TL

Mark, here are the links from the page I gave you…..
Response to Johm M. Reynolds
http://powerscourt.blogspot.com/2008/01/response-to-john-mark-reynolds.html

Grudem and kephale
http://powerscourt.blogspot.com/2008/01/grudem-and-ptolemy.html

Grudem and Glare
http://powerscourt.blogspot.com/2008/01/grudem-and-glare.html

Omitted Citations
http://powerscourt.blogspot.com/2008/01/omitted-citations.html

kephale in Literature
http://powerscourt.blogspot.com/2008/01/kephale-in-literature.html

McCarthy’s note on the page I sent was…..

“The foremost example which Grudem uses to prove that kephale means “authority over” is,

“the king of Egypt is called “head” of the nation”

Grudem used this quote on Jan. 19, 2008, on the Gender Blog. However, in Appendix 1A of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, he wrote,

19) Philo, Moses 2.30: As the head is the ruling place in the living body, so Ptolemy [Ptolemy Philadelphos] became among kings.
Cervin does not think that head means ruler here because Philo says that Philadelphos is the head of kings, not in the sense of ruling them, but as the preeminent king among the rest. Philadelphos is the top of the kings just as the head is the top of an animal’s body. . . . This example is therefore to be rejected (p. 100).”

Grudem continues in RBMW Appendix 1B to discuss this example. However, he fails to show that it means “authority over.” This is Grudem’s best piece of evidence and proves the opposite of his thesis, which is that kephale means authority. It obviously doesn’t. The rest of Grudem’s examples are similar. However, what is the point of quoting them if Grudem just recycles rejected evidence?

That should help!