Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 9
Finny highlighted Paul’s “headship order” (Christ–man–woman–God) and suggested Paul’s unusual sequence reminds us that having a head does not imply inferiority because “Christ Himself has a head”; how does the God/Christ analogy either heal or intensify your concerns about hierarchy, and what does it teach about God’s own nature—especially the possibility of authority that is truly “loving” and submission that is truly “glad”?
Another way to ask: How does the example of Christ having a head affect your worries about hierarchy—does it help or make it worse? What does it teach about authority that is loving and submission that is willing?

Direct Answer Finny uses the God/Christ analogy to argue that headship does not equal inferiority, because Christ is under the Father without being lesser in worth. It teaches that in God Himself we see “loving authority” and “glad submission,” which should reshape how we imagine male-female order.

Support from Transcript:

  • He calls 1 Cor 11:3 a “headship order”: “the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.”
  • He highlights Paul’s unusual sequence (man ? woman ? Christ ? God) and infers Paul wants to remind us this “is not some position of unique inferiority.”
  • Finny draws an analogy: “man is analogous to God, and woman is analogous to Christ,” a framework he says Paul sustains later (e.g., glory themes).
  • He says we wrongly import a coercive picture (“master and slave”) but Paul’s metaphor is “head and body,” an “organic union.”
  • He offers two clarifying phrases: “loving authority” (Father over Son) and “glad submission” (Christ’s joyful emptying and suffering).
  • He describes Christ’s submission as “gladly, joyfully emptied himself,” not teeth-gritting resentment.
Discussion Follow-ups Finny acknowledges hierarchy can sound “domineering” in our culture. Does the Trinity analogy challenge your assumptions by showing order without oppression—or does it raise new questions about how to keep authority from becoming “ugly” in practice?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10
Back Questions Next