There is still a burning question in New Testament studies about the potential signification of KEFALH qua a scriptural metaphor. Some prominent lexical suggestions offered by those professionals who analyze ancient Greek texts have been "source," "ruler" or "authority over" (1 Corinthians 11:3). See Peter Cotterell and Max Turner's Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation (London: SPCK, 1989), 141-145; Richard A. Horsley, 1 Corinthians, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998). Translating KEFALH as "source" often results in attempts to mitigate any notion of hierarchy for a number of possible reasons. But what is most important to me involves what the data suggest from the GNT and other relevant sources. Turner and Cotterell review GNT examples such as Colossians 2:19; 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians 5:23. They subsequently write: "Now contextually it is by no means certain that Col 2:19 presents Christ as the origin, rather than as the Lord of the Church, but clearly it would considerably weaken the thesis if the sense 'source' was part of the lexical meaning of the Greek word KEFALH ('head'); that is, if it were one of its established senses" (141). But is "source" one of the established senses for KEFALH? After discussing LXX and Classical examples where the word is employed by ancient writers, Turner and Cotterell conclude:
"In other words, as far as we can tell, 'source' or 'origin' was not a conventional sense of the word KEFALH in Paul's time. This does not preclude the possibility that Paul himself began to use the word in such a way, but we would need very strong evidence to support such a view, and in our judgment nothing like such strength of evidence is forthcoming" (145).
While, as Cotterell and Turner show, there does not appear to be enough evidence to decide in favor of "source" being one of the lexical senses for KEFALH in Paul's time, we do have synchronic attestation for the meaning "ruler" or "authority over." Paul apparently used KEFALH in this way, when he penned these inspired words to the Ephesians: KAI PANTA hUPETAXEN hUPO TOUS PODAS AUTOU KAI AUTON EDWKEN KEFALHN hUPER PANTA THi EKKLHSIAi (Eph. 1:22).
Now the primary text under consideration is 1 Cor. 11:3: QELW DE hUMAS EIDENAI hOTI PANTOS ANDROS hH KEFALH hO XRISTOS ESTIN KEFALH DE GUNAIKOS hO ANHR KEFALH DE TOU XRISTOU hO QEOS. According to this passage, every man has a head which is Christ, and every woman also has a "head" which is the man. Christ himself has a "head," who is almighty God; the operative term here is KEFALH with the meaning "head."
In order to appreciate the full significance of 1 Cor. 11:3, I think it is imperative to construe KEFALH in the appropriate manner. Louw-Nida point out that the semantic domains for KEFALH respectively are (1) the literal head of the body;(2a) a superior;(2b) units;(2c) the "head" cornerstone;(2d) to "have one's head covered";(2e) "to lie down to rest";(2f) to "have courage."(2g) to denote "responsibility."(2h) to "cause to be ashamed."[The aforementioned divisions are mine, even though the categories represent those delineated by Louw-Nida. For a further examination of this issue, consult L-N Vol. II, p. 141 under "KEFALH."]
My purpose in listing the respective semantic domains from L-N is to point out that we must not confuse usage (1) with usage (2a) although the two fields obviously are parasitic upon one another. In other words, I would contend that Paul is describing the superiority of God over Christ as opposed to suggesting that he describes an anthropological relationship between God and Christ. At least, that is how I see it. L-N is normally a reliable source when it comes to how Greek writers use terms in a particular context. It says a lot when we note that this lexicon makes the aforesaid comments about 1 Cor. 11:3.
Two other texts that we might bring up, however, are Eph. 5:23 and Col. 1:18:
hOTI ANHR ESTIN KEFALH THS GUNAIKOS hWS KAI hO XRISTOSKEFALH THS EKKLHSIAS AUTOS SWTHR TOU SWMATOS (Eph5:23).
KAI AUTOS ESTIN hH KEFALH TOU SWMATOS THS EKKLHSIAShOS ESTIN hH ARXH PRWTOTOKOS EK TWN NEKRWN hINAGENHTAI EN PASIN AUTOS PRWTEUWN (Col 1:18).
In the first passage, it seems that KEFALH is qualified by AUTOS SWTHR TOU SWMATOS. Paul apparently professes that Christ is the KEFALH ("head") of the Christian EKKLHSIA by virtue of his God-given soteriological function (SWTHR TOU SWMATOS). That is, he serves as KEFALH by virtue of being the Savior of God's congregation (Acts 5:31). Now if I am construing the syntactical and semantic relationships properly here, then KEFALH possibly denotes "source" (Gordon Fee) in Eph. 5:23, although I personally would not want to rule out the notion of supremacy in light of Eph. 5:21-22: "Be in subjection to one another in fear of the Christ. Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord . . ."
Nevertheless, Col. 1:18 is more comprehensible when one construes KEFALH as "has authority over." Richard B. Hays adds: "Even if Paul is thinking here primarily of man as the source of woman rather than authority over woman, this still serves as warrant for a claim about his ontological preeminence over her, as vv. 7-9 show" (Richard Hays, 1 Corinthians, page 184). I am not sure about Hay's "ontological preeminence" language since I think it is based on potentially questionable presuppositions about ontology in general. Nevertheless, Hays shows what appears to be unavoidable from a "natural" reading of the text. Paul is saying that men have some type of preeminence over women and it also follows that God is preeminent over Christ, although Hays wants to argue that God does not have any "ontological preeminence" over Christ later in his discussion.
Having stated the foregoing, I want to provide some evidence that KEFALH in 1 Cor 11:3 does signify superiority of rank. BDAG says that the term, when employed metaphorically,may denote:(1) A being of high status (Iren. 1, 5, 3; Hippol.Ref. 7, 23, 3).(a) "in the case of living beings, to denote superiorrank." Marion Soards (1 Corinthians in the NIBC Series) discusses the views of G. Fee and N. Watson, who both argue that KEFALH means "source" in 1 Cor 11:3. But Soards then supplies the following caveat on page 229 of his commentary:
"Nevertheless, the interpretive debate is not settled. J. A. Fitzmeyer ('Another Look at KEFALH in 1 Corinthians 11:3,' NTS 35 [1989], pp. 503-11) examines the LXX and Philo alongside Paul to argue 'head' could be understood as 'authority over' another person; also J. A. Fitzmeyer, 'KEFALH in 1 Corinthians 11:3,' Int 47 (1993), pp. 52-59. In a creative interpretive essay, S. E. McGinn ('EXOUSIAN EXEIN EPI THS KEFALHS: 1 Cor 11:10 and the Ecclesial Authority Woman,' List 31 [1996], pp. 91-104) argues that the charismatic gift of prophecy gave the women who were endowed with this gift an authority over their heads--the men--because of the Spirit's presence and power at work in their contributions to the congregation's worship."D. A. Carson also reports the following in Exegetical Fallacies (2nd Edition): "Although some of the New Testament metaphorical uses of KEFALH . . . could be taken to mean 'source,' all other factors being equal, in no case is that the required meaning; and in every instance the notion of 'headship' implying authority fits equally well or better. The relevant lexica are full of examples, all culled from the ancient texts, in which KEFALH . . . connotes 'authority'" (pp. 37-38).
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/tj/kephale_grudem.pdf
ReplyDeleteThis may add a few details.
Thanks, Duncan. Grudem covers many examples of KEFALH in the literature, and what does he conclude?
ReplyDelete"But this survey is probably sufficient to demonstrate that 'source, origin' is nowhere clearly attested as a legitimate meaning for κεφαλή, and that the meaning 'ruler, authority over' has sufficient attestation to establish it clearly as a legitimate sense for κεφαλή in Greek literature at the time of the New Testament."