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Gen 2:7; Rev 21:4; Heb 2:14). There will no longer be a sea because man will have access to God and will be dwelling with him (Rev 21:1, 3).  With the restoration of the Garden of Eden, the tree of life in the paradise of God will be available to the faithful (Rev 2:7) and God will restore the original intent he had for man and woman.

NOTE: Beginning with this article, footnotes can be read by clicking on the number in the body of the text.

Several months ago, I posted my first blog article on the role of women in the New Testament church and promised another article would soon follow. As I continued my study, I felt that some preliminary material would have been helpful and that perhaps the first article was a little premature. Because of that I took a detour (so to speak) in my study and the result is the following three essays. The first centers on the meaning of the word “brothers” in the New Testament. The second addresses “creation theology”, and the third examines the mutual or hierarchal nature in the Garden of Eden. For those of you who are interested in a more in depth study, I have included several endnotes in each essay. In a few weeks I will post Part 2 of the original study of women in the New Testament church and the information in these essays will serve as a foundation for that discussion. Please feel free to post any questions or comments and thanks for reading! ~ Jerry

 THE MEANING OF “BROTHERS” IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

       Jerry Jones

Crucial to the study of the role of women in the early church is a proper understanding of the word “brothers” as it is used in the biblical text.  In Greek, as in English, often the meaning of a word is determined by the context in which it is found.  At times the term brothers (ἀδελφοί) ¹“The pl. can also mean brothers and sisters.” Bauer, W., F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and E.W. Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature 3^rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 18. Four examples of how αδελφος is used outside the New Testament is as follows:

Euripides, Electra 536 (5th cent. BC) πως δ’ αν γενοιτ’ αν εν κραταιλεω πεδω γαιας ποδων εκμακτρον; ει δ’ εστιν τοδε, δυοιν αδελφοιν πους αν ου γενοιτ’ ισος ανδρος τε και γυναικος, αλλ’ αρσην κρατει. “How could there be an imprint of feet on a stony plot of ground? And if there is, the foot of brother and sister would not be the same in size, for the male surpasses.” In this citation from Euripides the form of the noun (adelphoin) is actually a dual form, not a plural, and it refers unambiguously to a brother-sister pair.

Andocides, On the Mysteries 47 (circa 400 BC) Χαρμιδης Αριστοτελους — ουτος ανεψιος εμος: η μητηρ η εκεινου και ο πατηρ ο εμος αδελφοι. “Charmides, son of Aristoteles — that is a cousin of mine; his mother and my father were brother and sister.” Here the form (adelphoi) is the masculine plural, and it refers unambiguously to a brother-sister pair.

Oxyrhynchus Papyri 713, 20-23 (AD 97) αδελφοις μου Διοδωρω κ. Θαιδι “… to my brother and sister Diodorus and Thedis” [Thedis is a woman’s name]. Again, here a masculine plural form (the dative adelphois) refers to a brother-sister pair.

Epictetus, Discourses 1.12.20 (circa AD 130) μεμφη δε και γονεις τους σεαυτου και τεκνα και αδελφους και γειτονας. “you find fault too with your own parents and children, and brothers [and sisters?] and neighbors.” Here the masculine plural may mean “brothers and sisters” in general, because it is used with gender-neutral words for “parents” and “children.” But the case is not clear. The same is true of the citation from Polybius.

For more information see: Michael D. Marlowe,The Translation of Αδελφος and Αδελφοι: A Response to Mark Strauss and I. Howard Marshall (2004).  Mark Strauss, “linguistic and Hermeneutical Fallacies in the Guidelines Established at the “Conference on Gender-Related Language in Scripture.’ “ JETS 41/2 (June 1998); 239-262.  When ἀδελφὸς carries this inclusive sense, it seems that the most accurate translation would be ‘brothers and sisters’.  This is not a concession to the feminist agenda.  Rather, it is exactly what the term meant in its first-century context.” (253) D. A. Carson, The Inclusive Language Debate: A Plea for Realism. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1998), 130-131.  “But there is plenty of unambiguous evidence, both in the New Testament and outside of it, that ‘brothers’ very often meant what we mean by ‘brothers and sisters.’ Thus within the New Testament, Paul can address the Philippian believers as ‘my brothers’ (Phil 4:1 NIV) and immediately start addressing two of the women in the church (Phil 4:2-3; see also 1 Cor 7:15; James 2:15).” David A. DeSilva, The Letter to the Galatians. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018), 515.  Throughout the commentary on Galatians, DeSilva translated adelphoi (ἀδελφοί) as “brothers and sisters” and maintained this was the proper understanding of the Greek word. Galatians is the only letter Paul closed with ἀδελφοί·ἀμήν (“brothers and sisters Amen”).  Because Paul had written some strong statements, this conclusion shows he still had a loving concern for these young converts. Andrew Bartlett, Men and Women in Christ: Fresh Light from the Biblical Texts. ((London: InterVarsity Press, 2019),163. “It is uncontroversial that when he addresses his readers as ‘brothers’ (plural of adelphos), this is used as a generic term which includes women (11:33; 12:1; 14:6, 20, 26, 39). In chapter 14 he says to the Corinthian believers, both men and women, that they should eagerly desire spiritual gifts…He says that he would like all of them to speak in tongues and even more to prophesy (v.5).” Bartlett, Men and Women in Christ, 206-207 “In Romans 15:14 he goes on to affirm that the brothers (including sisters—Greek adelphos) are able to ‘instruct’ one another (NIV). Here ‘instruct is noutheteo, which refers to teaching. It is the same word as is used for Paul’s admonition in Acts 20:31, for what leaders do in 1 Thessalonians 5:12, and it is used in the same sense. (The related noun nouthesia [‘instruction’] describes the purpose of the Old Testament in 1 Cor 10:11).” can mean ‘men’, yet in other contexts the same term can mean ‘men and women.’ ²Sometimes context shows anthropos (ἀνθρώπους) and can include both men and women (1 Cor 7:7; 2 Tim 4:2).

(1). Luke 21:16 states: “You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers, ³BDAG, 18. “Hence there is no doubt that in LK 21:16 ἀδελφοί = brothers and sisters.” relatives and friends…”  Sisters are not mentioned, but they would be included in “brothers.” 
Luke 21:16 
ἀδελφῶν καὶ συγγενῶν καὶ φίλων,
brothers and relatives and friends

In similar texts, the term sisters is mentioned as well. ⁴ἀδελφὰς and ἀδελφοὺς are accusative plurals and are from two different words that are closely related.

In Luke 14:26 and Mark 10:30, the term is “brothers and sisters,” but in Luke 21:18, it is only “brothers” which must include sisters. Luke is not saying “sisters” would not betray. The NIV 2011 uses “brothers and sisters” in Luke 21:18. In Matt 10:37, father, mother, son, and daughter are mentioned. In 1 Pet 2:17 (ἀδελφότητα) and 1 Pet 5:9 (ἀδελφότητι), the terms are translated “family of believers” in the NIV 2011. In the NIV 1984, they are translated “brotherhood of believers” and “brothers.” The translation of “family of believers” would include females. In the 5:9 text, Peter said “the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings.” Females were not exempt from suffering (Acts 8:3; 9:14; 22:4 Rom 16:7).
Luke 14:26
γυναῖκα καὶ τὰ τέκνα καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τὰς ἀδελφὰς ⁵

1 Tim 5:2 πρεσβυτέρας ὡς μητέρας,    νεωτέρας       ὡς ἀδελφὰςἐν πάσῃ ἁγνείᾳ.

   0lder women   as mothers  younger women  as  sisters      in   all      purity
wife     and    children and        brothers    and        sisters

Mark 10:30
ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ἀδελφὰς καὶ μητέρας. 
brothers   and   sisters    and mothers

(2). In Acts 16:13-40, Lydia and members of her household were converted along with some other women.  When Paul and Silas were released from prison, they went to Lydia’s house and met with the brothers (ἀδελφοὺς).  In light of the conversion of Lydia and others, brothers (16:40) would have to include women. ⁶In Acts 16:13, Paul found a group of women at a place of prayer (possibly a synagogue).  Men are not mentioned as being present.  One of the women was Lydia who was a worshipper of God.  This indicates she was not a Jew but had embraced the God of the Jews.  She responded to the message and, along with her household, was baptized.  She invited Paul and Silas to come into her house and they accepted her invitation.  After the experience in the Philippian jail, Paul and Silas were released from prison and went to Lydia’s house again (Acts 16:40). Luke wrote that “they met with the brothers and encouraged them” (Acts 16:40). Apparently, men had been converted since Paul and Silas had first visited Lydia, yet Luke provides no information as to how they were converted and by whom. Paul and Silas encouraged the “brothers,” yet the presence of women in Lydia’s house is well attested. This is an example of the term “brothers” including both men and women.

(3). While in Ephesus, Apollos met with Priscilla and Aquila to study the scriptures (Acts 18:24-26). After he received a better understanding, Apollos wanted to go to Achaia. The brothers “encouraged him and wrote to the disciples there to welcome him” (Acts 18:27).  Because of Priscilla brothers could not be limited only to males.

(4). In the Philippian letter, Paul urged the brothers to rejoice (3:1) and admonished the brothers (3:13).  He told the brothers to follow his example (3:17), stand firm in the Lord  (4:1) (mentioning Euodia and Syntyche specifically, 4:2), and to concentrate on certain qualities (4:8). He also mentioned those with him who sent their greetings (4;21). The recipients of the letter would have understood brothers included sisters. ⁷The “saints” (ἁγίοις) in 1:1 is masculine but would have included women.

(5). In 1 Corinthians, Paul addressed issues surrounding the Lord’s supper.  At the end of this teaching he said: “So then, my brothers (lit: “brothers of me”) and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together” (11:33 NIV 2011).

(6). Paul used the term “brother” six times in the final two chapters of 1 Corinthians (15:1, 6, 50, 58; 16:15, 20). The admonitions for the “brothers” in 15:58 should not be limited to men since the information in chapters 11 and 14 show women were involved in “the work of Lord.” ⁸11:2; 14:34; 7:2, 11, 15, 23; 39; 16:15 and the household of Chloe (1:10).

(7) In 1 Cor 15:1, Paul addressed the “brothers” reminding them “of the gospel I preached to you,” and they had “received and on which they had taken their  stand.” Paul continued by emphasizing the saving power of the gospel— assuming they would hold it firmly because if they did not they would “have believed in vain” (15:2). 

Most likely women were among the “brothers” mentioned in 15:1 because:
(a) Paul mentioned Chloe and her household (1:10).
(b) He addressed the brothers (ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἢ ἡ ἀδελφὴ) and sisters in       7:15.
(c) Women were praying and prophesying (11:5) and the wives of the       prophets were creating chaos (14:34).    

(8) In 1 Cor 15:5, Paul declared Jesus had appeared to (πεντακοσίοις ἀδελφοῖς) five hundred “brothers.”  Surely it can be assumed the “brothers” included women. 

(9) In Col 4:15, Paul wrote: “Give my greetings to the “brothers” at Laodicea” and adds, “to Nympha and the church in her house.”  This followed Paul’s normal practice to send greetings to women (Rom 16:3-15).

(10) Paul told his readers: “I urge you, brothers by our Lord Jesus Christ…join me in my struggle by praying to God for me” (Rom 15:30). The “brothers” would have included the women in the church. 

(11) In Rom 16:17, Paul warned the brothers “to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.” These admonitions would have been directed to both men and women because two verses earlier, he mentioned “Nereus and his sister” (16:15).

(12) In Rom 14:10a, Paul wrote: “You, then, why do you judge your brother  (ἀδελφόν)?” Or why do you look down on your brother (ἀδελφόν)?” Does Paul mean this is only a problem among men or does he mean it is a problem for both men and women? The NIV 2011 translates the verse in the following manner: “You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? (ἀδελφόν) Or why do you treat them (ἀδελφόν) with contempt?” ⁹

Σὺ     δὲ   τί     κρίνεις   τὸν ἀδελφόν σου;   ἢ καὶ        σὺ     τί   ἐξουθενεῖς τὸν ἀδελφόν σου; 

You  and why do judge  the brother    of you or indeed you why    despise   the brother of you

(13) In Gal 1:2, Paul mentioned the “brothers” who were with him.  In light of Phil 4:1-3, Rom 16:1-3 and Col 4:15, this included women (ἀδελφοί).  In the same chapter (1:11), Paul wanted the brothers (ἀδελφοί) to know the gospel he had preached.   

(14)  In Rom 15:14, Paul wrote: “I myself am convinced, my brothers, that you  yourselves are full of goodness, completed in knowledge and competent to  instruct one another.”  Considering the comments made about women in  Romans 16, they would also be included here.  ¹⁰As Paul concluded his letter to the church in Rome, he urged them (brothers and sisters) to instruct one another (ἀλλήλους νουθετεῖν) because they were “competent” (Rom 15:14). The Greek word (noutheteo) is translated “instruct” in the ESV, NRSV, RSV and NIV (2011).  The noun form of the word (nouthesia) is translated “instruction” in 1 Cor 10:11 as a function of the Old Testament. As Paul closed his first letter to the Thessalonians, he emphasized his teaching was to be received by the “brothers and sisters” (5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25, 27). He wanted them to appreciate the people who instructed (νουθετοῦντας ὑμᾶς) them (5:12 CEB). However, in many translations νουθετοῦντας is translated as “admonish” (NIV, ESV, NRSV).  In Paul’s closing remarks to the Ephesian elders, Paul declared he had instructed them (νουθετῶν ἕνα ἕκαστον) ”night and day with tears” (Acts 20:31).  As in 1 Thess 5:12, some translations use either “warn” or “admonish” (NRSV, ASV, ESV). It is important to observe nouthesia is closely tied to teaching (διδάσκοντες). Eg.:

(1) Col 1:28 “admonishing and teaching” (νουθετοῦντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον καὶ διδάσκοντες)

(2) Col 3:16 “teach and admonish” (διδάσκοντες καὶ νουθετοῦντες).

With a clear understanding of how the Greek word nouthesia is used in a number of texts and how adelphos should be understood, the importance of men and women teaching one another is evident (Rom 15:14).  

(15)  In 1 Cor 7:1-28, Paul had been teaching both men and women about issues  concerning sexuality and marriage. In 7:24, Paul urged brothers (ἀδελφοί) to  “remain in the situation” when called, but the context indicates the directive included women.  As he began to conclude his thoughts, he said: “What I mean brothers” (7:29) yet he had been instructing both men and women” as seen in  7:15 (ἀδελφὸςἢἡἀδελφὴ).

(16)  In 1 Cor 8:1-13, Paul addressed the problems relating to food sacrificed to idols. In his conclusion, he mentioned the “weak brother” (8:11), the possibility of wounding “their weak conscience” (8:12), and that eating such food could cause  his “brother to fall into sin” (8:13). Does Paul’s use of “brother” exclude women from being “weak,” having a “weak conscience,” or being wounded and falling “into sin”?  The NIV (2011)  and CEB uses “brother or sister” in 8:11 and 8:13 whereas the NRSV uses “believers” in 8:11.  ¹¹¹¹So by your knowledge those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed. ¹² But when you thus sin against members of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. ¹³ Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall.  (1 Cor 8:11-13 NRSV)

(17)  In 1 Cor 10:1, Paul addressed the “brothers.”  He proceeded to mention the experiences of the Israelites in the wilderness (10:1-5). In 1 Cor 10:6-11, he  admonished the “brothers” to use the experiences of the Israelites as their examples (10:6).  They were told not be idolaters (10:7), nor commit sexual  immorality (10:8), nor grumble (10:10), nor fall (10:12).  He then provided  instruction about withstanding temptation (10:13).  Surely women were not  excluded from these admonitions.   

(18)  After Paul had addressed the “brothers and sisters” in 8:11, 13; 10:1, he  proceeded to address issues within the assembly (11:2).  After he   corrected the conduct of both the men and women while praying and  prophesying, he corrected the conduct of men and women while they were  engaging in the Lord’s supper (11:33).  He introduced his discussion of spiritual  gifts by addressing both men and women (ἀδελφοί)(12:1). Note: Both men  and women possessed spiritual gifts (Acts 21:9; Cor 11:5; Acts 2:17). Paul  devoted chapter thirteen to the importance of love and respect for everyone during the assembly.  He began chapter fourteen by addressing the purpose of prophecy (14:1-5).  In 14:6, Paul began to address the chaotic nature of the assembly (14:6-19) and pointed out both men and women (14:6) had contributed to the problems (14:20, 26, 39).  Men and women prophets were a problem in 11:5 and also in chapter 14. Paul then continued with comments to the men and women in 15:1, 6, 50, 58; 16:15 and 20. ¹²1 Cor 14:34 was not the first time Paul had addressed the women in 1 Corinthians 14 because his teaching about the use of prophesy included women. Note: The “women” of 14:34 is not “categorical” (meaning all females) because women had ready been speaking (11:5; 13). 

(19)  In 1 Cor 16:20, Paul said all the “brothers” (ἀδελφοί) send their greetings. Assuming Paul wrote 1 Corinthians from Ephesus, women would have been included in this group (1 Tim 2:9-15; 3:2, 11; 5:2, 9-16).  ¹³The book of Ephesians is a general letter to several churches—not just the church at Ephesus. Paul indicates women were going to receive the letter (5:21-33).

(20)  In 1 Pet 2:17, Peter told his readers to “Love the brotherhood of believers” or as recorded in the NIV (2011), “Love the family of believers.” The original word is a form of “brothers” (ἀδελφότητα).  Peter would not have intended for women to be excluded from this group.

(21)  In Acts 15:36, Paul said to Barnabas: “Let us go back and visit the believers (ἀδελφοὺς) in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” The NIV (2011) chose to use the word “believers” which would have included Timothy’s mother and other women.  (Acts 16:1). The CEB translates ἀδελφοὺςas “brothers and sisters” in both Acts 15:36 and 16:2. 

(22)  In 1 Cor 2:1 Paul addressed the “brothers” when he wrote: “When I came to you…I proclaimed to you…while I was with you…I came to you.” He had already referenced the woman Chloe (1:10) so it follows women were included in 1 Cor 2:1 as were the women in the household of Stephanas (16:15)

(23)  In the book of Galatians, the NIV (2011) and CEB translate adelphoi (ἀδελφοί)  as “brothers and sisters” ten times.  The NRSV  translates adelphoi as “brothers andsisters” four times, as “friends” five times, and as “all members of God’s family” once (1:2). ¹⁴The NRSV translates 1 Cor 1:10, 11, 26; 2:1; 3:1; 4:6; 5:11; 7:24. 29; 10:1; 11:33; 12:1 14:6, 20: 15:1, 6, 50; Rom 12:1;15:14; 1 Tim 4:6 as brothers and sisters. In the case or 1 Cor 14:26 and 14:39, the NRSV translates “brothers” as “my friends.” The CEB translates 1 Cor 14:6, 20, 26, 39 as “brothers and sisters.” See 1:11, 26; 2:1; 3:1; 4:6; 6:8; 7:24, 29;12:1; 15:1, 50; Acts 18:18. 27. The New Century Version (NCV),  the New Testament for Everyone (NTE) and the Easy to Read Version (ERV), Christian Standard Bible (CSB), Names of God (NOG) and Tree of Life Version (TLV), ), New Living Translation (NLT), Expanded Bible (EXB), The Voice (Voice), New Century Version (NCV) and New International Reader’s Version (NIRV)  translates adelphoi as “brothers and sisters” (12:1; 14:6 20, 26, 39).The New Revised Standard Catholic Version Edition (NRSCVE) has “brothers and sisters” in 12:1; 14:6, 20. The only two places the NRSCVE does not translate adephoi as “brothers and sisters” are 14:26 and 14:39. In these two texts the translation is “friends.” In 1 Cor 10:1 Paul addressed “brothers and sisters” and later called them “dear friends” (ἀγαπητοί-agapetoi) in 1 Cor 10:14. In 2 Cor 6:18-7:1 the same title included “sons and daughters.”

(24) The women and the apostles were involved in prayer together (Acts 1:12-14). Peter spoke to the group of about 120 (Acts 1:16) and said (CEB NIV 2011) “Brothers and sisters…” (Ἄνδρεςἀδελφοί). These two Greek words could be translated “Men and brothers, (NKJV) however in this context ἀδελφοίmust include women (Acts 1:14). ¹⁵There are other texts which use “brothers” to include women (Matt 18:15; Rom 1:13; 14:10,15; 2 Cor 1:8; 8:1; 13:11 Gal 1:2, 11; 3:15; 4:12, 28, 31; 5:11, 13; 6:1, 18; 1 Pet 2:17; 1 John 5:16; Col 1:2; 4:15) Claudia was among the “brothers” (2 Tim 4:21). Compare Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί (Acts 15:7) with the “whole church” (ὅλῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ) in Acts 15:22. Women would have been in the “whole church” and were present for the discussion (Acts 15:7). Some translations use “brethren” (RSV, ASV) or “friends” (NRSV, MSG).

A footnote for 1 Cor 14:6, 20, 26, 29 in the ESV states the meaning of “brothers” includes “brothers and sisters”. The ESV does the same in Phil 3:1, 13, 17 and Gal 6:1 and 18. ¹⁶The NIV (2011) agrees with the ESV understanding of “brothers.”  At times the context  in 1 and 2 Corinthians limits “brothers” to “males” as in 1 Cor 16:11; 2 Cor 8:23; 9:3 and 9:5 (NIV 2011 agrees). ¹⁷In Acts 23:1, 6, and 28:17, Paul (recorded by Luke) used a phrase that left no doubt he was talking to men and not women because of the audience (Sanhedrin).  The phrase is ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί (men brothers).  With ἄνδρες used before ἀδελφοί, Paul’s intended audience was declared. In both texts, the NIV (2011) translates the phrase as “my brothers”. The NIV (2011) indicates this in its translation even though this same translation (NIV 2011) uses the term “brothers”(ἀδελφοί) to include “sisters” in 2 Cor 8:1. ¹⁸Luke records the Jerusalem counsel and the high priest giving Paul permission to take a letter to the Jews in Damascus allowing the punishment of the Christians (Acts 22:5). Luke refers to the Jews in Damascus as “brothers,” but the NIV (2011) translates brothers as “associates.”  Other translations use “brothers.”  Other examples of the exclusive use of “brothers” are  Acts 7:2; 23:1, 6 and 28:17. ¹⁹Women were not a part of Sanhedrin (Acts 6:15; 22:30). 

In 1 Cor 11-14, Paul addressed three problems: 
(1) Proper head coverings. 
(2) Proper conduct connected to the Lord’s supper. 
(3) Proper atmosphere in the assembly. 

In all of these areas, according to the framework of the texts, both men and women were involved. Concerning head coverings in 1 Cor 11:1-16, men and women were a problem. The solution to the problems with the Lord’s supper was addressed to both men and women (1 Cor 11:33).  The proper use of spiritual gifts was directed to men and women (1 Cor 12:1).  Finally, the chaotic problems of 1 Corinthians 14 were addressed to men and women (14:6, 20, 26, 39).

Realizing that the term “brothers” included “sisters” is fundamental in understanding Paul’s concerns with the assemblies at Corinth. In modern verbiage the terms guys, you guys, policemen, and firemen carry a similar meaning. ²⁰When people speak of visiting the “brethren” or going to see the “brethren” in today’s world, it would be understood they were talking about men and women. Nothing either before or after 1 Corinthians 14 would limit “brothers” to only men. The context of 11:4-5 clearly shows that head coverings were a problem for both the women and the men.  As he answered their question about gifts of the Spirit, he addressed men and women (12:1).  After explaining the nature and purpose of spiritual gifts, he stressed the importance of love.  As Paul concluded his remarks concerning the assembly, he made it clear he was addressing both men and women (14:6, 20, 26, 39). ²¹

In 1 Cor 7:24, the Greek reads as follows:

 ἕκαστος ἐν ᾧ ἐκλήθη, ἀδελφοί, ἐν τούτῳ μενέτω παρὰ θεῷ.

NIV (2011) “Brothers and sisters, each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.”

(See 1 Cor 7:29 for the use of ἀδελφοί.) 

The use of “brothers and sisters” in 14:26 and 14:39 shows both men and women were involved in hymns, words of instruction, revelations, interpretations, prophecy, and speaking in tongues in the assembly. 

Other examples also support this understanding.  Just as Paul used “brothers” as gender inclusive, even though it is masculine, he used “sons of God” (υἱοὶ θεοῦ) and “heirs” (κληρονόμοι) in the same manner (Gal 3:26, 29) even though they, too,  are masculine. ²²In 1 Thess 1:1-3 Paul thanked God for them, prayed for them, and remembered them. In the rest of the book, “brothers and sisters” are mentioned fourteen times in 85 verses (1:4; 2:1, 9, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 6, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25, 27). Other examples of the use of brothers and sisters are: 1 John 4:20, 21; 5:16; Jas 1:2, 16. 19; 2:1,5, 14, 15; 3:10, 12; 4:11; 5:7, 9, 10, 12, 19, (15 times in 5 chapters). Jesus used “brother” (that would have included women) in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:22-24, 47; 7:3-4) as well as in other teachings (Matt 18:15, 21, 35). ²³The only time the word disciple is found in female form is Acts 9:36 (μαθήτρια). On other occasions the word “believing” is attached to women (Acts 16:1, 15; 1 Tim 3:11; 5:16). In 2 Cor 6:18 Paul quoted from 2 Sam 7:14 and applied it to God’s new people. In the next verse (2 Cor 7:1), he called the “sons and daughters” of 6:18 as “dear friends” (agapetoi) that would include both men and women.  Paul does the same with “sons” which includes women (Rom 8:14, 19; 9:26; Gal 4:6-7; 1 Thess 5:5). Jesus used the term “sons” as gender inclusive in his parable about weeds (Matt 13:36-43), and when he taught about the sons of the kingdom (οἱ υἱοὶ τῆς βασιλείας) and the sons of the evil one (οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ πονηροῦ). The translators of the NIV (2011) simply says “people of the kingdom” and “people of the evil one.”²⁴Matt 5:9  “υἱοὶ θεοῦ”  In the following texts υἱοὶ is translated “children” (Luke 6:35; 20:36; Rom 9:26; Gal 4:7).  The writer of Hebrews referred to bringing many “sons to glory” (υἱοὺς εἰς δόξαν) 

(Heb 2:10).  Contextually the term is not limited to “men,” so both the NIV (2011) and CEB translate the phrase to “many sons and daughters to glory” and in Heb 2:11 and 2:12 the NIV (2011), CEB, NLT and the NRSV reference “brothers and sisters.” This translation is further supported in Heb 2:14 with reference to “the children” (τὰ παιδία ta paida)—a collective word.

Perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of good Biblical exegesis is acknowledging at the onset that we are approaching texts written to other audiences with the intent of addressing issues churches in the first century were facing.  An examination of the term “brothers” ²⁵Acts 2:29; 3:17; 7:2; 13:15, 26, 38; 22:1;23:1, 5, 6; 28:17. In an attempt to translate the meaning of the word “brother,” the NIV (2011) does the following: fellow Israelites (2:29; 3:17), brothers and fathers (7:2; 22:1), fellow children of Abraham (13:26), friends (13:28) and my brother (23:1, 6; 28:17). In reference to false teachers, Paul called them false brethren (pseudedelphos) in Gal 2:4 and 2 Cor 11:26.  as used in the New Testament letters indicates that while the term can at times mean only “men,” often it can mean both “men and women” and that both men and women played an important part in early church ministries and services.  Just as advances are continually made in scientific fields, so are advances in textual criticism.  In the past 70 years, beginning with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1946), our understanding of the Bible has changed. The rise of many translations and improved scholarship has enabled more accurate interpretations of texts that have long been discussed.  Hopefully ongoing discovery and good exegesis will continue to reveal and encourage a more insightful and accurate reading of the text. ²⁶Paul arrived in Puteoli and found some “brothers” who invited him to stay seven days with them (Acts 28:13-14) Should it be assumed there were no women in the church at Puteoli?  When Paul went to Rome, the “brothers” traveled as far as Three Taverns to meet him and escorted him into the city of Rome (Acts 28:15).  Paul’s closing remarks in Romans indicates the church included women (16:3-15). In both places where “brothers” is mentioned, the NIV (2011) uses brothers and sisters.