ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

General Christian Theology
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by silentreader »

lesterb wrote:Many of the NT commands are given in the form of principles. This leaves us with the responsibility of finding a way to live out this principle within the culture we live in. But it never gives us the right to explain away the principle entirely.

Once in a while the NT will enlarge on the principle, but there are always aspects that are left to us to apply. But we always need to make sure that we apply it in a manner that aligns with the original concern, or we have misused our responsibility to apply the principle to eliminate it.

I view the basic principle of the first half of 1 Cor 11 to be headship. But in this case, Paul went on and built on the principle and gave some instruction as to how the principle should be shown in everyday life. He still left the actual application open to local application within the reader's culture. But again, rather than just writing off what the NT says, we need to build our applications to this principle within the framework that the NT gives us. In other words, our responsibility to application within our culture starts where the NT stops. In this case, I would see this to include the following...

1. Earthly headship needs to mirror heavenly headship principles. IE. God is the father, and Christ takes his position under the father's direction. Jesus clearly didn't rebel against his father's direction. Similarly, earthly headship mirrors this, where the man is in the leadership role and the woman is in the supportive role. Someday the earthly and heavenly roles will be merged in the marriage supper of the lamb, and men and women will have equal roles in this as being part of the bride of Christ. But in the meantime, we need to make sure that our earthly roles line up in principle with the heavenly pattern.

2. God knows that humans need reminders that they can see and feel. So in this case the principle was important enough to our well-being that God gave us some reminders. First, since the woman's hair is for the glory of man, she is told not to cut it off. But the glory isn't just for men in general. She is to save that glory for her husband, so she covers it. This is a sign that she is accepting her role in God's plan.

3. This step of obedience on the woman's part should be a constant reminder to her of being a player in God's plan, and so should help her to keep her proper place, like Christ keeps his.

4. This obedience on the woman's part is a daily reminder to the man of his responsibility as well. He is in the role of mirroring the heavenly father on earth. Both the man's role and the woman's role are very important. Compare them to the role of the Father and the Son. But the submission of his wife or daughters to the heavenly plan should bring out the best in the father and husband.

5. The obedience of Christian men and women to the heavenly model is also an important part of their witness to onlookers. In this context Paul uses the term "angels" and there may be a special meaning in that, where the angels support the woman in her role. But in a generic way this could also include onlookers in general.

So, yes, culture enters into the application. But first, application must always support the principle. And second, it must include the direction given in the context of the principle. From that point on, application will depend somewhat on culture. I think that this is often misunderstood. And finally, the NT tells us to always be ready to give an answer to the hope that lies within us. This leads me to feel that this principle applies to more than corporate worship. It is a sign to society, it is a sign to the angels, it is a sign to the Christian brothers, and it is a sign that she is always ready to pray or prophesy as the need comes her way. And lets not forget that it is a sign to her personally that will help her to submit to God's plan for her.

Those are my thoughts. Take them for what they're worth... :wave:
:wave:
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by silentreader »

silentreader wrote:
Valerie wrote:
ohio jones wrote: If you are married, the ESV would make no difference in whether or not you should cover. Using the word "wife" and associating the veil with a sign of being married would only affect the question of whether an unmarried woman should cover.
Except for their footnote OJ:


Greek gune. This term may refer to a woman or a wife, depending on the context. In verses 5-13, the Greek word gune is translated wife in verses that deal with wearing a veil, a sign of being married in first century. And then the footnote to 'angels' in vs 10 it says "Or messengers, that is, people sent to observe and report".

According to their 'teaching' no one after the first century needs to concern themselves with this at all, married, or not-

(I should clarify my previous post- It's not that I mind covering, I do not- I mind all the differences about it so it would be easier if it didn't apply to today, but we disagree with ESV that it was 1st century only).
Simple, ignore the footnote, just read the text. Too many people study footnotes, and avoid the text.
I'm sorry, on second thought, "ignore" is a bit over the top.
I think we need to believe that the "meat" is in the text, and that footnotes are generally interpretative opinions and/or commentary on those opinions. Footnotes can be helpful, or they can be a distraction.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Josh »

She is to save that glory for her husband, so she covers it.
Where is this spelled out in scripture? I hear this a lot, but it's hard to buy for a couple of reasons:

1. Many Mennonite groups don't expect younger women to cover their hair at all, until sometime like age 12-15.

2. Nearly all Mennonite groups do expect unmarried women to cover their hair. They don't have a husband, so the idea she's saving her glory for her husband doesn't make a lot of sense.
0 x
Sudsy
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Sudsy »

How about Young's Literal Translation - 'and a woman, if she have long hair, a glory it is to her, because the hair instead of a covering hath been given to her'. A translation very keen on being literal.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by silentreader »

Josh wrote:
She is to save that glory for her husband, so she covers it.
Where is this spelled out in scripture? I hear this a lot, but it's hard to buy for a couple of reasons:

1. Many Mennonite groups don't expect younger women to cover their hair at all, until sometime like age 12-15.

2. Nearly all Mennonite groups do expect unmarried women to cover their hair. They don't have a husband, so the idea she's saving her glory for her husband doesn't make a lot of sense.
But where is the guarantee that these Mennonite groups have everything right?
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Bootstrap »

lesterb wrote:Many of the NT commands are given in the form of principles. This leaves us with the responsibility of finding a way to live out this principle within the culture we live in. But it never gives us the right to explain away the principle entirely.

Once in a while the NT will enlarge on the principle, but there are always aspects that are left to us to apply. But we always need to make sure that we apply it in a manner that aligns with the original concern, or we have misused our responsibility to apply the principle to eliminate it.
I agree entirely.

But in this case, it's somewhat difficult to figure out what the underlying principle is. Even Mennonites who agree that we have to do this today still disagree on what the principle is. For me, it's not so much explaining the principle away, I really don't think I know what the underlying principle is with any certainty.
lesterb wrote:I view the basic principle of the first half of 1 Cor 11 to be headship.
Well, maybe. Tertullian thought it was modesty. There are some other possibilities ... there's been quite a bit of debate about what the underlying principle is throughout Christian history.
lesterb wrote:So, yes, culture enters into the application. But first, application must always support the principle. And second, it must include the direction given in the context of the principle. From that point on, application will depend somewhat on culture. I think that this is often misunderstood. And finally, the NT tells us to always be ready to give an answer to the hope that lies within us. This leads me to feel that this principle applies to more than corporate worship. It is a sign to society, it is a sign to the angels, it is a sign to the Christian brothers, and it is a sign that she is always ready to pray or prophesy as the need comes her way. And lets not forget that it is a sign to her personally that will help her to submit to God's plan for her.

Those are my thoughts. Take them for what they're worth... :wave:
I definitely agree with your general approach. Personally, I don't think I know what the principle is. Since I agree that application must always support the principle, and I don't know what the principle is, I tend to regard this as a passage that I don't really know how to apply. I generally focus on applying the clearest passages and the things that are stated throughout the New Testament. I see this as an obscure and unique passage.

You, on the other hand, seem to have a fairly strong conviction that you understand the underlying principle. And that makes you more comfortable applying it in your life.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Our present Pastor spoke on his radio program "Truth for Life" on this today- I took a later lunch and was able to listen- he was wrestling through all this, but it sounded like whenever he taught this, he wasn't going by the ESV that the church now uses-
(they use to use NIV until the latest edition of that, which they got rid of all NIVs)

Anyway- I thought it was pretty interesting what he shared if you have 20 minutes- of course I will have to listen to the rest of the series as he's not finished-

https://www.truthforlife.org/ (today's broadcast)

I'm almost afraid to listen to tomorrow's lest I hear the possible truth about what he really believes the handful of us at Parkside that wear one- should or shouldn't be doing- I don't know yet but interesting timing on this
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Hats Off »

After reading through this discussion I came to the conclusion 1) that it would be good for us to have a fair understanding of why we do what we do and 2) that we need to be a little more tolerant of the other person's understanding on an issue. I feel that some of these posts show a lack of love and respect that I expect of fellow Christians.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Joy wrote:So far as women praying aloud in a gathering, many hymns are prayers. And with a broad interpretation of prophesying, that could possibly be included in hymns, also.
Could be- but consider what all Apostle Paul taught about the 'gift' of prophesying in Corinthians, when he taught about tongues and prophesying- prophesying in the earliest days of the church seemed to indicate more than it does for most Christians today-

Think about what is said here in Acts 21 about Philip's daughters:
8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.

9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

Somehow I get the idea there was more to this 'prophesying' than we seem to conclude, although 'this' kind is probably not really practiced today- it kind of stands out as something not done (possibly) by all women-

Certainly, prayer would be done by all women, married or single. Prophesying? Did all have this gift?
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Hats Off wrote:After reading through this discussion I came to the conclusion 1) that it would be good for us to have a fair understanding of why we do what we do and 2) that we need to be a little more tolerant of the other person's understanding on an issue. I feel that some of these posts show a lack of love and respect that I expect of fellow Christians.
I think it's been pretty civil- I think there are some misunderstandings that may not be there if we were speaking face to face sharing our thoughts-

I probably shouldn't have brought it up, but when I read 1 Corinthians 11 in the ESV the other day- this translation bothered me, and so did it's foot note, which probably before the Anabaptists teaching me, I wouldn't have given it another thought-
I do confess to being one of those people who are concerned about various translations- and how they can influence people- and even the translations themselves, can cause more divisions-
0 x
Post Reply