1 Cor 11: 10 ECHEIN EXOUSIAN EPI KRFALHS

jerker karlsson jerker_k at hotmail.com
Sat Oct 26 11:05:33 EDT 2002


Rev. Mark Eddy wrote:
>  From the examples above, it is clear that EPI THS KEFALHS on occasion 
> >means
>"over the head" instead of
>"on
>the head." And in a few of these passages "head" connotes more than just >a
>person's physical head. It can
>represent the entire person.

We must not confuse English, or Swedish (!), idiom with Greek. The mere fact 
that English idiom requires the preposition “Over” in some instances where 
Greek uses EPI doesn’t mean that Greek and English use the same idiomatic 
idea to express the same thing.

The most basic meaning of EPI is “upon”, i.e. placed on top of. The general 
meaning of “Over”, on the other hand, is the direction “above”. 
Consequently, when the English preposition “over” is used metaphorically as 
in “power over” the line of thought is that of a pyramid where someone on 
the top has power over someone at the bottom. EPI, when used to express 
influence or power over something, doesn’t take on the English idiom of 
“Over” but it preserves it’s basic meaning of “upon”. The Greeks both 
laughed (EPIGELAW) and ruled (EPIKRATEW) “upon” instead of “at” and “over”.

Regarding the verses you referred to I agree that Judit 8:3 and Jona 4:8 as 
well as Psalm 65:12 can’t be understood in analogy with “wearing on the 
head”. In 2Sam. 1:16 the translation of “DAMAEKA AL-RO´CHKA” is a rendering 
of a, as far as I know, purely Hebraic idiom. The idea of the expression, I 
assume, is that you get tainted with blood as if you killed someone in 
battle and thus you are also wearing the stains of blood in your face.  In 
Proverbs 25:22 the coal on your foes head is naturally a metaphor but the 
saying is literal and the syntax follows the letter. In Psalm 139:8 JHWH 
functions as a helmet or another type of protective head covering. In Rev. 
10:1 the rainbow is quite definitely a part of the angels outfit. In the 
three cases were the “wearing on the head” clearly doesn’t fit EPI is used 
in a hostile sense with the meaning of something coming hazardously close. 
In English perhaps rendered best with “come down upon”.

The point I wished to make were that the prepositional phrase “EPI THS 
KEFALHS” as well as the verbal phrase “EXOUSIAN ECHEIN EPI” has a predefined 
meaning of it’s own, that is:  “wear something upon ones head”. This, of 
cause, doesn’t negate the fact that “EPI THS KEFALHS” can be governed by a 
verb and thus be given a wider range of meanings. Still, the important point 
I hope can be made is that the interpretation of 1Cor 11: 10 doesn’t 
necessarily, or even preferably, run along the line “EXOUSIAN ECHEIN EPI”. 
It can as well run along the line “EPI THS KEFALHS”. It all depends on 
whether you treat “EXOUSIAN” or “EPI KEFALHS” as the key to unlock the 
verse. The fact that “EPI KEFALHS”, in almost every instance in LXX and 
Novum, denotes a wearing of some head covering either metaphorically or 
literally, doesn’t speak in favor of an interpretation which takes “EPI” as 
governed by “EXOUSIA” and thus denoting “authority over”.




>However, I would like to propose another translation of this verse. 
> >"Because of
>this the woman ought to
>have an authority over her head, because of the angels." The "authority" 
> >that
>she ought to have "over"
>her
>head is her husband (or father, if she is not yet married). I would be
>interested in hearing your
>objections to this understanding of the text. Alternatively, could Paul >be
>saying ""the woman ought to
>have authority over her head," meaning, the Christian woman ought to be 
> >able to
>know how properly to
>control what she has on her head, without having to have someone else >tell 
>her
>what to wear? I would be interested in hearing your arguments for why he 
>does not mean >this.

The problem that comes along if you insist that “EXOUSIA” should govern 
“EPI” in the sense of “authority over” is that the whole phrase would take 
on the meaning “possessing an authority over” as it indeed does in for 
example Luk. 9:1, Rev. 2:26, 6:8, 13:7, 14:18 and 16:9.

I believe we are arguing for somewhat the same interpretation of the verse 
so I won’t dispute your conclusion that women aught to wear an authority on 
their heads. What I would like to argue is instead that “EPI KEFALHS” has 
authority over “EXOUSIAN EPI” and therefore the passage means rather that a 
woman aught to wear an authority on her head than that a woman aught to have 
authority over the head.

I follow Gerhard Kittel and Hugo Odeberg when it comes to the meaning of 
EXOUSIA. They have both suggested that EXOUSIA is a metonym inspired by the 
Aramaic SCHALOTANAJJA, which means both authority and a head covering. As 
far as I can se this is the only explanation of the text that makes sense 
both in terms of grammar and meaning. Paul would then be playing with a 
double meaning. On the one hand we have the “authority” women are wearing 
literary in the church on the other hand we have the authority women are 
placed under in terms of creation.

Regards

Jerker Karlsson
Lund, Sweden



_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963




More information about the B-Greek mailing list