man and woman-exegesis of biblical texts
In reponse to my facebook post on 21st April 2025 LK said this is entirely wrong. The writer has conflated the word “man” meaning all of humankind, as the German does, and “man” as gendered person as in “a man.” The orthodox view is that the gendered person “woman” is just as much the image of God as the gendered
Some exegetical aspects of 1 Corinthians 11 (and 1 Cor 8:6). There may be some repetition from what I have said previously. There are 2 sections A and B. Section A. I argue that 1 Cor 11 is a continuation and explication of 1 Cor 8:6. If so, it will have bearing on how we understand Christ in 11:3, ie.
Man, not woman separately, is the image of God. This is my first of a number of posts, over weeks or months, on 1 Cor 11:1-16. The posts are written seeking comment and feedback. This can be done here or via email at neilkearnstheology@gmail.com They will seek to be primarily exegetical. However, they will encounter topics from how we understand
One article to explain 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 The aim of this article is to, in one long, article, to explain how 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is a united, integrated argument by Paul. It is universally recognized that this is a difficult passage to read as a whole. Plus, there are a number of specific issues that are said to be unclear.
HOW TO TIE THE WHOLE PASSAGE TOGETHER INTO A COHERENT COMPLETE INTEGRATED ARGUMENT. The meaning of and purpose of the background information about woman’s hair, men’s hair and bald heads. (Note: This section is taken directly from my Word Document on 1 Cor 11:2-16 so you will note it mentions Chapter 4 etc … This document is available by contacting me.) I
The Underlying Theology. Discussions about angels and exousia may be interesting BUT what is really important is that we understand and believe the Underlying Theology of the creation of man and woman that Paul presents in 1 Cor 11:2-16. Introduction.A. It seems that the Corinthian church was basically doing what Paul had instructed them to do – women covering and
Analysing and categorising the different types of arguments and information being used by Paul in 1 Cor 11:2-16 I have argued in the first 2 instalments and in further replies that Paul’s main argument is clear and direct “man ought not” and “woman ought to”. I have also argued that it is essential to delineate this main argument and to
INSTALMENT 2 – Exegetically determining what “exousia/authority on the head” means. It is referrring to neither man’s authority nor to woman’s authority. What does 1 Cor 11:10 “authority on the head” mean? A SIMPLE EXEGETICAL PROPOSAL. I don’t intend to list the different views and translations, other than to say the fact that some translations need to add extra words into the