Afterthought
Puritan Board Senior
Does the teaching of 1 Corinthians 11 imply that man is head (Authority? Leadership? Requiring submission?) of the woman in all spheres of life, not just in the church and family? I notice that the terms are "man" and "woman" not "husband" and "wife," and that the teaching of headship is drawn from a creation principle. Would this then imply that a woman ought not to be in an authoritative role over man in all areas of life (which in turn would restrict certain economical, governmental, and social positions from women)?
If this is the case, then on what basis does one defend the traditional teaching that woman is sovereign in her own spheres of labor? Or the idea that a woman is not to obey just any male authority: it is her husband to which she is required to submit?
Furthermore, how is one to understand such things as "the woman was created for the man" in Paul's teaching here if not all women get married?
(In some ways, this is a spin off from the "Gender Roles" thread.)
If this is the case, then on what basis does one defend the traditional teaching that woman is sovereign in her own spheres of labor? Or the idea that a woman is not to obey just any male authority: it is her husband to which she is required to submit?
Furthermore, how is one to understand such things as "the woman was created for the man" in Paul's teaching here if not all women get married?
(In some ways, this is a spin off from the "Gender Roles" thread.)