25: DOES “HEAD” MEAN “SOURCE”? 197something similar, none give the meaning “source” when the word is
applied to persons.^7 Nor do any of these lexicons or any other ancient
citations support other meanings claimed by egalitarians, such as the
meaning “one who does not take advantage of his body” or “preemi-
nent one.”^8
Once again the question is, where is the evidence? Where is even one
example of a statement that takes the form “person A is the head of per-
son B,” in which person A is not in a position of authority over person
B? Not one example has ever been produced by egalitarians. But if all
the lexicons and all the citations of this kind of expression contradict the
egalitarian position, why do egalitarian writers go on affirming it as if
it were proven fact?
Here again we must ask, what is the result of this egalitarian inter-
pretation? It changes the meaning of Ephesians 5:23:
Previous meaning: For the husband is the head of (= leader, author-
ity over) the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body,
and is himself its Savior.New meaning: For the husband is the head (= source, care-giver) of
the wife even as Christ is the head of the church.Once again, if we substitute a different meaning for a verse, and if
the new meaning is wrong, we have taken away the Word of God from
(^7) For elaboration see Grudem, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, 206-208.
(^8) Ibid., 208-211. In Discovering Biblical Equality, the section on the meaning of kephal∑by
Gordon Fee adopts the meaning “source” for 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians 5:33: see
Gordon Fee, “Praying and Prophesying in the Assemblies: 1 Cor. 11:2-16,” in Discovering
Biblical Equality, ed. Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis (Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity, 2004), 152, 155. Yet Fee gives no examples where the person called “head” is
not the one in authority; he cites no lexicons in support of the meaning “source”; and he shows
no awareness of my 2001 article (see footnote 4 above) interacting with a number of the arti-
cles he cites.
In another section of the book I. Howard Marshall favors the meaning “possessing ‘preemi-
nence’ or functioning as ‘ground of being’,” but also shows appreciation for Fee’s understanding
that kephal∑points to “Christ as the supplier of guidance and power to the body” (I. Howard
Marshall, “Mutual Love and Submission in Marriage: Colossians 3:18-19 and Ephesians 5:21-
33,” in Pierce and Groothuis, eds., Discovering Biblical Equality, 198). Neither Marshall nor Fee
give any answer to the obvious difficulty that comes from using verses that refer to Christ as
“head” to prove that the person called “head” is not the one who has authority!
Surely such verses prove exactly the opposite, for Christ has supreme authority over the
church. The egalitarian sense, “source without authority” (in an interpersonal relationship) has
never been supported by any example produced by any egalitarian writer.