We continue this series by further examining some of the traditions of men first introduced in Part 2. This post is dedicated to clearly identifying the pervasiveness of legalistic doctrines in the early Church period, as well as the first portion of a study on the Apostle Paul’s instructions to the church in Corinth regarding men and women in the assembly.
In all the Old Testament, God does not prescribe gender roles to husbands and wives, other than to establish civil laws surrounding the entering into and dissolving of marriages. The Law does not dictate exactly how a marriage should function between partners. Husbands and wives are given no instruction in how to relate to one another in marriage other than an expectation for fidelity, laws governing sexual purity, and civil laws protecting the interests of both parties when it came to disputes, damages, or divorces. Jesus later made it clear that even these divorce laws were only given because of the hardness of the human heart; they were allowances made for the sin nature and contaminated human culture. As far as God is concerned, a husband and wife are still just one.
When the early apostles wrote their letters to various churches, very little is addressed to specifically men or specifically women. Like the Old Testament, the New Testament does not tell men and women who they should “be” in marriage. Instead, it reveals that human marriage is actually prophetic of the marriage between Christ and the Church; it always has been. Paul describes this relationship as a “great mystery” and emphasizes that the point of it all is the oneness God has made inherent only in marriages (Eph. 5:30-32). To this end, redeemed men and women are instructed to live so their marriage reflects this oneness. Their redeemed relationship should reflect what God originally created and has now restored, not the results of the Fall.
To understand this better we will examine some specific New Testament passages on men, women, and marriage that many believers have struggled with and far too many churches have used to support unsound doctrine. We’ll start with Paul’s letters to the church in Corinth.
Paul exchanged a number of letters with the Corinthian church, at least three and possibly four or more. Only two are preserved for us today and those are both Paul’s replies. Although Paul indicates receiving letters with their questions to him, we unfortunately don’t have any surviving copies of the letters written by the church members. We are left to infer their questions and concerns based on his replies. To understand Paul’s words to and about men and women in Corinth, we’ll look at the broader message of his letter and his reasons for writing it. The very first letter Paul wrote the Corinthians is lost (I Cor. 5:9). After receiving it, the church responded to Paul with a letter of their own, also now lost. His second letter to them is the first one we have, the book of 1 Corinthians.
Paul’s very first concern with the Corinthians is that they were carnal and divisions were the result. “You are still carnal, for where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?” (I Cor. 3:3). This carnality and subsequent lack of unity was dangerous; it left them vulnerable to being infiltrated by false doctrine and the traditions of men (I Cor. 4:14-21). False prophets are repeatedly compared to wolves in Scripture. Wolves always hunt in coordinated packs, by stealth, and they target the weak and the isolated. Much as he had warned the Galatian church, Paul now warned the Corinthians, although not quite as sternly. Perhaps the situation in Corinth at the time was not yet as dire as it had become in Galatia. He warned them about sectarianism (I Cor. 1:10-13), he reminded them that true spiritual maturity is not gained or understood by human means, even if manmade doctrines are (1 Cor. 1:18-25, I Cor. 2:6-14), and he confirmed to them that his message was not one gained or delivered by the power of human understanding, “but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2:4,5). He also warned them that he would eventually come and see their embarrassing spiritual condition for what it actually was (I Cor. 4: 14-21).
The remedy for these ills, Paul told them, is to “Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump” (I Cor. 5:7a). Leaven in Scripture is a symbol of our native wickedness. It includes our sin, our manmade doctrines, our spiritual hypocrisy, and our own self-righteous laws. These have no place in our new life in Christ. In Biblical times – and in many parts of the world still today – a leavening agent or yeast was not something you bought in the grocery store. Rather, it was kept and maintained in your own home, typically for years or even generations. Each time you baked bread you would take a small piece of the leftover dough from the previous loaf, or a sourdough starter, and use it to inoculate your new batch of dough. This cycle was self-perpetuating and could go on indefinitely.
Taking our cue from the first mention of leaven in Scripture, God instructed the Israelites to come out of Egypt, out of bondage (and symbolically out of sin and death), without it. The leaven was symbolic of what they had to eradicate from themselves in order to begin their new life of freedom. God delivered them, but they were responsible to leave their old mindsets and lifestyle behind. The Passover lamb (symbolic of Jesus Christ) was to be sacrificed and, “On the first day you shall remove leaven from your houses. For whoever eats leavened bread . . . that person shall be cut off from Israel” (Exodus 12:15). Partaking of the leaven was not a minor thing for the Israelites. It could result in being cut off from the assembly.
Jesus further expounded on the meaning of leaven when he warned his disciples, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy” (Luke 12:1). Leaven always makes more of itself; it quickly reproduces and expands when it finds a suitable environment. The Pharisees were spiritual phonies and their beliefs, lifestyle, and rabbinical laws always produced more phoniness, both in themselves and in those who followed them. In their reliance on their own “law”, they actually nullified the true Law of God, thus the hypocrisy Jesus charged them with (Mark 7:6-13). This hypocrisy produces a form of godliness that is worthless (it is powerless), yet dangerous because it inevitably attempts to replace true godliness. Jesus also warned His disciples that rejecting this leaven would make them targets of the established religious order (Luke 12:1-12).
Decades after Jesus first warned His disciples, Paul was still fighting the leaven. He was also predictably being targeted. “Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? They zealously court you but for no good!” (Gal. 4:16,17a). He warned the Galatians that even a little bit of leaven will eventually spread throughout the entire batch of dough, if given time (Gal. 5:9). And he now told the Corinthians the same thing (1 Cor. 5:6).
Leaven can’t be contained; it can’t be effectively “walled off”. It will occupy, expand, and eventually exceed whatever small space is left to it. The only cure is to completely purge it and start over.
Leaven, carnality/spiritual immaturity, and sectarianism are a triad. Where you see one you will find the other two. The more legalistic a group is, the more bound up in the traditions of men and the old sin nature, the less true spiritual maturity and the more divisions and contentions you will find within it. True unity is a direct result of collective yielding to the Holy Spirit’s influence and His practical authority in a group. Traditions of men are anathema to the Holy Spirit because they always eventually attempt to supplant Him, even as they try to convince you they are only “supplemental.” The more leaven you hold, the less Holy Spirit you will operate in. Jesus offers freedom. Traditions of men can only provide bondage.
Paul knew the spiritually immature are most susceptible to the deceptions of leaven, and the spiritually divided are most vulnerable. Therefore, he earnestly exhorted such believers in his letters. After first addressing the Corinthian’s primary issues of spiritual immaturity and resulting sectarianism, then reminding them of his own qualifications over those voices in Corinth who were trying to lead the church in different directions, Paul finally begins addressing their specific concerns and questions, starting in I Corinthians chapter 5. His response implies the letter composed to him had been full of questions and requests for advice, likely on issues the various factions within the church were becoming contentious over.
- In Chapter 5 Paul addresses a specific case of sexual immorality in the church and the practical steps they should take to remove it.
- Chapter 6 addresses an issue of believers within the church suing one another.
- Chapter 7 answers some marriage questions they had asked and offers specific advice for their situation.
- Chapter 8 addresses some questions and disputes they were having about eating food that has been offered to an idol by an unbeliever.
Chapters 9 and 10 are Paul taking a detour to again defend his apostleship and to argue both the validity and purity of his ministry. He spends an entire chapter reminding the Corinthians that it isn’t enough to just start well in the faith. You must finish well for it to count. The Israelites who were delivered out of Egypt failed to do this and were finally destroyed as a result. He warns them to guard against idolatry, against partaking of things pertaining to demons, and against immorality. This is not to fulfill some list of man-made rules but out of motivation to stay wholly committed to God. Don’t get side-tracked. He concludes the defense of his position and qualifications by telling them to, “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1).
After this detour, in the first half of chapter 11, Paul addresses a custom of head covering during prayer and teaching. He is likely back to answering specific questions they had asked in their letter to him and possibly even quoting some of their own words, or those teachers they were beginning to follow, back to them. The original Greek this letter was written in doesn’t include punctuation, so if he were quoting, it would be unclear. Paul is addressing certain traditions that at least some in Corinth were being caught up in.
For example, it seems odd for Paul to argue that “every man praying or prophesying having his head covered dishonors his head” (1 Cor. 11:4). It is odd for two reasons. First, Jewish tradition does include the practice of men covering their heads to pray. Paul, a Jew by culture, would know this. Orthodox Jewish men today still practice head covering. They will cover themselves with a tallit, a special prayer shawl only for men, pulled up across their heads and draped down over their shoulders when praying or reading the Scripture. This has also evolved into the modern practice of Jewish men wearing a kippah (small round skullcap), although kippot did not become standard until well after Paul’s time. In contrast, Jewish women don’t wear either one. Now, because this male head covering during spiritual activities is a Jewish tradition and not a commandment of God, it is entirely possible that Paul is specifically refuting this custom here. But that would actually be the second reason this statement is somewhat odd. There is no other Scripture about universal head covering – for men or women – in all of the Old or New Testament. God has given no indication that either men or women should – or shouldn’t – cover their heads in prayer, much less that not doing so would be a dishonor. It would be unusual for Paul to teach a doctrine that is not a consistent theme in Scripture. He was an expert in Scripture from his former profession. Instead, this statement may not be Paul’s teaching at all, but rather a quote of what was being taught by some in Corinth. If Paul was actually quoting one of the Corinthian’s own doctrines back to them, he negates the basis for this idea of gender segregation by responding that men and women are not independent from one another; they are equal and joined. Although the first woman came out of a man, all subsequent men have come out of a woman, so in the end it is only God Who is the true source of all (1 Cor 11:11,12).
For these same reasons, it is odd for Paul to unilaterally claim that, “if a man has long hair it is a dishonor to him” (1 Cor. 11:14). In fact, in the Law, God had required both women and men taking a Nazirite vow to leave their hair uncut for the duration of their vow, then shave their head at the end as the culmination of the ritual (Numbers 6:5,18). Paul would have known this. Jews even accepted the practice of a father vowing his under-age son as a life-long Nazarite, as in Samson’s case (Mishnah Sotah 3:8). This would naturally result in some grown men with very long hair! Since Roman cultural norms for men in Paul’s day included cropped hair and shaved faces, it reasonable to assume Corinthian men typically wore their hair short. This was their “normal.” There might even have been a negative image associated with long-haired men in their culture. But short hair for men is never universally required in God’s Law nor guidelines for hair length ever even mentioned for either sex. Regardless of exactly what Corinthian questions or customs Paul was addressing in this chapter, he concludes the entire matter by declaring that he and those with him have no such custom nor do any of the other churches in other cities (1 Cor. 11:16). A few chapters later he more explicitly calls them out for attempting to “run the show” and unilaterally impose certain doctrines on the entire Body.
Midway through chapter 11 Paul has finished up his responses to their specific questions and now circles back to provide further correction and instruction on the topic he introduced at the very first – their divisions and carnal conduct. He opened the letter on this topic and will now close on it. He spends the second half of chapter 11 and all of chapters 12, 13, and 14 correcting their general conduct in assembly. His language here does not sound as though he is responding to questions asked of him, but rather that he has learned of their conduct and is now rebuking and instructing them in the proper way. Apparently, some things had gotten out of hand. This was likely due in no small part to the contentions of the various church factions he had already mentioned and was being made worse by the Corinthians’ own carnality. He rebukes their disorder and sin in the Lord’s supper, rebuking their immaturity and selfishness. Next, concerning the spiritual gifts, he emphasizes the unity to be acknowledged in their diversity. The gifts work together out of the same Spirit, not in competition. He emphasizes the love that is to motivate the gifts. And finally, by chapter 14, he is sharply correcting what seemed to be a state of chaos in their general assembly. He told them to take turns, that everyone has something to offer, that “God is not the author of confusion but of peace,” and this is the standard all the other churches practice (1 Cor. 14:33).
It is within this broad section of corrections on general conduct and assembly that we finally arrive to Paul’s instructions regarding women’s participation in public worship.
