Autonomy
Dictionary.com
1. independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions: the autonomy of the individual.
2. the condition of being autonomous; self-government, or the right of self-government; independence: The rebels demanded autonomy from Spain.
3. a self-governing community.
Mirriam Webster
1 : the quality or state of being independent, free, and self-directing
2 : independence from the organism as a whole in the capacity of a part for growth, reactivity, or responsiveness
WordNet
n 1: immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence [syn: liberty] 2: personal independence [syn: self-direction, self-reliance, self-sufficiency]
So thinking about autonomy, no one is completely autonomous. We are not autonomous from the local governments. We are not autonomous from God's Will. We will suffer the consequences when we do not line ourselves up with God's Will. We are not fully autonomous from the needs and desires of our families.
However, everyone experiences a large degree of personal autonomy. We get up and go to bed when we want, have the job we have decided upon, wear the clothes we choose, eat the food we want, live in the house we want, all from the choices available. That is a lot of personal autonomy. Personal autonomy is not bad provided we use this freedom wisely. Those who do not use their freedoms wisely may end up in jail, ostracized from friends and church, etc.
It is personal autonomy used wisely that brings us opportunities to witness about God to nonbelievers, to do good to others, to spend time in the presence of God and therefore be blessed by His presence, and so on.
Children grow up from little personal autonomy to greater degrees of personal autonomy as they mature into the capacity to make wise decisions, at least that is the idea in raising one's children. Unfortunately, many parents give their children too much personal autonomy before they are wise or mature enough to handle it. And of course, schools often encourage more freedom among children then they are really ready for.
And so on......
Those who want to say that autonomy is sinful are drawing from a disagreement on the meaning of 1 Cor. 11 where Paul is saying the woman is to have authority on her own head. The traditional interpretation is that the woman is to have "a symbol of" authority on her head. The problem is that those words are added in by misguided translators. The new tactic by traditionalists is to make accusations that any woman wanting to be responsible for her own life and decisions is wanting more control than women should have, and she is being rebellious.
But it is God's desire that every Christian believer grow and mature into the fullness of the Man Christ Jesus. This maturity is not only for men but for women also. God wants a healthy body of believers. We need to grow in wisdom because some day we will all be judging the angels.
1 Cor. 6:3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?
Jason David BeDuhn
"'Because of the Angels': Unveiling Paul's Anthropology in 1 Corinthians 11."
Journal of Biblical Literature
Once again, Paul's basic point is clear: women must have, that is,
_exercise_ authority over their heads. _exousia_ can only mean that
the women themselves possess this power of authority. The long-
forwarded notion that it means that women's heads are under _someone
else's_ authority is linguistically unsubstantiated. _exousia_ is
otherwise unattested in Greek literature with the meaning "a sign of
someone else's authority." Paul _always_ employs the term to mean
authority held by the subject: the individual's right and freedom to
act, the individual's control over objects, persons, or situations,
and by extension as a title of individuals who exercise such
authority. In fact, Paul is concerned throughout 1 Corinthians with
the issue of "authority" precisely in the sense of rights or freedoms
claimed by his readers which he seeks to have them voluntarily
subordinate to broader community values. I must emphasize the
absolutely clear linguistic force of this term, no matter what
difficulty it gives us in understanding Paul at this point, because
_most_ interpretations of 1 Corinthians 11 are based on the reversal
of that linguistic force and cannot be substantiated without such a
reversal.
"This sense for _exousia_ in 1 Cor 11:10 as one's own right and
authority, not subjection to someone else's, is supported by Paul's
use of _opheilo_ in the same verse, "for in Paul this does not imply
external compulsion but obligation." Paul_always_ employs _opheilo_
with the sense of performing one's duty and acting upon one's own
responsibility and commitment, and the substantives based onthe verb
likewise all carry the meaning of a responsibility, obligation, or
moral debt of the individual. The language Paul chooses in v. 10,
therefore, only could have been understood by his readers and hearers
as referring to the responsibility women hold in the situation under
discussion."
Showing posts with label 1 Cor. chapter 11. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1 Cor. chapter 11. Show all posts
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Kephale Meanings
Lets look at 1 Cor. 11 and it’s usage of kephale. The questions arise as to what in this application is kephale meaning metaphorically. “kephale” properly translated as “head”, metaphorically has meanings ranging from pre-eminant, origin, source, “in front”, and less rarely a type of dignity.
Gordon Fee says in his book on First Corinthians (pg. 502 & 503)
“Indeed, the metaphorical use of kephale to mean “chief” or “person of the highest rank” is rare in Greek literature------so much so that even though the Hebrew word “ros” often carried this sense, the Greek translators of the LXX, who ordinarily used kephale to translate ros when the physical head was intended, almost never did so when “ruler” was intended, thus indicating that this metaphorical sense is an exceptional usage and not part of the ordinary range of meaning for the Greek word. “
OK, so the listings in 1 Cor. 11:3 are not in the order of a hierarchy of authority, kephale is not normally used to mean a ranking anyway, so what in that listing CAN you see, that flows without changing the order and that flows with the normal range of meanings of kephale. Look again.
In humanities creation the first event spoken of was the creation of the human, and it is Christ through whom all things were created. The second event is that the woman was drawn forth from the first human. (this is further discussed in verses 8-12 giving credence to this observation), and the last event in the creation of humanity is that God brought forth the God-Man, the “last adham”, the Messiah – Christ.
Not only does that sense fit without changing anything, but it is confirmed in six of the verses following verse 3. (keep in mind that verses don’t really matter since the Greek was not written in verses or even sentences, but in groups of thoughts.... IOW no grammatical divisions). And nothing following verse three shows any relationship to a hierarchical concept. (Verse 10 does not have the words “a symbol of” in the orginal Greek).
So, then the next question is, is what was Paul bringing to our attention with these comparisons. And that is another post. In brief, I belief he was pointing us all to give honor and respect, in particular wives to not fail in this when in public services.... Preaching/prophesying and praying/worshipping.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Author: Gilbert Bilezikian
Title of Book:Beyond Sex Roles, pgs. 277-78
In order to understand the meaning of "head" as used by the apostle Paul, it is helpful to determine its meaning within the language spoken by Paul. The authors of works such as A Greek-English Lexicon by Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott (Oxford: Clarendon Press 1968), or Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965, 10 volumes) have thoroughly investigated biblical and contemporary extra-biblical writings and reported that the word kephale was used in the secular and religious Greek contemporary to Paul, with the meaning of source, origin, sustainer, and not of ruler. The second century B.C. translation of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament into Greek provides a case in point. The Hebrew word for head (ros), commonly used for leader, ruler, or supreme is translated in the Septuagint by a Greek word other than "head" (kephale) over 150 times. It was much later that the word kephale began to be used as "authority" under the pressure of Latin usage, as evidenced in the writings of some post apostolic church fathers. For Paul and his correspondents the use of the word kephale as a synonym for ruler or authority would have been as meaningless as attempting to do the same today with tete in French, or Kopf in German.
~~~~~~~
Author: David Scholer
Title of Book:Women, Abuse, and the Bible, pgs. 42-43
What is the result of this two-decades-long debate within evangelical circles over the meaning of kephale, and how does it relate to the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and Ephesians 5:21-33? It is not likely that any further progress can be made now in the analysis of the Greek word kephale; the evidence is in and has been sifted from various perspectives. It seems clear to me that the evidence shows the metaphorical meaning of kephale can be varied, including "authority over", "preeminence", and "source." It is, however, especially important to note that the Septuagint evidence rather clearly indicates that the Greek kephale was not normally used to translate the Hebrew rosh when the Hebrew term meant a ruler, leader, or someone in authority. This considerably weakens the argument that kephale in Hellenistic Greek means "authority over" or "ruler." In my judgement, Bilezikian and Crain have made this case especially well. Rather, it seems clearly established that kephale can mean "source", as many (such as Kroeger, Fee and others) have shown. Perhaps Fee has given the most succinct statement of the basic evidence.
However, and this is a very important point that so much of the kephale debate seems to ignore or to put aside, the determinative evidence for the meaning of kephale is its use and function in particular contexts. Thus, proving a range of meanings for kephale is important, especially against the undue limits argued by Grudem, but the critical issue is how kephale functions in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and Ephesians 5:21-33.
Although 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (especially in the allusions to Genesis 2 in verses 7-9) does reflect to some degree the traditional Jewish understanding of androcentrism, the passage as a whole provides considerable support both for an understanding of kephale as "source" and also for a genuine equality and mutuality between men and women in the church. The christological issue in the words "and God is the head of Christ" (11:3 NRSV) is better served in Pauline theology by the understanding "source" rather than by "authority over". Further, even the Genesis argument (11:7-9) fits very well with understanding kephale as "source."
Gordon Fee says in his book on First Corinthians (pg. 502 & 503)
“Indeed, the metaphorical use of kephale to mean “chief” or “person of the highest rank” is rare in Greek literature------so much so that even though the Hebrew word “ros” often carried this sense, the Greek translators of the LXX, who ordinarily used kephale to translate ros when the physical head was intended, almost never did so when “ruler” was intended, thus indicating that this metaphorical sense is an exceptional usage and not part of the ordinary range of meaning for the Greek word. “
OK, so the listings in 1 Cor. 11:3 are not in the order of a hierarchy of authority, kephale is not normally used to mean a ranking anyway, so what in that listing CAN you see, that flows without changing the order and that flows with the normal range of meanings of kephale. Look again.
In humanities creation the first event spoken of was the creation of the human, and it is Christ through whom all things were created. The second event is that the woman was drawn forth from the first human. (this is further discussed in verses 8-12 giving credence to this observation), and the last event in the creation of humanity is that God brought forth the God-Man, the “last adham”, the Messiah – Christ.
Not only does that sense fit without changing anything, but it is confirmed in six of the verses following verse 3. (keep in mind that verses don’t really matter since the Greek was not written in verses or even sentences, but in groups of thoughts.... IOW no grammatical divisions). And nothing following verse three shows any relationship to a hierarchical concept. (Verse 10 does not have the words “a symbol of” in the orginal Greek).
So, then the next question is, is what was Paul bringing to our attention with these comparisons. And that is another post. In brief, I belief he was pointing us all to give honor and respect, in particular wives to not fail in this when in public services.... Preaching/prophesying and praying/worshipping.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Author: Gilbert Bilezikian
Title of Book:Beyond Sex Roles, pgs. 277-78
In order to understand the meaning of "head" as used by the apostle Paul, it is helpful to determine its meaning within the language spoken by Paul. The authors of works such as A Greek-English Lexicon by Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott (Oxford: Clarendon Press 1968), or Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965, 10 volumes) have thoroughly investigated biblical and contemporary extra-biblical writings and reported that the word kephale was used in the secular and religious Greek contemporary to Paul, with the meaning of source, origin, sustainer, and not of ruler. The second century B.C. translation of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament into Greek provides a case in point. The Hebrew word for head (ros), commonly used for leader, ruler, or supreme is translated in the Septuagint by a Greek word other than "head" (kephale) over 150 times. It was much later that the word kephale began to be used as "authority" under the pressure of Latin usage, as evidenced in the writings of some post apostolic church fathers. For Paul and his correspondents the use of the word kephale as a synonym for ruler or authority would have been as meaningless as attempting to do the same today with tete in French, or Kopf in German.
~~~~~~~
Author: David Scholer
Title of Book:Women, Abuse, and the Bible, pgs. 42-43
What is the result of this two-decades-long debate within evangelical circles over the meaning of kephale, and how does it relate to the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and Ephesians 5:21-33? It is not likely that any further progress can be made now in the analysis of the Greek word kephale; the evidence is in and has been sifted from various perspectives. It seems clear to me that the evidence shows the metaphorical meaning of kephale can be varied, including "authority over", "preeminence", and "source." It is, however, especially important to note that the Septuagint evidence rather clearly indicates that the Greek kephale was not normally used to translate the Hebrew rosh when the Hebrew term meant a ruler, leader, or someone in authority. This considerably weakens the argument that kephale in Hellenistic Greek means "authority over" or "ruler." In my judgement, Bilezikian and Crain have made this case especially well. Rather, it seems clearly established that kephale can mean "source", as many (such as Kroeger, Fee and others) have shown. Perhaps Fee has given the most succinct statement of the basic evidence.
However, and this is a very important point that so much of the kephale debate seems to ignore or to put aside, the determinative evidence for the meaning of kephale is its use and function in particular contexts. Thus, proving a range of meanings for kephale is important, especially against the undue limits argued by Grudem, but the critical issue is how kephale functions in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and Ephesians 5:21-33.
Although 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (especially in the allusions to Genesis 2 in verses 7-9) does reflect to some degree the traditional Jewish understanding of androcentrism, the passage as a whole provides considerable support both for an understanding of kephale as "source" and also for a genuine equality and mutuality between men and women in the church. The christological issue in the words "and God is the head of Christ" (11:3 NRSV) is better served in Pauline theology by the understanding "source" rather than by "authority over". Further, even the Genesis argument (11:7-9) fits very well with understanding kephale as "source."
Kephale
The literal meaning of the Hebrew word “kephele” is the head on ones shoulders. Metaphorically, it can be used in a variety of ways (to be determined contextually) or it can mean literally the head on one’s shoulders.
=============================
Gordon Fee pg. 149, “Discovering Biblical Equality”.
Kephale in 1 Cor. 11:3, Paul metaphorical use of “head” in verse 3 ………………
1. This is both its first occurrence in Paul’s writings and its only appearance in a context where “the body” is not mentioned or assumed. Later when Paul speaks of Christ as “head” in relationship to the church (Eph. 4:15-16; Col 2:19) it is a metaphor not for “lordship” but for the supporting, life-giving role that in ancient Greek thought the (literal) heas was understood to have in relationship to the physical body.
2. ……….at issue, finally, in this whole passage is the nature of the relationship perceived between God and Christ.
3. What we know from the evidence is that when the Jewish community used this metaphor, as they did frequently in the OT, it most often referred to a leader or a clan chieftain. On the other hand, although something close to this sense can be found among Greeks, they had a broader range of uses, all of which can be shown to arise out of their anatomical understanding of the relationship of the head to the body (its most prominent or important part; the “source” of the body’s working systems, etc).
4. The earliest extant consistent interpretation of the metaphor in this passage is to be found in a younger contemporary of Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria (d.444?), who explicitly interprets in terms of the Greek metaphor: “Thus we can say that ‘the head of every man is Christ’, for he made by (dia) him…as God:’but the head of the woman is the man’, because she was taken out of his flesh…Likewise ‘the head of Christ is God, because he is of him 9ex autou) by nature” (Ad Arcadiam et Marinam 5.6). That is , as with Chrysostom’s understanding of the two pairs (God-Christ, Christ-man), Cyril is ready to go this way with all three pairs because of what is said in ver 8: that the woman was created from the man. Not only was the idea that the head is the source of supply and support for all the body’s systems a natural metaphor in the Greek world, but in this case it also supported Cyril’s Christological concern (not to have Christ “under” God in a hierarchy), just as it did for Chrysostom.
===========================
To put an interpretation of “authority over” for the man toward the woman in 1 Cor. 11, is to do the same with God and Christ, which was a heretical understanding which Athanasia fought hard against.
=============================
Gordon Fee pg. 149, “Discovering Biblical Equality”.
Kephale in 1 Cor. 11:3, Paul metaphorical use of “head” in verse 3 ………………
1. This is both its first occurrence in Paul’s writings and its only appearance in a context where “the body” is not mentioned or assumed. Later when Paul speaks of Christ as “head” in relationship to the church (Eph. 4:15-16; Col 2:19) it is a metaphor not for “lordship” but for the supporting, life-giving role that in ancient Greek thought the (literal) heas was understood to have in relationship to the physical body.
2. ……….at issue, finally, in this whole passage is the nature of the relationship perceived between God and Christ.
3. What we know from the evidence is that when the Jewish community used this metaphor, as they did frequently in the OT, it most often referred to a leader or a clan chieftain. On the other hand, although something close to this sense can be found among Greeks, they had a broader range of uses, all of which can be shown to arise out of their anatomical understanding of the relationship of the head to the body (its most prominent or important part; the “source” of the body’s working systems, etc).
4. The earliest extant consistent interpretation of the metaphor in this passage is to be found in a younger contemporary of Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria (d.444?), who explicitly interprets in terms of the Greek metaphor: “Thus we can say that ‘the head of every man is Christ’, for he made by (dia) him…as God:’but the head of the woman is the man’, because she was taken out of his flesh…Likewise ‘the head of Christ is God, because he is of him 9ex autou) by nature” (Ad Arcadiam et Marinam 5.6). That is , as with Chrysostom’s understanding of the two pairs (God-Christ, Christ-man), Cyril is ready to go this way with all three pairs because of what is said in ver 8: that the woman was created from the man. Not only was the idea that the head is the source of supply and support for all the body’s systems a natural metaphor in the Greek world, but in this case it also supported Cyril’s Christological concern (not to have Christ “under” God in a hierarchy), just as it did for Chrysostom.
===========================
To put an interpretation of “authority over” for the man toward the woman in 1 Cor. 11, is to do the same with God and Christ, which was a heretical understanding which Athanasia fought hard against.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)