Mark

Sue,

You’ve lost me again. Let me begin by saying that BDAG in my opinion is a useful resource on this topic. Under point 2 for kephale, BDAG seperates between ‘people’ and things. Under people they give ‘superior rank’, under ‘things’ they give ‘uppermost part, extremity, end point.

As regards engaging with you…here you go. You cite Cyril, but fail to mention that arche also means authority aswell as source. So when kephale/arche are in view, authority is not an excluded possibility. Likewise, source is a possible option, however the unambiguous nature still looms over this text.
It is interesting that you are following in the footsteps of Kroeger who used this same text, and had the same points told to her. What you and her need to do is give a non-ambiguous citation.

In favour of the comp position is this point…numerous texts that are unambigous. For example Chrysostom
Homily 26 on 1 Corinthians
” Husband as head and ruler. Consider nevertheless that she is a woman, the weaker vessel, whereas thou art a man. For therefore wert thou ordained to be ruler; and wert assigned to her in place of a head (kephale) that thou mightest bear with the weakness of her that is set under thee.”

Again…
Homily 3 on Ephesians
” Christ as head of the body, ruling over it, and head (kephale) of all things. “Which is His Body.” In order then that when you hear of the Head (Kephale) you may not conceive the notion of supremacy only, but also of consolidation, and that you may behold Him not as supreme Ruler only, but as Head of a body. “The fulness
of Him that filleth all in all” he says… . Let us reverence our Head, let us reflect of what a Head we are the body,—a Head, to whom all things are put in subjection”

There are several other citations for unambiguous use of kephale linked in with subjection, ruler, authority with Chrysostom alone, let alone other texts.

Please continue to show me unambiguous citations to support your position.