Was Jesus Himself an Actual "Feminist" in a way? Yes or no?

[Endeavourer]

If you read the verse it is obviously hierarchical in nature. I think four are mentioned; God, Christ man and woman. From the sentence you can see the meaning, but I can go find the exact Greek word since the New Testament was written in Greek.

I strongly disagree. You need to contort the words to get to that interpretation.

The exact Greek word for "head" is kephale. Above I provided a scholarly discussion of what that word meant in Paul's time, and showed you that it could not have meant "authority".

There was no such word as headship. A Greek person back then would have looked at you funny if you tried to tell him the context of "head" in this verse is 'headship".

1 Cor 11:3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Also, if it means authority, how is it that only 2/3 of the Trinity is hierached? Where does the Holy Spirit fit in?

If it means authority, does that mean that every woman is under the authority of every man? (There are people who say it does and put this subjugation to practice in their communities.)

Or, is kephale/"head" referring to a source?

1 Cor 11:3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

The Son is the only begotten Son of the father (the Father is the source of the Son), the man was created by the Son in Gen 1:1 (the Son was the source of man), and the woman was taken out of the man (man was the source of woman).

I feel this interpretation does not leave a person stretching for a twist to the text in order to frame the meaning.

 

[Paidiske]

So then did you become a feminist for dialog reasons and taught yourself feminism or are you a feminist?

I'm not sure it's either of those, exactly. I became aware of feminism at about the same time as I started going to church (in my late teens), although those things happened independently. I've grown in my understanding of both feminism and Christianity at the same time, and found in Christ a radical equality of the sexes which matches the fundamental claim of feminism.

The question then becomes, so what? What does one do, or aim to change, as a result of that radical equality? A Christian answer and a secular answer will never align, because the Christian will frame his or her answer in light of the reign of God, and a secular person will not. But the fundamentals of feminism, for me, sit very neatly within the gospel message and indeed, grow inevitably out of it.

 

[Endeavourer]

Also, if it means authority, how is it that only 2/3 of the Trinity is hierached? Where does the Holy Spirit fit in?

When faced with this question, headship proponents have gone so far in their "making stuff up" then try to argue that the Son must be eternally subordinate to the Father (doctrine of ESS) and that the trinity's economy operates like the family unit:
--The Father is the Father
--The Son operates as if the Mother
--The Holy Spirit operates as if the child

Here, from the Aquilla Report:

"When I first started reading about Eternal Subordination of the Son and the parallels being drawn between Father/Son and husband/wife, I wondered what those who teach ESS did with the Holy Spirit. It seemed to me that He was left out of the analogy. I jokingly wondered if the husband is the Father and wife is the Son in the analogy, then were the kids like the Holy Spirit? It seemed so farfetched to me, but that is exactly what Dr. Grudem teaches in his Systematic Theology. Continuing on from the last quote:

And, although it is not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, the gift of children within marriage, coming from both the father and the mother, and subject to the authority of both father and mother is analogous to the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Father and Son in the Trinity. (257.)​

"This last quote is perhaps the most troubling of all that I’ve read. Todd Pruitt at Mortification of Spin has done an excellent job of explaining the danger here:

This goes far beyond reasonable speculation. In an effort to be charitable I want to call it exotic. But that will not do. It is worse than exotic. It may well be blasphemous.

I chose that word with no small amount of thought and sobriety.

The stubborn insistence of Drs. Ware and Grudem to force a parallel between the Father and the Son to a husband and wife is worse than troubling. And, as we can see from the passage cited above, it leads to the inevitable comparison of the Holy Spirit to the child of the divine husband (Father) and wife (Son). These parallels have far more in common with pagan mythology than Biblical theology.​

"I hope that those who have read and recommend Dr. Grudem’s Systematic Theology will go back and reconsider what is being taught."

Eternal Subordination of the Son and Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology - The Aquila Report

 

[Paidiske]

The Athanasian Creed explicitly rules out any possibility of eternal hierarchy in the Trinity. Yes, it is true that Christ emptied himself during the incarnation, but that doesn't speak to eternal realities. Before the incarnation and after the ascension the Trinity are a community of equals, working by consensus, not command.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

If you read the verse it is obvious...... I think four are mentioned; God, Christ man and woman. From the sentence you can see the meaning,......

Well, obviously not everyone, though the meaning from God is clear, yes. God is head of Christ. Christ is head of man. Man is head of woman. No contradictions, instead perfect peace and joy and life and harmony with all God's Plan and Purpose and God's house that God is building.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I strongly disagree. You need to contort the words to get to that interpretation.

The exact Greek word for "head" is kephale. Above I provided a scholarly discussion of what that word meant in Paul's time, and showed you that it could not have meant "authority".

There was no such word as headship. A Greek person back then would have looked at you funny if you tried to tell him the context of "head" in this verse is 'headship".

1 Cor 11:3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Also, if it means authority, how is it that only 2/3 of the Trinity is hierached? Where does the Holy Spirit fit in?

If it means authority, does that mean that every woman is under the authority of every man? (There are people who say it does and put this subjugation to practice in their communities.)

Or, is kephale/"head" referring to a source?

1 Cor 11:3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

The Son is the only begotten Son of the father (the Father is the source of the Son), the man was created by the Son in Gen 1:1 (the Son was the source of man), and the woman was taken out of the man (man was the source of woman).

I feel this interpretation does not leave a person stretching for a twist to the text in order to frame the meaning.

It's not authority.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon says the following ( see url
Strong's Greek: 2776. κεφαλή (kephalé) -- the head and 1 Corinthians 11:3 Interlinear: and I wish you to know that of every man the head is the Christ, and the head of a woman is the husband, and the head of Christ is God. )

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2776: κεφαλή

κεφαλή, κεφαλῆς, ἡ, the Sept. for רֹאשׁ; the head, both of men: Matthew 5:36; Mark 6:24; Luke 7:38, 44 (Rec.),46; John 13:9; Acts 18:18; 1 Corinthians 11:4; Revelation 1:14; Revelation 4:4, and often; and of animals: Revelation 9:7, 17, 19, etc.; on the phrases κλίνειν τήν κεφαλήν, ἐπαίρειν τήν κεφαλήν, see κλίνω, 1 and ἐπαίρω; on the saying in Romans 12:20, see under ἄνθραξ. Since the loss of the head destroys the life, κεφαλή is used in phrases relating to capital and extreme punishments: so in τό αἷμα ὑμῶν ἐπί τήν κεφαλήν ὑμῶν (see αἷμα, 2 a., p. 15{b}), Acts 18:6, and similar phrases in classical Greek; see Passow, under the word, p. 1717{a}; Pape under the word, 3; (Liddell and Scott, under the word, I. 3 and 4). Metaphorically, anything supreme, chief, prominent; of persons, master, lord: τίνος, of a husband in relation to his wife, 1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 5:23; of Christ, the lord of the husband, 1 Corinthians 11:3 (cf. Buttmann, 124f (109)); of the church, Ephesians 4:15; Ephesians 5:23; Colossians 2:19 (cf. Buttmann, § 143, 4 c.); τοῦ σώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας, Colossians 1:18; πάσης ἀρχῆς καί ἐξουσίας, Colossians 2:10; so Judges 11:11; 2 Samuel 22:44, and in Byzantine writings of things: κεφαλῆς γωνίας, the corner-stone, see γωνία, a. ((From Homer down.))

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

But the fundamentals of feminism, for me, sit very neatly within the gospel message and indeed, grow inevitably out of it.

It looks like you discovered the truth in line with Biblical life and God's Plan,
if it could be called "Biblical feminism" without reference and without association to the world's way.
Not many people have bothered to find out the Biblical Way as you have, and they general associate , if not always, "feminism" with the world's way in rebellion against God's Word, against God's Way.

 

[ToBeLoved]

When faced with this question, headship proponents have gone so far in their "making stuff up" then try to argue that the Son must be eternally subordinate to the Father (doctrine of ESS) and that the trinity's economy operates like the family unit:
--The Father is the Father
--The Son operates as if the Mother
--The Holy Spirit operates as if the child

Here, from the Aquilla Report:

"When I first started reading about Eternal Subordination of the Son and the parallels being drawn between Father/Son and husband/wife, I wondered what those who teach ESS did with the Holy Spirit. It seemed to me that He was left out of the analogy. I jokingly wondered if the husband is the Father and wife is the Son in the analogy, then were the kids like the Holy Spirit? It seemed so farfetched to me, but that is exactly what Dr. Grudem teaches in his Systematic Theology. Continuing on from the last quote:

And, although it is not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, the gift of children within marriage, coming from both the father and the mother, and subject to the authority of both father and mother is analogous to the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Father and Son in the Trinity. (257.)​

"This last quote is perhaps the most troubling of all that I’ve read. Todd Pruitt at Mortification of Spin has done an excellent job of explaining the danger here:

This goes far beyond reasonable speculation. In an effort to be charitable I want to call it exotic. But that will not do. It is worse than exotic. It may well be blasphemous.

I chose that word with no small amount of thought and sobriety.

The stubborn insistence of Drs. Ware and Grudem to force a parallel between the Father and the Son to a husband and wife is worse than troubling. And, as we can see from the passage cited above, it leads to the inevitable comparison of the Holy Spirit to the child of the divine husband (Father) and wife (Son). These parallels have far more in common with pagan mythology than Biblical theology.​

"I hope that those who have read and recommend Dr. Grudem’s Systematic Theology will go back and reconsider what is being taught."

Eternal Subordination of the Son and Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology - The Aquila Report

No one is teaching that the Holy Spirit would be in the role of a child here or that this ESS or whatever is not even relevant.

We are discussing a specific verse, not an ESS theology, whatever that is. It looks weird to me. Calling the Holy Spirit a child is offensive to me.

 

[Endeavourer]

@ToBeLoved , I already had given you exactly the reference you provided as well as a scholarly criticism of it.

It seems like you are responding to my post without reading it?

Previously posted:

1 . lit.- a. actually of the head of man or beast [followed by thirty-six lines of entry giving examples of this obvious meaning, ranging from the New Testament to Aesop’s fables]….h. metaph... Christ the [kephale] of the [church] thought of as a [soma (“body”)] Col. 1:18;cf. Col. 2:19.

2. fig- a. In the case of living beings, to denote superior rank. (cf. Artem. 4:24. p.218 where [kephale] is the symbol of the father; Judg 11:11; 2 [Sam] 22:44) head (Zosimus of Ashkelon[500 A.D.] hails Demosth. as his master: [“0h, divine head”] [Biogr. p. 297]; of the husband in relation to his wife I Cor 11:3b; Eph 5:23a. Of Christ in relation to the church Eph 4:15; 5:23b. But Christ is he head not only of the church but of the universe as a whole, [“head over all things”] Eph 1:22, and of every cosmic power... the head of all might and power or all rule & authority]. Col. 2:10. The divine influence on the world results in the series (for the growing distance from God with corresponding results);...God the [kephale] of Christ, Christ the [kephale] of the man, the man the [kephale] of the woman, I Cor 11:3c,a,b.

B. of things the uppermost part, extremity, end, point... [kephale gonias] the cornerstone (forming the farthest extension... of the corner, though Joachim Jeremias... thinks of it as the keystone or capstone above the door;... Mt 21:42; Mk 12:10; Lk 20:17,...Ac 4:11; I Pt 2:7 B[arnahas] 6:4 (all [quoting] Psalm 118:22 [LXX Ps 117:22]).” [3]

The following are some criticisms of Bauer’s definition:

Under section two, where Bauer gives “superior rank” as a meaning for kephale, he cites only two references from secular Greek. One comes from Zosimus and is dated A.D. 500 -- at least 400 years after the New Testament was written. (Our question is not what kephale meant in A.D. 500 but rather what Paul meant when he used kephale when writing his letters to the churches in the first century.)

Bauer’s only other reference to secular Greek to support the meaning of “superior rank” is to Artemidorus in the second century, where kephale is used as a symbol of the father. What Artemidorus said (Lib K, Capt 2, Para 6,) was “He [the father] was the cause (aitos) of the life and of the light for the dreamer [the son] just as the head (kephale) is the cause of the life and the light of all the body.” He also said: “the head is to be likened to parents because the head is the cause [source] of life.” Bauer’s reference may be an example of a lexicographer reading his own cultural understanding (i.e., fathers have “superior rank”) into the text.”[4]

Phillip Payne rightly comments:

The Mickelsen’s criticism of Bauer’s treatment of kephale is well founded. The inappropriateness of citing the Zosimus statement as an example of kephale denoting “superior rank” is not due only to its late date. It is virtually certain that this passage does not imply a position of authority over anyone. Stanford classicist Mark Edwards stated that ho theia kephale in the Zosirnus document is a salutation implying dignity, not authority. Presumably the Demosthenes referred to is the great Athenian orator (384-22 B.C.), who could not have had a position of authority over Zosimus since Demosthenes had died over 800 years earlier. [5]

[/QUOTE]

 

[ToBeLoved]

@ToBeLoved , I already had given you exactly the reference you provided as well as a scholarly criticism of it.

It seems like you are responding to my post without reading it?

Previously posted:

[/QUOTE]
So if you look at it, I copy and pasted it below; notice that there are different things depending on the verse, so look specifically for I Corinthians 11:3. You have to find the one verse you are looking at because all that is below, as a whole, shows the different places iterations of that word are used also. Not so much with this word, kephale, but I've seen it other times when researching Greek.

So, notice that our verse falls in the 2. section. That is what I am trying to point out to you, is that there are specifics there for that verse.

Endeavourer said: ↑
1 . lit.- a. actually of the head of man or beast [followed by thirty-six lines of entry giving examples of this obvious meaning, ranging from the New Testament to Aesop’s fables]….h. metaph... Christ the [kephale] of the [church] thought of as a [soma (“body”)] Col. 1:18;cf. Col. 2:19.

2. fig- a. In the case of living beings, to denote superior rank. (cf. Artem. 4:24. p.218 where [kephale] is the symbol of the father; Judg 11:11; 2 [Sam] 22:44) head (Zosimus of Ashkelon[500 A.D.] hails Demosth. as his master: [“0h, divine head”] [Biogr. p. 297]; of the husband in relation to his wife I Cor 11:3b; Eph 5:23a. Of Christ in relation to the church Eph 4:15; 5:23b. But Christ is he head not only of the church but of the universe as a whole, [“head over all things”] Eph 1:22, and of every cosmic power... the head of all might and power or all rule & authority]. Col. 2:10. The divine influence on the world results in the series (for the growing distance from God with corresponding results);...God the [kephale] of Christ, Christ the [kephale] of the man, the man the [kephale] of the woman, I Cor 11:3c,a,b.

B. of things the uppermost part, extremity, end, point... [kephale gonias] the cornerstone (forming the farthest extension... of the corner, though Joachim Jeremias... thinks of it as the keystone or capstone above the door;... Mt 21:42; Mk 12:10; Lk 20:17,...Ac 4:11; I Pt 2:7 B[arnahas] 6:4 (all [quoting] Psalm 118:22 [LXX Ps 117:22]).” [3]

 

[mkgal1]

If you read the verse it is obviously hierarchical in nature.

Only if one is reading through the lens of God and His character/love and ways to be about authority and hierarchy (which is why I posted earlier about you implying a hierarchy in the Trinity and you denied that as a response).

Earlier you posted this:

I never said it was a hierarchy, that is what you took from reading it.

I said the Godhead, each in their roles, glorify the other members of the Godhead.

That is not hierarchy at all.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Only if one is reading through the lens of God and His character/love and ways to be about authority and hierarchy (which is why I posted earlier about you implying a hierarchy in the Trinity and you denied that as a response).

Depends what you mean by hierarchy. Guess that might be a bad word use.

Jesus says that the Father is more powerful than all. And Jesus submits to the Father.

So it's complicated. I think it's very unified and glorifying because of the perfection. I don't know that humans have a good word for that. Yet Jesus is the Creator of all things and God has put all things under Christ.

So it's not all that simple. It's not like humans with imperfection, ego and not being peaceful. It's God.

I'm not sure there is a good word in our language for it. Perfectly cooperative, in sync, of one will, unified.

 

[mkgal1]

Depends what you mean by hierarchy. Guess that might be a bad word use.

Jesus says that the Father is more powerful than all. And Jesus submits to the Father.

So it's complicated. I think it's very unified and glorifying because of the perfection. I don't know that humans have a good word for that. Yet Jesus is the Creator of all things and God has put all things under Christ.

So it's not all that simple. It's not like humans with imperfection, ego and not being peaceful. It's God.

I'm not sure there is a good word in our language for it. Perfectly cooperative, in sync, of one will, unified.

As far as I'm aware of, there's only ONE form of hierarchy.

I believe our theology is built on what we believe about the Trinity. For me.....the Athanasian creed is a good general summary (but you said you consider that to be merely coming from a "dead saint"....so I don't think that means too much to you).

 

[mkgal1]

I'm not sure there is a good word in our language for it. Perfectly cooperative, in sync, of one will, unified

I agree with this (but that's not a hierarchy).

In the Greek Orthodox tradition.....there's a term used to describe the Trinity, "Perichoresis". Like you're saying.....some concepts are too complex for just language. Instead....this is more of a visual. This is perichoresis (circle dance):

 

[ToBeLoved]

As far as I'm aware of, there's only ONE form of hierarchy.

I believe our theology is built on what we believe about the Trinity. For me.....the Athanasian creed is a good general summary (but you said you consider that to be merely coming from a "dead saint"....so I don't think that means too much to you).

I just don’t give any man the authority I give Gods Word. So no mans words impress me or are over the authority of scripture.

 

[mkgal1]

I just don’t give any man the authority I give Gods Word. So no mans words impress me or are over the authority of scripture.

Many believe God's Word (Christ) isn't limited to the Bible. There are other ways He continues to reveal His Truth to us.....but the development of the creeds wasn't based on one man.

The text of the Bible still has to be interpreted (especially for those of us that aren't using Koine Greek as our language).

 

[ToBeLoved]

Many believe God's Word (Christ) isn't limited to the Bible. There are other ways He continues to reveal His Truth to us.....but the development of the creeds wasn't based on one man.

I don't give the creeds ultimate authority either.

I do give the Bible ultimate authority as it is God breathed. God also breathed life into Adam

 

[ToBeLoved]

I agree with this (but that's not a hierarchy).

In the Greek Orthodox tradition.....there's a term used to describe the Trinity, "Perichoresis". Like you're saying.....some concepts are too complex for just language. Instead....this is more of a visual. This is perichoresis (circle dance):

I will have to watch the video later. I usually dont watch any Youtube videos from this forum, but I will check it out and give you my feedback later tonight.

 

[redleghunter]

I'd say more of an egalitarian.

Jesus treated people in accordance to how God created man and woman in His image and likeness.

 

[Rion]

Jesus treated people in accordance to how God created man and woman in His image and likeness.

From my understanding, egalitarianism is treating men and women with respect and dignity, while not pretending that there's no difference between the two.