Don Martin - Mark J. Ward Covering Discussion

The Don Martin - Mark J. Ward Discussion on

I Corinthians 11:1-16

Ward's 15th

This is the next (in sequence) post(s) that Mark J. Ward writes under the Subject line: Re:I Corinthians 11:1-16...

Subject:
Re: I Corinthians 11:1-16
Date:
Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:56:01 -0500
From:
markjward@darientel.net
To:
mars-list@mtsu.edu
CC:
markjward@darientel.net, dmartin5@concentric.net

Mark J. Ward, here to brother Don Martin and the list:

(post one of two)

I hope that all are doing well. I am enjoying the discussion with Don, even
tho’ he has not dealt with some argumentation that we have put forth in
opposition to his position. Don is one of the most capable men who advocates
the “spiritual gifts” position on I Corinthians 11:1-16 and he is doing as good
a job as any man I know in presenting that position. I will make a few comments
<G> concerning Don’s last post and answer his Question #1. Again, I want to
emphasize how much I appreciate the tenor of this discussion as it is basically
free from motive assumptions (only a few times, brother Don <g>) and has been,
in the main, a discussion on the text and attempts at argument from scripture.
I believe that this is how we should discuss our differences (stay on the
points of difference and deal with argumentational weaknesses in the others’
position) and that God is pleased with such interaction among brethren who
disagree. I also hasten to point out that Don and I agree on several topics,
and I would be the first to uphold him in those matters.

Don wrote (in part):
“Of course, Mark must engage in some word logistics to arrive at this
conclusion since Mark does not believe the gift of prophesy is extant.”

Mark here:
I deny the word logistics, but Don really believes such about my position. Don
knows there are subtle differences in God’s Holy Word that make a difference in
application: teaching a man versus teaching over a man…children being plural of
class and children being plural in number…edifying the church and edifying IN
the church…praying AND prophesying versus praying OR prophesying.

Even if, for the sake of argument, I agree that prophesying is INSPIRED ONLY, I
could not agree that such would HAVE TO MEAN that “praying” and “pray” in our
text would be miraculous ONLY (as Don so asserts). I believe Don has strained
the meaning of the words, in this case. Paul wrote to “every man” and “every
woman” who prayed at Corinth (inspired OR uninspired), whether leading or
following…they were praying. Thus, we still disagree at this point in our
respective studies. I hope we will both continue to reflect on the arguments
presented in this good exchange as future opptys avail themselves.

Don also wrote (in part):
“Not all Christians at Corinth had the gift of prophesy, but Mark is ignoring
this stated fact (I Cor. 12: 10ff. cp. chapter 14). Mark incorrectly reduces
the common meaning of "prophesy" to uninspired teaching.”

Mark here:
I don’t ignore such at all! I ~include~ those who had the gift of prophecy, but
do NOT exclude uninspired folks who were praying, for example, whether leading
or following. Don position misses the point that people can “pray” without
having to have the “gift of prophecy”. Such is a tragic oversight in
interpreting the text.

My good brother Don fails to recognize that an uninspired woman who prays (who
never prophesies) is a "praying or prophesying woman." (to use Don’s uninspired
word order relevant to his understanding of the text). That is a critical
point worth noting (again and again) as we continue this discussion, brother
Don and dear readers.

Don also wrote (in part):
“Again, Mark, you fail to realize not only who these people were, but also the
circumstance in which they were "praying or prophesying."
These women needed to be covered in view of the sameness of what they and their
male counter-parts were doing and, obviously, were they were doing it to
eliminate any possible abuse of headship insubordination.”

Mark here:
Don has not and cannot prove that the women were exercising dominion over men
while “praying or prophesying”!!! I AGREE that ~both the men AND THE women~
were “praying or prophesying”, but such is NOT necessarily THE SAME AS (as I
have previously pointed out) ~both the men AND THE women~ exercising dominion
over men in all those situations (of praying or prophesying).

I also have pointed out previously that “biking or hiking” does not equate to
ALL INSPIRED ONLY HIKERS, ALL INSPIRED ONLY BIKERS, and ONLY BIKERS WHO ARE
LEADING… to the exclusion of “bikers” who were not “hikers”, bikers who were
not leading, but following, and bikers who were not “gifted” <g>. Don
continues, even after we present argumentation to the contrary, to assert that
there was some possible abuse of headship insubordination related to INSPIRED
ONLY ladies concerning men. We have pointed out that such
a “potential/possible” problem can be said to exist with UNINSPIRED women, so
what does that prove? Don continues to strain the passage to the exclusion of
the uninspired men and women at the church of God at Corinth (and elsewhere).

Don believes I do not properly understand “to whom” Paul was speaking. I will
leave it to the readers to decide for themselves (as we should all base our
convictions and beliefs on our own studies and conclusions). Paul was writing
to the “church of God at Corinth” (1:2) and the text in chapter 11 includes
words like: “Be YE followers of me…” and “Now I praise YOU, BRETHREN, that YE
remember me,,.as I have delivered them to YOU” and “But I would have YOU know…”
and “the head of EVERY man” and “the head of THE WOMAN” and “EVERY man”
and “But EVERY WOMAN” (11:1-5). Since folks could be PRAYING without
prophesying, we have pointed out that brother Don errs in his understanding
that they (to whom Paul wrote) were ONLY PROPHETS/PROPHETESSES. From this mis-
understanding, brother Don leaps to other conclusions that are unwarranted:
like MIRACULOUS ONLY praying and ONLY WHILE LEADING.

Further, Don asserted:
“I have attempted to stress two basic facts:

(1). We do not have prophets and prophetesses today (I Cor. 13: 8-10).
(2). The veil of the east does not have a place or meaning in our American
culture.

Hence, the specific teaching resident in I Corinthians 11: 3-16 pertaining to
these women and the veil is inapplicable to women in the church today.”

Mark here:
I have continued to call upon our good brother Don to PROVE from the inspired
record (a) the circumstances he alleges/asserts/assumes were at Corinth and,
(b) that those PROVEN ??? “said circumstances” are RELEVANT to ALSO PROVING
that applicability to those in New Testament times, and NOT TO US TODAY! This
he has not done. Don tries to say that if culture dictates such today…such is
required today (I want to give him credit for that part of his belief, but not
that I agree with it <g>), but such assumes that culture had anything (or
really ALL???) to do with Paul’s inspired instruction in the first place (which
is begging the question= assuming that to be proven).

Since the word “or” separates “praying” from “prophesying” and since we “pray”
today, (1) above does nothing to negate the passages’ applicability today and
the reasoning found at (2) might be used incorrectly concerning many things in
the Bible NOT being applicable today (like unleavened bread and fruit of the
vine???) that are still applicable EVEN IF SOCIETY does not so recognize any
significance to them!!! But, since GOD based the “reasons” women were to be
covered on reasons OTHER THAN “custom or culture”, then (2) above by Don does
nothing to negate the applicability of the passage today. Further, Don has
admitted that he is not sure ~just what~ the societal norm/custom(s) (thus,
the “meaning” of the covering to non-Christians <g>) was to the Jews and Greeks
that co-existed in the city of Corinth when Paul wrote I Corinthians!

Don didn’t understand the “biking or hiking illustration”. But, Don has already
admitted that the Holy Spirit separated “praying” FROM “prophesying” and that
two things can exist in the same passage (like eating bread and prophesying)
and there is no mandate that BOTH be “inspired only” if one thing in the list
is inspired. Further, if Don replied to the fact that inclusive definitions of
words exist like in the case of “teachers of good things” (Titus 2:3) and “ A
prophet is not without honor, save in their own country” (Mt. 13:57) could
properly be whether speaking of inspired OR uninspired teachers/prophets we
missed it. NOTE: this is a use (in Mt. 13:57) of a form of the same basic word
for prophet that is used in I Cor. 11 and Titus 1:12 (concerning a prophet who
was uninspired: a true prophet, not a false prophet). This is in direct
opposition and refutation of the assertion that Don has quoted and advocated in
his position in this discussion and at his website in his article at his
website on this topic.

(con't in next post)

In Christian love,
Mark J. Ward
The Religious Instructor
http://www.religiousinstructor.com
The Golden Isles church of Christ
http://www.religiousintructor.com/church

(From MARS-List Digest 3927, February 22, 2003

Subject:
Re: I Corinthians 11:1-16
Date:
Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:57:04 -0500
From:
markjward@darientel.net
To:
mars-list@mtsu.edu
CC:
markjward@darientel.net, dmartin5@concentric.net

Mark J. Ward, here to brother Don Martin and the list:

(post two of two)

We continue our discussion with brother Don Martin concerning our differences
of understanding on the true meaning and application of I Cor. 11:1-16. Don
believes the text is for a "special group of women" who no longer exist today
(in light of the cessation of the miraculous) and I am contending that Paul
wrote to "every man" and "every woman" who engages in "praying OR prophesying".
Since we "pray" today, we are included in obeying the instruction. Again <g>:
My good brother Don fails to recognize that an uninspired woman who prays (who
never prophesies) is a "praying or prophesying woman." That is a critical
point worth noting (again and again) as we continue this discussion, brother
Don and dear readers.

Finally, Don continues to assume and assert that ladies like Anna who were
inspired prophetesses exercised dominion over men, which is not taught in
scripture! Don assumes something (again) that is not unavoidably taught from
the text. We pointed out that IF Anna taught EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY INDIVIDUAL
in Jerusalem that sought redemption, that he still did not have a passage that
taught she did so, as he asserts, publicly in such a way as to include the
sense of exercising dominion over mixed audiences, or over men.

Let me give an example of how Anna could teach “all” who sought redemption in
Jerusalem (in the temple) and not exercise authority over men. A woman today
can be in the church’s building, between or after “services” and be in the
foyer at the back of the building, for example, be teaching men (but not
exercising dominion over them) and be involved in “edifying the church” without
ever having to exercise dominion over men and without ever having to “publicly
address a mixed assembly of men and women” in the church. Anna, could teach in
the temple area and be an inspired prophetess, teaching men, without ever
exercising dominion over men in a public setting (tho the setting ~per se~ was
public). Hope this helps.

Concerning Don’s comments about my references to his references to brother
Cavender’s booklet on the subject (more than once) followed by my references to
studies by others who disagree with the general position of brothers Don Martin
and Bill Cavender, Don and all should recall that I have pointed to several
references and encouraged folks to read the information on BOTH sides of this
issue (including brother Gene Frost’s material at the old GOSPEL ANCHOR
QUARTERLY, brother Don’s article at the web and brother Cavender’s booklet <g>,
brother Hutto’s booklet at the web, brother Wiser’s review of brother
Cavender’s booklet and a few articles I have at the web), as well as any other
material on this study…and, TO READ ALL IN LIGHT OF THE BIBLE. Hope that helps…
<g>. I would certainly want to read, for example, a review of my material on
the Second Serving, if such exists, in a comprehensive study of the matter (and
not limit my study to just the material I have put forth). Material that is a
review of another’s position is very helpful, at times, in seeing if
argumentation really makes sense, that may sound convincing at first blush….We
need to base our convictions on what is actually taught in scripture, and not
on assumptions of uninspired men. Thus, the discussion and studies continue. <g>

Now to Don’s Question #1:
Question one:

In what circumstance were the praying or prophesying women at Corinth to have
their head covered:

A. When they were publicly (before or in the presence of others) praying or
prophesying?
B. When they were in private (totally alone, no one else present)?
C. When they were in the presence of a man?
D. When they were in the presence of a woman (no man present)?
E. When they had a role in teaching a man?
F. During a Bible class at home (their families, including their husband)?
G. During a Bible class at home with no man, not even their husband,
present?
H. During a Bible class in the church building (men present)?
I. During the preaching in the assembly (mixed audience and male
preacher)?
J. During the preaching in the assembly with no man present?
K. During public prayer offered by another in the assembly (male leading
the prayer)?

Mark here:
The Bible teaches, “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered,
dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her
head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were
shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a
shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.” (I Cor. 11:4-6).

Brother Don asks a multiple choice question (which is NOT all-inclusive of all
situations, which is fine) concerning whether or not I believe the Bible
teaches that a woman AT CORINTH (in the wording of his Question One) should
cover her head at various times. Let me give the short answer in this para and
then address his A-K individually afterwards. Don has been good to try to
answer, in full, most of the questions I asked him. I want to do the same in
the spirit of good Bible study. ~The Bibles teaches, whether in public or in
private, whether in the company of another human being or not, whenever and
wherever a woman is engaged in ~praying or prophesying~…she would need to be
covered.

Don asked:
A. When they were publicly (before or in the presence of others) praying
or
prophesying?

Mark here:
Yes, since they would be engaging in “praying or prophesying” and that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16. However, for a
woman to publicly or privately exercise dominion over men would be wrong and,
as such, should not be engaged in by women (with, or without inspiration).

B. When they were in private (totally alone, no one else present)?

Mark here:
Yes, since they would be engaging in “praying or prophesying” and that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

C. When they were in the presence of a man?

Mark here:
Yes, since they would be engaging in “praying or prophesying” and that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16. However, women
with, or without miraculous gifts are not authorized to exercise dominion over
men.

D. When they were in the presence of a woman (no man present)?

Mark here:
Yes, since they would be engaging in “praying or prophesying” and that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

E. When they had a role in teaching a man?

Mark here:
Yes, since they would be engaging in “praying or prophesying” and that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

F. During a Bible class at home (their families, including their husband)?

Mark here:
Yes, whenever they would engage in “praying or prophesying” for that is “when”
God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

G. During a Bible class at home with no man, not even their husband,
present?

Mark here:
Yes, whenever they would engage in “praying or prophesying” cause that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

H. During a Bible class in the church building (men present)?

Mark here:
Yes, whenever they would engage in “praying or prophesying” since that
is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

I. During the preaching in the assembly (mixed audience and male
preacher)?

Mark here:
Yes, whenever they would engage in “praying or prophesying” in that assembly
since that is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

J. During the preaching in the assembly with no man present?

Mark here:
Since I believe, for example, that the church can arrange a ladies (only) Bible
class which could be an assembly with no man present…Yes, whenever they would
engage in “praying or prophesying” in that assembly since that is “when” God
said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16.

K. During public prayer offered by another in the assembly (male leading
the prayer)?

Mark here:
Yes, whenever they would engage in “praying or prophesying” in that assembly
since that is “when” God said for the woman to cover in I Cor.11: 1-16

NOT(E): I would like to remind the reader that my good brother Don Martin and
I “start” the difference on this topic concerning the understanding of and
the “definitions” to be properly placed upon “every man”, “every woman”,
and “praying or prophesying” in the text we are studying. Therefore, what
Don “means” when he words his question has to be understood from his
perspective, but my answer has to be considered from my understanding of the
proper application of the words. Keep this in mind as we go through this part
of our good study. Please remember that my good brother Don fails to recognize
that an uninspired woman who prays (who never prophesies) is a "praying or
prophesying woman." Also, a woman who prophesies (who is not engaged in prayer)
is a “praying or prophesying woman”. Don strains the text to mean PROPHETS ONLY
and PROPHETESSES ONLY…whereas we must note that the BIBLE says “every man”
and “every woman” and “praying OR prophesying” which does not mandate such an
EXCLUSIVE meaning (i.e. Don’s ~prophets only~, instead of “every man” vs 4….and
Don’s ~prophetesses only~, instead of “every woman” vs 5).

I hope this helps. If unclear, please let me know. Let all know that using the
term “praying or prophesying” does NOT imply that I believe (necessarily) that
women “pray AND prophesy” in all the settings brother Don has listed above.

In Christian love,
Mark J. Ward
The Religious Instructor
http://www.religiousinstructor.com
The Golden Isles church of Christ
http://www.religiousinstructor.com/church

(From MARS-List Digest 3927, February 22, 2003

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE NEXT ARTICLE

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO THE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS STUDY

[Editor’s Note: This is one of the most in-depth, comprehensive studies between two brethren on the issue of whether "the spiritual gifts view" of I Corinthians 11:1-16 is true, or whether God requires women today to cover their heads with an artifical covering whenever they pray. We hope all readers will continue to study all Bible topics with open minds, willing to conform to God's Truth. Thanks for reading! - Mark J. Ward markjward@yahoo.com ]

Email the Editor at markjward@yahoo.com