Speaking about prayer, let's go ahead and take a moment and open with prayer and then we'll dig into our study today. Father, we thank you so much for the opportunity to gather together on this, the Lord's day, your day. We thank you for the privilege of being able to pray for each other and for the classes that are taking place. We pray that your word, the power of your word would impact our lives so as to transform us and conform us more to the image of Christ. And we pray that for our class today, that Lord, as we dig into these passages that we're going to look at in terms of the order of service and how men and women are to conduct themselves, we pray, Lord, that you would guide our discussion, guide our time. And I pray that what we say and do would give you honor and glory. We thank you in Christ's name. Amen. Alright, today we're jumping into lesson 7 of the male and female roles in the church, and this is part 2. And I want to begin by reminding us that we're going to be looking at a couple of passages that that on the surface, if you were to just read them, they're pretty challenging. And they remind me of Peter's words in 2 Peter 3, verse 16, I think it is, where Peter says about Paul that, as also in all his letters speaking in them of things in which are some things hard to understand. Today we're going to be discussing one of those passages that quite frankly is hard to understand. If you've got your notes, I'm just going to be bringing up on the slides the passages that we're looking at. But if you've got your notes, I'm going to be following along with most of what Alan says. I'm going to add a few things here and there. But generally speaking, the first passage that we're looking at is 1 Corinthians 11, verses 2 through 16. If you've got your Bibles, you can open up your Bibles and look at it more closely. But again, I'm going to put the words up on the screen on the TV. And then we're just going to jump in. What I want to do is I want to kind of set the context for you. We're going to do like a little Bible study today. But I want to set the context for you. And then basically, I'm going to just work my way through Alan's notes in the notebook. So, let's go ahead and look at the passage first, and then we will discuss it in detail. The passage begins this way. Let me set it up this way, first of all. If you know the book of Corinthians, 1 Corinthians in particular, Paul is addressing issues that needed to be corrected in the church there in Corinth. And he is Here in chapter 11, digging into some of those issues that need to be corrected, it really begins in chapter 8 that the corrections start to become very pronounced, particularly in reference to the church and how the believers in Christ ought to conduct themselves in an orderly way. But 1 Corinthians 11, he talks about this issue of how to pray and prophesy in the church. And then at the end of chapter 11, he's going to dig into the issues related to the Lord's Supper. And then from chapters 12 through 14, he's going to talk about the issue of spiritual gifts. And one of the passages that we're going to be looking at has to do in that area. But again, what he's doing here is he's laying the foundation for how believers, both male and female, how they are to conduct themselves in an orderly way in the church. And so that is the emphasis here. in these latter chapters of 1 Corinthians. So we're now kind of neck deep into the corrective measures that Paul is giving. And in chapter 11, verse two, I'm sorry, 1 Corinthians 11, verse two, he begins this issue of addressing praying and prophesying. So I'm gonna read this for you, and we're gonna read it slowly. And then what we'll do is we'll dig into, okay, trying to pull it apart and understand what he's talking about here. Paul says, now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. The traditions that he's talking about here are the apostolic traditions. These are not man-made traditions. He's talking about the teaching that got passed down from Christ to the apostles, and now the apostles are passing it down to believers in the church. But Paul is praising them for, again, holding firmly to these apostolic traditions. But he says in verse 3, But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of every woman, and God is the head of Christ. Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying shames his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying shames her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut short. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut short or her head shaved, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. For indeed, man was not created for the woman's sake, but the woman for the man's sake. Therefore, the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless, 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. But all things originate from God. Judge for yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him. But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God." That's clear, isn't it? That's a challenging passage, isn't it? Again, Paul is bringing correction to the church and he's addressing this issue of headship and head coverings. Now, I was really tempted. In fact, I'm going to tell you, I have not yet landed on this passage. This is a difficult passage. This past week, I came across at least seven different views regarding this passage from good and godly men. And the issue here is that I think the key to understanding this passage is the context. I think helping to kind of grasp what was taking place in first century Corinth during this time kind of helps us. But let me say this right up front. The issue here, even though Paul speaks about coverings, the issue here is head coverings is not the issue. Head coverings is the symbol that illustrates the concrete biblical position regarding headship. And that's what Paul is addressing. So I want to say that just off the front end, because once again, you're going to come across good and godly people who have different views over how to interpret the details of this text. Now this morning, again, I just want to say up front, this is a challenging passage. The reason for this passage, and the reason why it's challenging, once again, is because good and godly men differ on this issue. But here in 1 Corinthians 11, 2 through 16, Paul is discussing the issue of headship in the church in reference to, or using as analogy, this local custom of covering one's head. And his concern primarily is how men and women relate together in the context of the worship service. That's the issue that Paul is addressing here. Now, again, in this passage, clearly, there was corrective measures needed to discuss and to address this issue because, in a sense, there was disorder happening in the church. And it was happening in such a way that it was directing people away from the creation order. And so once again, like 1 Timothy 2, 1 Timothy 3, and other passages, Paul takes us back to the creation order in order to understand how headship works and why it is necessary in the context of the church. So again, like 1 Timothy 2, 11 through 15, Paul is describing the boundaries set by God regarding men's and women's roles in the ministry of the church. Now, I came across one author who kind of summarized some of this for me, and I found it really helpful, so I'm going to share it with you. But one author writes this, the primary concern of the apostle in 1 Corinthians 11 2-16 is to expound the divine order and authority that is inherent in the structure of the universe. His primary purpose is not to teach about head coverings. although the matter certainly relates to his, Paul's, primary purpose. His concern is how believers then relate to God, to God-ordained authority. And that basically is the issue. The issue is, how is authority being practiced in the local church? Now, a little bit of context here. Just as in 1 Timothy chapter 2 and 3, Paul addresses the issue of order and disorder in the church. Here in 1 Corinthians 11, 2-16, he addresses this in the context of headship and authority, and how it then relates to the practice of praying and prophesying in the corporate worship service. The practice of praying and prophesying in the Corinthian church certainly illustrates the problems that Paul was seeking to correct. But in order to understand the principled application of this passage, Paul then provides the church first with a clear and theological argument regarding the issue of headship in the church. And we see that very dramatically in verse three. of chapter 11. I've highlighted it here, but just to recap, Paul says, but I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. When you think of that, when you look at that word headship or head, you must think in terms of authority, because that's what the word kephele means. There are scholars, good and godly men, who take this to mean source, but basically there is no justification for that in the context of how this word is used in the New Testament. So when you see the word head, just replace it with the word authority. And that will bring a little bit more clarification to this passage. So if we were to read this verse and replace that word or use that word the way it's defined, Paul says, but I want you to understand that Christ is the authority over every man. The man is the authority over a woman, and God is the authority over Christ. Now, we know it's not used definitively in the way it's used by way of source, because if that were the case, then here this would be a denial of Christ's deity. because Christ would then be the, He would be the source of the Father. He would come from the Father, be created by the Father. And we know that that is not true. So we have to translate this word, kephele, by the way that it was intended to be meant, or intended to mean, here in the New Testament. And that is the word authority. So, what Paul is saying is that there is disunity, there is a contradiction to the authority that God has laid down, being practiced in the church. And so here I am reminding the Corinthian church that there is an order to how we conduct ourselves in the family of God. And especially as we practice the worship service on Sunday. So here again is the issue of really what Paul is talking about. Head coverings is simply just an analogy or an illustration to the more principled directive that Paul is giving here in the church. Now, like the creation order, God has established lines of authority in the church. And where there is headship and submission in marriage, likewise, there is also headship and submission in the context of the church. And the point being here that in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul argues that there is a proper order to understanding how men and women were to relate to one another and to relate in the context of the public worship service. This is not an issue of who is superior or who is inferior, but rather how do men and women relate together in order to properly glorify God in the context of the local church. Now, Paul introduces this subject, this issue in verses 2 and 3 by commending them of holding to the traditions of the elders. The problem is that they had forgotten the divine order in holding to those traditions. And so, in verses four through nine, he then discusses how this matter of headship and authority manifests itself in the praying and the prophesying ministries of the church. This is where the issue of head coverings illustrates a much more broader principle of headship and submission in the church. In other words, the point of Paul's correction here in verses 2 through 16 is one of authority established by God. And that's the bottom line. So again, this passage is therefore focused on the roles of men and women in the context of the local church. And the key to a proper role relationship between man and woman in this context is the authority that God has laid down. So again, this is to recognize that Christ has headship over every man. In fact, the way Paul discusses it in Colossians is, Christ is the head of the church, period. He is the one who has ultimate authority over the church. But as the church practices its faith, as they, here in the early church, miraculous gifts were being displayed, there was authority that needed to be issued in the church. Likewise, as the ministering gifts were being practiced in the church, there was a line of authority that was given. And so there were boundaries. Last week, I can't remember your name. Where are you? Yeah, your name? Joshua came up to me and said, maybe a better word than limitations is boundaries. And I actually like that because God has set boundaries for us in terms of how we present and work out our faith and how we practice it in the church. So again, here what Paul is saying is that Christ is the head of every man, the man is the head of the woman, and God is the head of Christ. And so, a woman who prays and prophesies in the church must not seek to usurp the authority that God has given to man in the church. Likewise, she is not to let her new identity in Christ liberate her from the order of creation. And that is what we see happening in the first Corinthian church. So the first century Corinthian church is what I meant to say. So rather in the context of the local worship service, she must recognize and be in submission to man's authority over her. Now, why is this? Well, that brings us to this perplexing illustration that Paul uses. Notice verses seven through nine. Paul says, for a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but the woman from man. For indeed, man was not created for the woman's sake, but the woman for the man's sake." So, how does head covering relate to the order of creation. And this is where the interpretations go crazy. Let me just say this. In the first century, in the Roman world, in the Greco-Roman culture, both men and women engaged in head coverings. They, the Romans would cover their head when they entered some sort of a religious service. Could it be a secular cult service or it could have been the Christian service. And they would have covered their heads because that was the local custom. Likewise, women would cover their heads with a cloth or a fabric in the first century. What's interesting is that the Romans would cover their heads, the Greeks would not. And so there was this issue of coming into the Corinthian church, which if you know the context of Corinth, it was a seaport. So people from all over the Roman world came through Corinth. And so you had this difference of tradition or local custom in coming into the church. Now, for a Roman person to wear a hood covering, especially a man, there was this idea that was being conveyed to the culture that not only was the Roman man covering his head to come into the worship service and again engage in the practice of his faith, But that head covering spoke to the entire congregation, saying that that Roman who covered his head was, in essence, a high priest. And so, when a Roman would come into the Corinthian church, it would send the wrong message to the congregation of the church. Likewise, for a woman to come in uncovered, her head uncovered, there would be this stigma attached to her. Basically, if she was a married woman, she would cover her head and come in with a covering. And if she was unmarried, she would then not cover her head, but she would, in a way, bind up her hair so that it would communicate the right message to the church at the time. To put it frankly, if a woman was married and came into the church service without her head covered, she would be communicating to the church that she is no longer under the authority of her husband. And so therefore, she is now free and available to any man in the church. And a woman who didn't bind up her hair and let it go loose would communicate, in essence, a message of perhaps she was a prostitute. And so, Paul is here using this local custom to illustrate the biblical principle again of authority and leadership over the congregation. So, when Paul says to the man, do not cover your head, he is saying that because he says, in essence, You have authority over your wife and you do not need to cover your head to convey a wrong message to the church as if you were the focal point or the high priest in the service. Because who is head over the man? Christ, and Christ is what? The High Priest. So therefore, Paul is reminding them that do not cover your head for that reason into the service because you are directing the headship away from Christ, the authority away from Christ, and you're bringing it upon yourself. Likewise, he said to the women, you need to cover your head. That's the local custom, and so therefore wear it. But why? Because if you're married, you have your husband as the authority over you. Also, wearing a head covering, binding up your hair. And again, I say your hair because Paul says at the end of this section, he says in verse 14, does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it's a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for what? A covering. So the issue is, is that if you have long hair, and you bind it up in such a way as to communicate that you're in submission to the authority that God has established in the church, then you are speaking the right message. But again, the head covering itself was just an illustration of how out of whack the church had become at Corinth related to this issue of authority. So again, the woman who prays and prophesies in the church must not seek to usurp the authority over the man. She must not let her new identity in Christ liberate her from the order of creation. Rather, in the context of the local worship service, she must recognize and be submissive of man's authority over her. And again, the issue is because of verse 7, for a man, or actually 7 through 9, for a man ought not to have his head covered since he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. For indeed, man was not created for the woman's sake, but the woman for man's sake. That again takes us right back to Genesis chapter 1 and 2. Again, we see an order to God's creation. We see headship and submission being, again, visually given to us in the context of the local church. And the issue is, is that where there were qualified men to lead the service, women were not, even though they may have been skilled, may have even been gifted as teachers, skilled in being able to articulate biblical truth. They were not to usurp that authority or that role over the man. Why? Because God had established those lines of authority. And ultimately, they speak to us of the true intention of the church, which is Again, the church is submissive to Christ. Ultimately, Christ is the head. He is the one who has authority. The church submits itself to Him. Likewise, in the marriage, the marriage is a picture of Christ and the church. So again, the man has headship over his wife, the wife is in submission to the authority and leadership of her husband, and together they complement each other so as to bring about a proper picture of what creation order there is, but also how God has structured and ordered the church itself. So again, this is an issue of one of authority and submission in the church. Now, the woman is to take this knowledge of the creation order into account when she then practices this issue of praying and prophesying, lest she dishonor man who has authority over her and is the source of her being in creation. In other words, a woman needs to be very sensitive in how it is she was to conduct herself in the practice of praying and prophesying. Once again, Paul elaborates on this a little bit more fully in chapters 12 through 14. But the issue here is that a woman who was praying and prophesying, and let me add this. Again, we're reading this in the context of the first century. This was before the miraculous gifts had ceased. And so in the context of the church, people were being gifted with the gift of prophesying. And God would speak directly to that person in some capacity, and then they would then relay that word to the church. Now, here's the difference. Prophesying is not teaching. prophesying in this respect is receiving from God a revelation from God, and they give that revelation directly. But here, then, what becomes the practice of the church is that the qualified men who were given to serve as pastor, elder, overseers of the church, it was their job, then, to teach that message. So it went from a direct revelation of God to the people, and then the people who are gifted and certified by the church as pastor, elders, overseers, they would then teach that, the implications of that revelation to the church. They would harmonize it with the Old Testament. They would then interpret it in a way that was consistent with the apostolic teaching, and then they would bring application to the church. A person who prophesied didn't do that. They were left, in fact, as Paul articulates in chapters 12 through 14, that they were to speak this word, but then have somebody interpret for them in the context of how is that prophecy to be understood. Now again, this is the context that we're looking at and reading at here in this particular passage. So once again, the issue is one of headship and authority. So if a woman was prophesying, she needed in one sense to do it in an orderly fashion. And if there was a word that was being given, sometimes it was given to her husband and her husband then would relay it to the church. And then the pastor, elders, overseers would then take that word. And again, they would interpret it according to the scriptures. So, here you have this very complex situation where you have women exercising a miraculous gift that God had given them, but they were to do it in an orderly way. They weren't to usurp the authority of the men in the church. They weren't to declare that they were the qualified, certified teachers. They instead were to be submissive in how it is that they conducted their miraculous gifts in the church. Now again, praying and prophesying, again, in all the interpretations that I was reading, lumped these two together. For some, others separated them. It seems natural that these are to be separated, that praying and prophesying are not the same thing, although God could give a miraculous message through a woman and she could articulate that by way of prayer. But the issue here is, how is the practice of that then being conducted to the church? Now, one question that is raised is, what's the nature of this praying and prophesying? And again, how does this not contradict, again, Paul's command in 1 Timothy 2, 12? Essentially, if you remember, in 1 Timothy 2.12, as we looked at last week, Paul said, I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over the man. So when she was prophesying, was she contradicting Paul's command there? Was Paul contradicting himself? No, because again, understanding what prophecy is, it was different than teaching. And this is the way, again, we should understand this. Praying and prophesying is not the same as preaching and teaching. At the time that Paul, again, wrote this letter, the miraculous gifts were still in effect, and both men and women prophesied, giving new revelation to the church. The difference being that preaching and teaching had to do with interpreting and applying God's word. Prophecy is simply relaying direct revelation given by God. And again, in the first century church, both men and women did this by praying and prophesying in the church, whereas only qualified men would then teach, interpret, and apply God's Word to the church. Now, one commentator puts it this way, preaching in the church is honored over prophecy in Paul's writings because of its strategic place in God's economy, and so Paul reserves that for men in the church. And that's why This complex passage that we're looking at should be interpreted in light of more clearer passages. So once again, as we relate this to 1 Timothy 2, if Paul is saying, I don't permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over the man, that helps us in one sense to understand what Paul is saying in this church, in the context of 1 Corinthians. So once again, this isn't an issue of silencing women altogether. It's the issue of, again, what's the order? And how do you do that in a biblical way? Is Paul preventing women from praying and prophesying here in 1 Corinthians 11? Absolutely not. A simple reading of this illustrates that this was what was going on, and it was proper for them to do this. But the bigger issue is, how were they doing it? And it seems like, given the illustration of head covering, that there was a little bit of imbalance going on between the roles of men and women. So women were starting to usurp the role of the men. Men were then submitting to the women. And here Paul is saying that ought not to be. Now, there's a lot of details in this passage that would take a lot of time to go through. I mean, questions about what glory is he talking about? What does it mean when he says, because of angels? What about, again, dishonoring and honoring? And what about long hair as opposed to some sort of fabric head covering? I'm so tempted to say, go ahead and study that for yourself. Since I haven't particularly landed on all the details here, I do and am in agreement with Alan that the bigger issue here is the role of men and women and how it's being communicated. So the context here, if you go back to your notes, Alan gives a great layout here, a very outlined form. But the context again is the assembled church where prophecy was being given. Note that the prophecy or the purpose of prophecy was to edify the congregation very clearly in 1 Corinthians 14. We see that. And so this anticipates the gathering of the saints together. This helps us to understand the boundaries here. So we're not talking about the marriage relationship. We're not talking about in society, in the work environment, relationship between masters and slaves. We're not looking at that context. We're looking at the context of the church. And so that sets the boundaries for us. In public, where the presence or absence of hair or other head coverings would have conveyed something important to others, Paul is just using that local custom as an illustration here in the context of the church. But the practices of praying and prophesying here is what's at issue. And again, it speaks to the issue of the church. Now, the requirement is laid out very simply here. Women must wear something on their head if they are to pray or prophesy or presumably speak in any other public way to the church in the church assembly. Men are not to wear something on their head if they pray or prophesy. or presumably, speak in any other public way in the church assembled. And the reasons for this, Alan lists them here, but one is, again, to remember male headship, male authority. Men have authority in the church under Christ. It is a delegated authority. It is authority that is not assumed upon the man as the prime authority, but it is authority nevertheless that reflects the very purposes and the understanding of the message of Christ to the church. So, women need to submit to that authority. Quite frankly, men need to submit to that authority as well. But in the context of the created order, we see this order being illustrated here for us. Men have delegated authority under Christ. Women need to submit to that authority. And due to the context here of the church, this appears to include all male authority in the church, not just a woman's husband. So, again, this word anair or gune in Greek could be translated man or woman, or it could be translated husband or wife. And that has then caused quite a stir in commentators in how they've interpreted this passage, because they're trying to blend the two together. I think Alan is right. We're talking about the context of the whole church. Again, the illustration that Paul uses here of why there needs to be headship and submission, he uses the analogy of the head coverings. But just in general, in the created order, there is this headship and helpership that is, again, articulated in how man was created first and then woman from man. And so this headship and helpership is the issue that is at play here in the context of 1 Corinthians 11. the early church fathers, the Turian, wrote that Adam's correct, that it refers to the man and the woman, and that's really the only early church writing that there is on the subject, but it supported the fact that it's man and woman, it is not at all about husbands and wives. So I'm of that leaning in terms of interpreting this passage. Head coverings again symbolize being under somebody else's headship. This was especially true in the culture in which Paul was writing this letter. Glory here. The Greek word for glory in this case is doxa. It could mean opinion or judgment, which is always understood to be good in the New Testament. But it's usually translated glory in the sense of splendor and sometimes praise and approval. So again, when Paul is talking here about the glory of the woman is the man, that's really speaking to this wonderful relationship that men and women share together in their roles. It's a complimentary role. Men have headship to compliment the woman who is in submission to the man. The woman is complimenting the man in her submission to him. So the issue here is that glory really speaks of the wonder and the splendor of God's created order here. Now man is the glory of God and the woman is the glory of man. This is evidenced by the fact that God made Adam first and that the woman was created for the man's sake. This suggests that the glory referred to here has to do with Adam being from God and for God, and Eve being created from man and for man. Women are also created in the image of God. This passage doesn't contradict that in any way, shape, or fashion. But this is a derived authority or headship or glory that's through Adam rather than a direct creation by God from the ground. So again, this is where man and woman complement each other. Again, man in the way that he was created received glory from God, approval from God. Likewise, when a woman, when she was taken out of Adam's side and created into woman, that was to illustrate the glory from which she came from. She was the approval of man. And in fact, man, when he saw a woman, said, Whoa, woman. No, he said, Whoa, man. No, he said, He said, this is woman. And again, he was giving approval. And God said, over all of that, after the sixth day of creation was done, he said that everything was what? It was very good. Very good. So again, we're talking here about a glory that is derived ultimately from God, but it's passed down through man. And it complements the creation order that God put together. So, One of the implications of this is that a woman's participation in the public worship service must be through the man in authority, particularly her husband, but then those qualified men who are to serve as pastor, elder, overseers in the church. Now notice that because this is based on the created order, this is not culturally, this is not a cultural principle. This has nothing to do with culture, in other words. This has to go back to again the original creation order. And again, notice also that notwithstanding all of this, men and women depend on each other and ultimately on God for their existence. So God, you had created order in creating man and woman and ultimately then the family itself. But here in the church, you're illustrating this in the practice of the church and how we conduct ourselves as men and women together in the church. So the glory of the woman is her long hair. That's a, again, a highly debatable issue here, but this carries the usual meaning, again, glory of splendor. or approval. It is parallel to man being the glory of God and woman being the glory of man in the sense that the woman's hair is from her and for her. It's really given to her for a covering. And that's led some scholars to believe that Paul doesn't have in mind here any kind of fabric covering. He's actually talking about a woman's hair. And actually, Alan himself draws that application out, and I really appreciate him doing that. Now, with regards to the word nature here, Paul appeals to the natural distinctions between men and women. Again, this is not a cultural construct. This is not a cultural argument. It is dishonorable for men to have long hair. Again, they were to cut their hair to show that they were male, that they were, again, created by God and the glory of God. The long hair is the source, though, of the glory for a woman. Now, again, naturally, if Paul's talking here, and Alan draws this out, it is natural for a man's hair to thin or recede as he ages, and even for him to become bald. But this is not natural for a woman. You guys are looking at me, aren't you? I'm just illustrating the principle in our home and in the church. But again, this was not natural for a woman. It happens, but it's not, it wasn't, it's an exception to the rule, so to speak. In fact, it was shameful in the culture at that time for a woman to shave her head. And so Paul is, again, using this illustration of this local custom to say, women, let your hair grow. Why? Because it's a glory, it's a splendor. It shouts to the world that you're feminine, that you are a woman. And so once again, don't shave your head. It's a covering for you. In fact, it's shameful for a woman to shave her head. It wasn't for a man. The point is that if it's proper for a woman to have her hair, her head covered among the people, then it is even more necessary when she approaches God publicly in prayer and represents him by prophesying. So again, this distinction that God has given is so important here. Now, having said all of that, what's some of the application that we can draw from the passage? Number one, since the reasons given are non-cultural, the principle applies to us even today in our church. Many complementarian evangelical commentators understand that the wearing of head coverings by a woman to have been the culturally appropriate symbol in first century Corinth of a wife's submission to her husband's authority. But that other symbols of the same principle could equally appropriate in our cultures, in our times. And an example is, instead of you wearing, you women who are married, wearing a head covering, you wear a ring. The problem is, is that men wear a ring as well. So this is just a cultural symbol that signifies that we're married. Although today, even the world is getting away from that. But the issue is, is that what do we, what kind of symbol do we use to illustrate the role between husband and wife? Well, here in the context of the first century, one of the ways a woman would illustrate her submission to her husband was to wear a head covering. And that was one way of doing it. So once again, these symbols are things that are not the main issue. The main issue is the divine order that God has established from creation. Now, it seems that no coincidence, Allen says, that covering the head is a symbol of the fact that women are under the headship of men. Obeying the principle is more important than the symbol of that principle. But the symbolism is more than some culturally driven outward indication that she is married, like her having a ring. That is one reason why baptism by sprinkling is not appropriate. Only immersion carries the idea of the intended symbolism. And again, you guys should understand that because We are fully dying, being immersed into the body of Christ, but fully dying to our sin and being raised from the dead to follow after Christ. That is the symbolism that's being used in water baptism, and that's why sprinkling just doesn't do it. But again, the same thing with unleavened bread. It's better that the bread be unleavened when celebrating the Lord's Supper because leaven represents sin. Now again, we don't want to make so much about the symbol, but the symbol does communicate something. And that's why that's important. Proper symbolism is also why a wife takes the last name of her husband, indicating her submission to him and his, her role in helping him, rather than retaining her maiden name, which is, which would indicate independence. And rather than creating a hyphenated name that they both share, which would indicate equality with no differences, this is one of the reasons why we want to, again, think about the symbol, but again, not take the symbol as being the mandate. So, again, Both spouses typically wear wedding rings in our culture, and the wife's ring typically doesn't symbolize her submission to her husband's headship. Again, there's equality, but there's differences. And the symbolism, in one sense, should illustrate some or both of that, but do it in such a way as to be pointing us to the reality, which is the creation order and God's established definition of what headship is. So, Paul appeals to creation and to nature, not to culture. when explaining the importance of head coverings on the woman. These reasons are given to justify not only the principle of male headship in the church, but also to justify head coverings as the appropriate kind of symbol of being under that headship. And that's why Paul indicates it here. Paul is not saying to us that women need to wear a head covering in the church. He is using that symbol, which was a local custom, it was a culturally designated issue, and he's just using that to illustrate the greater, more divine purpose here. Although the word translated woman can also mean wife, it seems unlikely that only married women are to display an outward symbol of being subject to authority when praying or prophesying. Clearly in the church context or in the church setting, all women are under the authority of the church leaders who are men. And there is nothing in the passage to indicate that the authority that women are submitting to in this church activity is solely that of that to their husbands. They were actually doing this in the context of the full church. And it wasn't a dishonor to her husband. But how she practiced that in submission, if she was married to her husband, or submission to the elders of the church, that was the issue. So again, If this principle applies only to married women, then that means that either, number one, unmarried women don't have to display a symbol of their submission to male authority in the church. Two, unmarried women were not allowed to pray or prophesy at all in the church. Or three, Paul was leaving it up to each church to identify an appropriate symbol for unmarried women. None of those possibilities seem as reasonable as the straightforward interpretation that this applies to all women, particularly given the two previous reasons, which is, again, looking at this symbol being a symbol but not the mandate. So therefore, it seems that this command is best obeyed when all women in the church, at least those who speak publicly, wear a head covering or a covering on their head. But that then raises the question, what kind of head covering? What is he talking about here? The text says covered, simply covered. It doesn't specify a hat, doesn't specify a veil, or any other particular kind of garment. Although any of those would surely be appropriate in the context of 1 Corinthians 11. The rest of the New Testament is similarly silent on this issue. Other passages that talk about the relationship between men and women in the context of the church don't even mention this. So this is unique. It is something that Paul is speaking of related to, again, the issue of headship and submission But this symbol that's being used at Corinth was something that needed to be addressed because it was sending the wrong message. And then also, if you notice at verse 16, but if one is inclined to be contentious, contentious about what? About this issue? Then we have no other practice, Paul is saying, nor have the churches of God. So in other words, This is not an issue to be contentious over in the sense of fighting for whatever symbol that you want in the church. The issue is headship, helpership. Headship, submission. That, if you're going to be contentious about that, then this is why we're telling you to do this. And that's the custom of the church. So again, the text says covered. It doesn't specify a hat, veil, or any other kind of garment. The rest of the New Testament is silent on this. Verse 15 indicates that long, not short hair is given for a woman for a covering, the Greek word here for covering. It's used only one other time in the New Testament, in Hebrews chapter 1, verse 12. And it conveys the meaning of a garment, which short hair does not convey. It is derivative of the verb parabolo, which is used to translate the word to clothe. And again, this suggests that a woman's long hair would satisfy the requirement for a head covering and is equivalent to a garment. Now, a woman's long hair is linked to the idea of a head covering earlier in this passage in verses five and six. And the two concepts are discussed interchangeably throughout the passage in the context of women displaying a symbol of their submission to authority in the church. Some have suggested that arranging the hair more on the top of the head on these occasions would be a satisfactory alternative to some kind of separate garment. But verse 15 emphasizes that the length of a woman's hair contributes to the glory and that it bestows on her. And wrapping it up on the top of her head would seem to negate that effect. So again, a woman needs to be a woman. She needs to look like a woman in the church. And one of the ways that she does that by letting her hair grow and letting that serve as a covering for her. Now, it's appropriate for men to remove their hats by praying or even when entering the assembly. And likewise, it is inappropriate for men to wear a spiritual head covering, like a skull cap that Jews would wear. And then they would not do that in the church. Once again, because it had a significant interpretation to it. And so men were not to wear some sort of head covering that would show that they were somehow in authority, like a high priest over the church, so. Okay, there's so much more here. Before we move on, any questions? I'm afraid to ask, but any questions? Because I'll just tell you, quite frankly, if I don't know, I don't know. Yeah, I mean, it's, you know, just thinking, I like what you said about, you know, the symbolism, don't, you don't take them as a mandate unless we're told otherwise, like baptism, you know, Matthew 28, go and baptize, so clearly we're to practice that. But the context is so important, and it's easy to get lost and think about the nuances and things, because in Acts 21, Paul pays to have men's heads shaved, and this passage says, don't do that. But clearly, that was a practice. A Jewish practice. A Jewish practice. Again, you think of the Nazarite bow, and they did not shave their heads, so they would have long hair. And you mentioned the yarmulke. And that was a symbol of God's authority over them. So the context is really important, and not to take it too far. Yeah, exactly. Any other comments? Questions? Well, now we're going to jump over to 1 Corinthians 14. we're going to tackle another challenging issue. And that has to do with women speaking. Paul says, the women are to keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the law also says. But if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in church. Well, wait a minute, Paul. Didn't you just say that women were praying and prophesying in the church? How do we understand this? Again, the context is the local assembly. It's the church. So it's how do we conduct ourselves in an honorable way that honors God, pleases God. But here, once again, prophesying is more edifying then once again, the context here of, let me back up. The context here is the assembled church. And in 1 Corinthians 14, he's dealing with the spiritual gifts that have been given to the church. One of those gifts is prophesying, one of them is speaking in tongues. 1 Corinthians 14, 26, Paul says, what is the outcome then brethren? When you assemble, Each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. So, Here in the assembled church, prophesying was lifted up as a very special gift to the church. And the reason why is because it communicated God's message to the church. Again, as I told you before, the elders would then, pastor, elders, overseers would then interpret that message. They would apply it to people and they would do it through the gift of teaching to the church. But what was also being practiced in 1 Corinthians 11 is people were being given the miraculous gift of speaking in a foreign language. Now again, given the seaport issue here of Corinth, people from all over the Roman world speaking multiple languages would come into the church and God would gift people in the church to be able to speak in these languages so that they could understand it. The problem was, is that it would be like in here, if somebody were to say, God has given me a revelation, which he hasn't, the Bible is God's full revelation, but let's just take the argument for how Paul's presenting it here in 1 Corinthians. It would be like somebody in here being given the gift of, give me an obscure known language in the world. Well, I'm thinking of a language today. I could use this as an example. If somebody were to speak Spanish in here and only two or three of you understood Spanish, what benefit would that be to the rest of us? It wouldn't be of any benefit at all. So Paul, in the context of 1 Corinthians 14, is saying prophesying is so much more important. Why? Because what it's done is it's given in a language that everybody knows, and Koine Greek was the language that everybody knew. So if a woman is given a gift of prophecy or of speaking in tongues, but she's supposed to be silent in church, isn't... We'll get to that. Isn't when she's prophesying, when she's speaking in tongues, it's not technically Her teaching, it's the Holy Spirit, it's God. Correct. Correct. God has given a revelation to that woman, that woman then speaks it, and maybe she's speaking a foreign language. She would then wait for somebody to, two or three people to interpret that for her. Right, but I'm just saying that if she's prophesying, it's not that she's up there teaching. No. Not that she's teaching to men. No. She's literally like relaying what the Lord is teaching. Correct. Correct. She's still teaching. But prophesying here in the context of speaking in a language that everybody would know is really what's at issue. It needs to be conducted in such a way that, again, it benefits everybody. But, once again, the rules for this kind of difference of language in the church is really what Paul outlines here in verses 14, in chapter 14. So, the rules for the orderliness of the church that give us the background and the foundation for understanding verses 34 and 35, is that first of all, if anyone was to speak a tongue, it should be by two or three, or at the most two, by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret. But if there is no interpreter, Paul says that person who is speaking in that language must keep silent. It's of no benefit. It's not beneficial to the church. let him speak to himself and to God. So if he's receiving a revelation, but there's nobody there to interpret, that person is just to keep silent. And again, thank God for that knowledge that's been given to them, that word that's been given to them. The number who spoke in tongues at any given time in the worship center was to be restricted to two or three, someone else must provide the interpretation of what is said. This was another spiritual gift again in the church and it was the reason why there needed to be interpreters because it needed to benefit the whole church. And so then those who speak in a tongue must be self-controlled, agreeing to limit the number who speak, agreeing to speak one at a time, and agreeing not to speak in the tongue if no one with the gift of interpretation is present. Note that this does not mean that there should be a complete silence in the whole assembly, for all believers in the church are to participate in the worship of the body. But again, the issue is that how is this speaking to be conducted? What order was to be given to this? And Paul says in verses 18 through 21 of Ephesians, he says, we are to speak to one another in Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord. So Paul here in verses 34 and 35 is not telling women not to speak. It's just in what context and how were they to keep silent here? So that's at issue. Prophesying. which again was relevant to the early church. Let two or three prophets speak and let the others pass judgment. But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. For you all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not a God of confusion, but of peace. There's an order to this. And if you're not conducting yourself in an orderly fashion, keep silent. So again, prophecy was important in the early church because of the New Testament scriptures were not yet complete. And those with the gift of prophecy, both men and women, would be given a gift, a message from God to, again, relay to man by way of instruction, exhortation, or encouragement. However, Paul instructs the church not only to be orderly, prophesy one by one, but also to have others pass judgment, and on each prophecy in turn. This ensures that the prophecy is truly from God, being consistent with all other known revelation. For example, the Old Testament, the teachings of Jesus, and the teachings of the apostles. Those who judge a prophecy as to its doctrinal validity guard against false teaching. And again, beloved, do not believe every spirit. This is first John, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This was to bring order to the church. It was to prevent the church from believing a lie. And so as with those who speak in tongues, those with a prophecy must be self-controlled, limiting those who speak to two or three and agreeing to speak one at a time. When a prophecy was given to a person, to one person, the others would keep silent while the other one is speaking. Can you imagine if, you know, a bunch of people started receiving a prophetic word from God and they were speaking all at the same time in a foreign language? What chaos there would be in the church. So this is an issue of order. I've actually seen that happen, where it's just chaotic in a lot of the, I don't want to say what type of churches, but anyway, I've seen that happen. And so one brother testified and he said that he was at a church, this particular woman stood up and she so-called had the gift of speaking. And she was speaking in a different language. And the language she was speaking in, a woman identified that language, which was interesting. And she said, that woman is blaspheming God. No one else understood what she was saying, but she was a part of this congregation where everyone's kind of speaking. She said, this woman is boldly cursing God, but I understand what she's saying. So, like, this really just falls in line with that. I was wondering about speaking in tongues. There's multiple people who are speaking here at one time, and maybe in the traditional sense of what we might envision speaking in tongues today, where you might see a Catholic Baptist church or a Pentecostal church. Being that typically no one is interpreting that speaking in tongues, would that be considered That is a loaded question. Loaded only because, if I can just be so bold, is to say the tongue speaking that occurs today is not the tongue speaking that you see in the Bible, number one. The other issue is, yeah, But more importantly, what you're seeing illustrated is exactly what Paul is trying to correct. He is trying to bring order to the church. God is not a God of confusion. He's a God of order. So when you see a church that is just chaotic like that, it's dishonoring to the Lord. And that really needs, what needs to be confronted. The other issue of whether or not it's the same tongue speaking, that's a separate issue, but here, What we are seeing in Paul's writings is that some of that was going on. And Paul says there needs to be order in the church. Why? Because everybody in the church needs to be benefited if this is indeed a true revelation given by God. Likewise, with preaching and teaching the word of God, there must be order. We sit silently listening to the message preached. Why? Because we want that word to benefit everybody. We want to be sensitive to those around us and make sure that they understand God's truth. But when there's disorder and there's chaos happening, it just dishonors the Lord. So that's really what's at issue here. But I appreciate your asking that because I've seen it so many times in churches that are in America, that there's just chaos. And it's sad because I want to take them right back to 1 Corinthians 14, and say, don't you understand that in the big picture you're dishonoring God by having this chaos? Because it's of no benefit. I remember Billy Graham. Let me end with this. I remember Billy Graham when he was in Bible school. He was really wrestling through this issue with these very enthusiastic people that would pray. And he was studying in one room. And in the opposite room, there was a group that gathered together to pray. And they were all praying kind of at the same time. And it was very loud and it was just hard to follow. Billy Graham says he got up and he banged on the wall and he said, God's not silent. He can hear what you're doing. I mean, it's the issue is, is that you don't need to shout. You don't need to be in confusion. Just again, give order to your prayers and God will hear you. The issue for this particular situation is here in Corinthians is there was disorder going on. Women were not recognizing their roles. Men were not recognizing their roles. The gifts were not being practiced in a way that honored the Lord. And so Paul says, this is an issue where it really comes down to what is beneficial for the church and what then speaks back to the creation order. And Paul is saying that this is how it ought to be conducted in the practice of the church. Now, we'll get to the rest of this next week. We're running out of time. So any last comments or thoughts? I just wanted to mention how everything that talks about speaking in tongues, it never says teaching. It only ever says speaking. Yeah. It's a spiritual use, but it's not the gift of teaching. Correct. So if someone does it, it's not a contradiction of what he's telling you. Correct. Yep. Anybody else? Was there somebody else? All right. Sorry to muddy the waters further. I hope I didn't. But thank you for this time. This is a challenging passage, but it's so critical for us to understand. So let's go ahead and close in prayer. Father, we thank you so much for this time and for your word. We thank you. for just how you have given it to us to help us to understand how to live in an orderly way, to understand our roles as men and women, to benefit the larger body of Christ, and again, to reflect accurately what is your divine creation order. Father, it is so wonderful to know that you have created us male and female, but to know that how we can practice our faith, how we can practice living like Christ can be done in such a way to honor both genders and to bring glory to you by pointing us all the way back to the creation order. Father, we're grateful that you are the one who has ultimate headship over the church. You have authority over our lives. We need to be submissive to that authority. And so, Lord, as we try to seek to understand these passages better, I pray that we would do so with an attitude of humility, that we want to learn, to grow, and ultimately to conduct ourselves in a way that is pleasing to you. So Lord, with what we have studied, may this be the beginning of that. And I pray that your blessing be on the rest of our service today, and especially as we engage in the Lord's table this afternoon. We thank you, Lord, for all of this in Christ's name. Amen.