The Faulty Hermeneutics of Complementarianism

Inductive Bible Study Parody:

Do Christian Women Commit Sin When they Neglect to Wear a Veil Before God especially in Church?

Read: 1 Corinthians 11:2-16

2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife[a]is her husband,[b] and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife[c] who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6 For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.[d]11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; 12 for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him,15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

A trick question? Yes! But only for those who espouse complementarianism, i.e., the belief that spritual leadership in church especially the Senior Pastorate and Elders are roles reserved ONLY for Men.

Those who believe in this teaching ought to review if their hermeneutics are accurate or even honest or are they being selective and arbitrary.

To emphasize this, they use the EXACT SAME HERMENEUTICS that I will apply to women commanded by Paul to wear a veil when worshiping in public or in church.

So for complementarian hermeneutics to be consistent, their women should wear a veil in church. Otherwise they worship God in sin! And for the following complementarian reasons:

1. Paul's declarations are as much the word of God as those of Jesus Christ Himself. The passage above is entirely from St. Paul.
2. Paul used the imperative to show that these are commands to be followed as he communicated and intended to be applied and immediately. Notice the words "ought" and "should"
3. Paul used prevailing tradition to argue his point. v.2
4. Paul used doctrine or theology to support his point which are those we have underlined above. v. 7- 9 refers to the creation itself, "Man is the image and glory of God",yada, yada, yada.
5. Paul used "nature" or instinct to support his argument further. v.14 is quite explicit about this.
6. Paul finally argues that no existing church practices otherwise v.16

So the SIX arguments above are even above and beyond what the complementarians lean upon to support their practice of "men only" roles. In other words, there are more reasons for women to wear the veil in public than for churches to follow the "men only" rule! To be really blunt about this, the Southern Baptists during the American Civil War used even lesser and inferior hermeneutic support to preserve slavery! And to date, they have never recanted this formally which means that they tacitly agree with their forebears by not publicly declaring that it was a biased, selective, arbitrary and dishonest hermeneutic mistake! It reminds me of the Roman Catholic church that up to this date will not admit that they are the ONLY reason for the Dark Ages of inquisitions and prohibitions!

They have subtle "official" hints of apology for racism, BUT I would like to see them publicly admit to exactly what I stated above:  a biased, selective, arbitrary and dishonest hermeneutic mistake! For goodness sake, this is the denomination that claims strict orthodoxy and accurate bible interpretation! This is the denomination that literally forces their congregations to "avoid any appearance of evil". Today they continue to deteriorate from racism to male chauvinism and sadly, most members, are not even aware of their dark past (and present!).

Now, of course, this entire blog is just a parody to emphasize the inconsistent hermeneutics of ALL complementarians. I believe the following hermeneutic rules are more dependable.

1. Paul's statements are THE WORD of God only as far as cardinal doctrine is concerned
2. On peripheral doctrine, Paul's words can be SAFELY treated as some kind of first century church "Book of Discipline" which means that these are standards applicable ONLY to the right cultural context. In his cultural context, the society was decidedly male chauvinistic, women were rarely, if ever, educated and those who are lucky enough to get education cannot even claim an inheritance when the parents die! And we thought Christianity did away with that (not with the complementarians!)
3. Paul's theological proofs may also be faulty. Most scholars who read that "MAN was created in God's image" RARELY, if EVER, assume that God intended MAN to refer only to males. I know that Paul is an Apostle and a highly educated Jew. But Paul was not perfect nor was his hermeneutics. In fact, at this very point, Paul's hermeneutics are faulty. If we refer back to Genesis 1:27, we immediately notice that even Paul's hermeneutics was biased by his cultural context, 


So God created man in his own image,
    in the image of God he created him;
    male and female he created them.


Paul did not even bother to quote or must have mis-read the last phrase "MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM. Otherwise, his hermeneutics would have been impeccable. Here he made the terrible mistake of isogesis (reading into the text his bias or forcing the text to support his agenda) instead of exegesis (rightly dividing the word of truth to determine what God is really saying or declaring.)

So let us not make the grievous mistake of elevating Paul to the level of Jesus....PLEASE!