Using 1 Corinthians 11, Bercot says publishers and editors can “push their theology” through subheadings (e.g., NIV’s “Propriety in Worship”) and even through where a chapter break is placed; what doctrines or “exceptions” have you absorbed simply because an editor framed a passage as being about “worship” or “propriety” rather than “commandments”?
Another way to ask: How have Bible headings or chapter breaks led you to think a passage is about “worship” or “proper behavior,” and what teachings or “exceptions” might you have accepted because of that framing?
Direct Answer
Based on Bercot’s example, a common “exception” absorbed from editorial framing is the idea that Paul’s head covering instructions are merely about worship-time propriety rather than ongoing commandments.
Support from Transcript:
He says publishers often “push their theology through the use of slanted subheadings.”
He cites the NIV subheading at 1 Corinthians 11: “propriety in worship.”
He argues Paul “in no way limits his commandments to times of worship,” yet the heading nudges readers to think he does.
He says readers then assume: “Oh, this only has to do with propriety. These aren’t real commandments.”
He adds chapter divisions also steer interpretation: Langton grouped head covering with love feast/communion, which “naturally makes the reader think” the whole chapter is about public worship.
He says Langton “should have ended chapter 11” after head covering and started a new chapter for communion.
Discussion Follow-ups
What other passages have you mentally filed under “worship settings only” because of headings or layout? How might your obedience change if you treated the text as commands before you treated it as “propriety”?
