I see there has been no response. Not sure of the reason for this. Generally speaking, however, I personally tend to shy away from books, etc., which seem to have an agenda or are out to attempt to prove a position. In so many cases, the evidence is interpreted, distorted or selected for the purpose of supporting the position statement, rather than the evidence as it appears being the basis of the position statement. They got it backward, what?

There were Gnostic groups which had women priests, something that did not occur in either the Old or New Testaments.

We might not expect the Gnostics to take the OT much into account, however, as the Gnostics rejected the Old Testament because they did not believe it was a revelation from the true God. They believed the Old Testament God was actually evil.

However, your original question was general in nature, in regard to ANY occurrence or application of the word. This definitely is relevant to that question. Aside from that, of interest is the derivation and origin of the word which the gnostics applied. Kittel's reference to Hindu ('Indian') influences I found intriguing. All that, of course, is different than Paul's use of the word. Yet one source of confusion in Paul's writings is his habit of using words in circulation in Hellenstic/Greco-Roman cultures, and applying them in a DIFFERENT WAY, with an OT twist! It can leave one wondering!

Dave

A question I would now like to throw out, is, what is the meaning of "head" [Kephalee] at Ephesians 5:23 and 1 Cor. 11: 3? At issue is whether it means "authority over" or "source" or "origin"? Do you or any others have an opinion on this, based on a close study of the text and on how it is used there and elsewhere?

Then there's also the fact that in a search of the way kephalee is used in Greek literature outside the Bible, the evidence is overwhelming that it signifies authority, as the evidence in the writings of Paul also establish.

Do you have a quote from Gnostics showing exactly how they used the word, Kephalee?

I know there were various Gnostic groups, such as the Montanists, who had women as officers in their groups, a practice which was condemned by both the Eastern and Western churches of that time.

(The Eastern church had slightly different practices from those in the West. For instance, it had many more deaconesses because of the sensitivity about the importance of the separation of men from women. These assisted in the preparation of women for baptism and also made sure that women understood the teachings prior to their baptism.)

I'll do some more research into the occurrence of the word outside the Bible. I believe there are only a few times when it was used where it MAY have the meaning of source, but even those do not unquestionably use it that way, as far as I understand the material at this point.

Regards,
"John 3: 17"