Mark

Ok, here are what i know in regards to facts about kephale.
1. IT has different meaning depending on contexts.
2. It was never used in relation between PEOPLE without the notion of authority. If Paul uses is to mean non-authority when talking between people, it is the first time in all of greek literature as far as i know. So this might be true, but seems highly unlikely from what we know about the use of the word.
3. Paul caould have used a stronger auhtority word-true, but he didn’t. He did use this word, that when used in the context of people DOES denote authority. The argument trying to say ‘why didnt he use a different word’ has no merit at all. Kephale is used in certain contexts to denote authority.

Now about Corinthins because we are skirting abit. I wanted to simply be on the same page, thats all.
1. 1 Cor 11, doesn’t infact use the head/body metaphor as in other passages like Eph 4:15 which is unusual. So the argument for the head/body metaphor cannot apply to this passage. Gordon Fee, an egalitarian rightly recognises this.
2. Paul draws back to the created order in his argument.
3. Paul uses interchangebly the literal ‘head’ with the ‘head’ of auhtority in verses 4-7
4. The use of kephale in verse 3 is in the context of people, which according to how we know the word was used in this context, must denote authority.
5. Paul concluded from the creation order that a women ought to have a sign of auhtority on her head. The reference to angels here is unusal and also heavily debated.
6. Some egalitarians think verse 11 somehow cancels out the proceeding verses. This is not true. Although the man is in authority over the women, niether should be independent of the other. This is precisely what we saw in Gen 1-3 and which Paul confirms with the creation order. Hypothetically even if it did cancel out the proceeding verses, it must be recognised by egalitarians that you are admitting that there is a creation order with authority.Paul is listing a creation order of authority which you are so against. So there is a contradiction in your view.
7. Do i think the head covering is a mandate for all time, no. It is cultural, but the use of kephale to denote authority to the husband is. Paul draws right back to Gen to support his argument for mans authority, which he applies the the cultural context of head coverings.

Here head connot mean ‘source’, because source is the translated word for heads(plural). The singular is translated ‘mouth’. So should we say the man is the mouth of the wife? The context of how kephale is used clearly indicates a husbands authority. This passage is about propriety in worship- especially realting to head coverings. This is cultural, the headship of the husband is not. So to dismis this passage as purely cultural is wrong.

I look forward to all your interpretations. It will better help me understand your views.