If you’re like me, 1 Corinthians 11.1-16 might sound like one of the strangest passages in the New Testament. What? Paul wants women to wear head coverings? What? Men aren’t allowed to have long hair? (What about the pictures I’ve seen of Jesus?)
Maybe what makes it more striking is the fact that head coverings are only worn in obscure corners of Christianity. The majority of female Christians in the world worship and pray with their heads uncovered. Isn’t this a clear violation of what Paul is saying?
Doesn’t it sometimes seem like we choose to follow some passages and not others?
Sometimes this argument is used to invalidate the entire Old Testament. Point out OT Law regarding homosexuality and you will hear that no one takes the OT literally, since the OT Law also says that we shouldn’t wear clothing of mixed fabrics, a command almost no one observes today.
I guess the question is, when we come to an ancient text like the Bible, when do we take things literally (i.e. the Ten Commandments), and when do we look for underlying spiritual principles?
Put it another way, how can Christians today know which parts of the Bible are "culturally relative" and which parts apply to all believers in all cultures throughout history? If you’ve struggled with this, I wrote an extra long post for you. If you don’t, feel free to just skip ahead.
This is a hotly debated topic, and so of course my response will seem simplistic. I am mainly trying to be helpful to the inquisitive students who read this blog.
First, you can’t just disregard something because it seems strange or unpopular in our culture.
For example, in our culture, people don’t like what the Bible has to say about sexuality (too strict!) but like what it has to say about forgiveness. In the Middle East, however, they like what the Bible has to say about sexuality but don’t like what it has to say about forgiveness (not strict enough!). So if we don’t apply Paul’s words on head coverings, the reason can’t be just because it’s unpopular.
Second, you interpret each passage based on the kind of writing it is.
Luke, for example, says that his writing is the result of careful research and eyewitness accounts. He’s telling you, take this literally, I’m telling you history. Other sections of the Bible, like the Song of Songs, are clearly poetic and metaphorical (or else you actually have a very ugly woman!). How literally you interpret Scripture depends on In the case of Paul’s letters, we read them like ordinary letters, which means that we try to take them as literally as possible.
Third, you must consider how similar the original context is to our modern context? The greater the similarity, the more literally we should expect the application to be.
This helps make sense of why we don’t follow many of the OT civil laws; in modern times God’s people don’t live in a agrarian theocracy but are scattered throughout various nations under diverse governmental systems. This doesn’t mean those laws are meaningless, it simply means we attempt to discern the underlying reason or value that led to God making such a law. “Do not cook a baby calf in its mother’s milk” (Exodus 23.19) thus is applicable to our modern day in that it has something to say about cruelty to animals and our stewardship of God’s creation.
Moving to the NT, there are many instructions that are given that had cultural significance at the time it was written that simply don’t have the same significance today. 1 Corinthians 16.20 literally reads, “greet one another with a sacred kiss.” Kissing is not a normative way of greeting in our culture, so NLT updates this to “Greet one another with Christian love.” The meaning has been accurately preserved. The literal “kiss” is not the point; the show of Christian affection is. So to apply this text, we look for a more modern expression of Christian affection. (No kissing the girls, guys. Sorry.)
When it comes to head coverings: head coverings in Paul’s time, or long vs. short hair were cultural representations of the differences between men and women. As we discussed yesterday, believers in the Corinthian church were pursuing a hyper-spirituality where they not only spoke in the language of angels but also were trying to sexless, like the angels.
In response to this, Paul writes in 1 Cor. 11 that men and women are interdependent (11.12), complementary and each has a unique glory to offer the world. When we flatten the differences, the glory is turned to shame. The literal length of hair or head covering isn’t the point; the distinction between the sexes is. Paul is particularly concerned about bringing unnecessary shame that would distract offended outsiders from the gospel (11.6).
In our times, women don’t distinguish themselves from men by covering their heads (at least not in the U.S.) So to apply this text we would strive to preserve the uniqueness and the distinction between men and women. Men shouldn’t wear lady clothes, and women shouldn’t dress like men. God made us different, and the difference is good!
This post has been long and overly simple at the same time. But I hope it at least shows you that we can’t just pick and choose what is comfortable to believe.
We work hard to discern God’s heart, to care about what he cares about and to not care about what he doesn’t care about.
Lord, help me to rightly understand and obey your word. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment