by 
Paul and the Corinthians Exchanged Letters
The dialogue theory is that a woman (does not need to wear an external covering on her head during prayer or prophesy) because 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 reflects a conversation taking place.
The premise is that Paul and the Corinthians engaged in what we would describe as a conversation by correspondence. Much like a modern-day text conversation, but with longer delays in the responses.
According to the theory, Paul quoted parts of the Corinthians letter in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, then wrote his response.
This explanation of 1st Corinthians 11 is relatively new and promoted in large part by a female minister and theologian in England.
This explanation fails in several regards as I will illustrate.
Paul Wrote A Letter that We Don’t Have
It is clear from 1 Corinthians 5:9 that Paul had previously written to the Corinthians. However, the earlier epistle does not exist any longer. The fact remains there was at least one other letter from the apostle to the church at Corinth that we don’t have.
The Corinthians Wrote a Letter to Paul
From 1 Corinthians 7:1, we learn that the Corinthians had written to Paul seemingly to ask some questions. Thus, it is also accurate that the church at Corinth had sent at least one letter to Paul with concerns or questions for him to answer.
Thus far, the dialogue theory is supported by the Bible. But the explanation becomes tenuous from this point forward as it indulges in considerable speculation and makes many assumptions.
At this point, the proponents say that 1 Corinthians Chapter 11:1-16 is a mixture of quotations from the letter the Corinthians wrote to Paul followed by his response to their statements.
The Dialogue Theory Resembles E-mails
In business e-mails, I have seen people quote something (from an e-mail sent to them) in their reply. The quote is copied and pasted in a different color followed by the answer. Sometimes the color is changed to red to show this came from the e-mail they received. If you have seen or used a similar practice, then maybe this will help explain the dialogue theory.
The Dialogue Theory Illustrated with Subheadings
The proponents of the dialogue argument sometimes make use of subheadings to show who was doing the talking. Here’s an example for you using the NKJV.
Paul speaking
(2) Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. (3) But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
Corinthians Speaking
(4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. (5) But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.
Paul Speaking
(6) For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.
Corinthians Speaking
(7) For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (8) For man is not from woman, but woman from man. (9) Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. (10) For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
Paul Speaking
(11) Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. (12) For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God. (13) Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? (14) Does not . . . [Yes, the text is broken at this juncture to support the theory.]
Corinthians Speaking
. . . even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?
Paul Speaking
(15) But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. (16) But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.
To be clear, the subheadings are used to demonstrate their explanation that Paul is answering specific things the Corinthians supposedly wrote to him.
Guessing About What the Corinthians Wrote to Paul
The letter the Corinthian church wrote to Paul no longer exists.
Thus, no one can say with any degree of certainty what the letter said. Therefore, the nature and content of the letter are nothing more than guesswork at best.
As a support that Paul was responding to the Corinthians’ letter, the proponents point to other places in 1st Corinthians where Paul quotes things that were said. However, this still does not establish the contents of the missing letter, nor does it preclude Paul quoted from verbal reports or other sources.
Paul Could Have Quoted Verbal Reports
In 1st Corinthians 1:12 NKJV, Paul leads with quotations “Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul. . .” or “I am of Apollos” or “I am of Cephas” letting the church know that he has become aware of the divisions that have developed.
He continues his discourse about being of Paul or Apollos in 1 Corinthians 3:4.
Did these quotes come from the letter the church at Corinth penned to Paul?
Again, no one can say for certain. These statements could just as easily have been reported to Paul verbally by Timothy, Chloe’s people (1 Corinthians 1:11), or some other person who had more recently visited Corinth.
Specific Quotes Don’t Seem Like Things People Write in Letters
Reading on down into 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, these verses do not appear to be Paul replying to a letter from the Corinthians.
Paul says, “. . . I hear . . . .” 1st Corinthians 11:18 NKJV (Bold added) This sounds like a verbal report about the abuses during the Lord’s Supper that Paul possibly heard from a faithful brother who had visited Corinth.
I am hard-pressed to believe the Corinthians wrote to Paul saying,“The Lord’s Supper has been modified just a bit since you left. It’s a genuine celebration with some getting drunk! It’s great! So our question is . . . .”?
I find it pretty obvious Paul is not replying to a letter from the Corinthians as he begins in 1 Corinthians 11:17 regarding his criticism of their partaking of the Lord’s Supper.
Paul Sent Others to Check on the Churches
Paul is known to have sent others on his behalf to look in on churches where he had preached to see how the brethren were doing. For example, see 1st Thessalonians 3:1-8:
“Therefore, when we could no longer endure it, we thought it good to be left in Athens alone, and sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow laborer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith, that no one should be shaken by these afflictions; for you yourselves know that we are appointed to this. For, in fact, we told you before when we were with you that we would suffer tribulation, just as it happened, and you know. For this reason, when I could no longer endure it, I sent to know your faith, lest by some means the tempter had tempted you, and our labor might be in vain. But now that Timothy has come to us from you, and brought us good news of your faith and love, and that you always have good remembrance of us, greatly desiring to see us, as we also to see you— therefore, brethren, in all our affliction and distress we were comforted concerning you by your faith. For now we live, if you stand fast in the Lord. 1st Thessalonians 3:1-8 NKJV (Bold added)
Paul Sent Timothy to Corinth
Likewise, we also know that Paul sent Timothy to Corinth.
“Therefore I urge you, imitate me. For this reason I have sent Timothy to you, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church.” 1st Corinthians 4:16-17 NKJV (Bold added)
Timothy was also likely returning to Corinth for a short stay. 1st Corinthians 16:10-11
Don’t Rule Out the Holy Spirit Working Thru Paul
Aside from the possibility of verbal reports from those who had visited Corinth, the Holy Spirit was certainly capable of revealing to Paul in any number of ways the problems and issues that the Corinthian church was dealing with.
The Book of 1st Corinthians was inspired.
We should not rule out the possibility that the Spirit let Paul know about the conditions and issues in Corinth.
The Dialogue Theory Folks Have Never Seen the Missing Letter
In attempting to support that Paul was quoting from the letter sent by the church at Corinth, the dialogue theory proponents also point to another quote Paul appears to make.
“All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.” 1st Corinthians 6:12 NKJV
Once again, any letter the Corinthians wrote to Paul no longer exists.
The notion that anyone can articulate what was contained in a writing that is no longer available is more than a mere stretch. It is guesswork, rank speculation, and complete conjecture.
Even by accepting the unsupported proposition that Paul is responding to something the church wrote to him about head covering directives, it is impossible to know what they said in their letter since we don’t have it.
Paul Responds to Gossip and Grumbling
I see other statements from Paul in 1st Corinthians responding to things that the brethren appear to be saying about Paul. These statements do not appear to be from correspondence written to Paul, but from gossip or murmuring about him.
In 2nd Corinthians 10:10 Paul writes, “For his letters,” they say, “are weighty and powerful, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.” (NKJV)
This is a statement made by the Corinthians and Paul is quoting them.
Assuming this statement was written in a letter to Paul, then the Corinthians would have written, “Paul your letters are weighty and powerful, but your bodily presence is weak! Your speech is contemptible!”
I don’t know about you, but I don’t see someone writing this statement in a letter. It sounds a lot more like what someone would say when Paul wasn’t in the room. The statement sounds a lot more like a verbal attack upon Paul when he was not there.
The Agenda Behind the Dialogue Theory
I am also personally wary of theories or explanations that appear to have a separate agenda associated with them.
Seemingly those who have adopted the dialogue explanation for why a woman does not need to cover her head also support women pulpit ministers, women elders and deacons, and female leadership roles in the church.
God established roles for us based on gender. The bedrock for these roles is founded on the same theology as the head covering commands.
Getting rid of head covering opens the door to challenge the other roles (and responsibilities) God has imposed on men (and women). The argument becomes if theology isn’t important for head covering, then we should reject the theology for male leadership at home and church.
This dialogue theory of interpreting 1st Corinthians 11:1-16 is an unreasonable conclusion in my opinion.
Leave a Reply