Dave

Thanks for that Mark! I am happy to throw my 5 cents worth in…
The second and third of your first three points I do not agree with, but it is good to know what we are not agreeing on. But I think I agree with your first point!!
With regards to 1 Cor 11…
1 – No body part of the metaphor mentioned…very true!
2 – Paul draws back to the created order…in which case he got the order wrong in 1 Cor 11:4! I am not seeing a created order. Could you elaborate?
3 – Where is the head of authority in verses 4-7. I see no evidence of authority here. Please point me to the words used to show this?
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.” Perhaps this is how you see it, but you have failed to establish this. Your first point was that kephale had different uses depending on context, but this does not mean you can lock in the formula kephale + people = authority. This is not an adequate look at the context to determine what the context is saying.
5 – Yes…angels etc, unusual and weird!
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.”
But what of verse 12? It appears, contextually, to be talking about the origin of man and woman. Does this not relate somehow to what has followed created order and make it relevant? That being that everything comes from God (through Christ)…like he is the head? I do not believe that egals think verse 11 simply dismisses the preceding verses, but how do you dismiss what it brings to the passage…including verse 12?
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.”
As mentioned earlier, I do not see where Paul is appealing to Genesis, nor how you can make the statement that kephale here denotes authority to the husband. It is not there. Please show me the exact words that indicate this!

Finally, you said, “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?”
I believe I read pretty much this argument from Grudem. It is typical of Grudem. TL has responded correctly and said that it is not referring to the mouth we speak out of. Why would Grudem suggest it does? I am not sure of their motives! BUT, the singular very much relates to the plural meaning. The mouth of a container, such as a jug, is the source of where what is in the container comes from, and it is the “mouth”, the opening. Grudem does make much of the “mouth” being the wrong end of a river to be the “source”, but egals never said that kephale only referred to rivers, they said it referred to source, “like the head of a river”.
Sorry for the rant but I get very tired of word games.