Head coverings passage seems contradictory.

[Pamelasv]

Why does this passage seem contradictory?  In the beginning it says women should shave their heads if they don't wear one. Then at the bottom it says long hair is given as a covering. What am I missing here?  

[thereselittleflower]

He doesn't say women should shave their heads.   He said not wearing a head covering in Church is the same disgrace as a woman who shaves her head.

• 1 Corinthians 11:       5But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. 6For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.

He is simply making a point.

 

 

 

[Pamelasv]

It is still contradictory because her hair in the beginning is long, and he is saying she should have her hair cut off if she doesnt wear a covering.  But at the end long hair is given as a covering. 

[thereselittleflower]

Do you never make statements of the nature -   'if you're going to do that, you might as well do this because it's the same thing' in order to get someone to understand the nature of the thing they are going to do?

He is saying the reason why it is shameful for a woman to shave her hair is because her hair is given as a covering.

He is then saying that when a woman comes to worship at Church, she should cover herself even more so before God.    

He is comparing her natural covering of her hair in everyday life to the need to do more than use just the natural covering when coming before God.

He is comparing the everyday circumstance to the special circumstance of coming before God, and saying what is enough for the everyday is not enough when we come before God.

 

Just as a woman would not shave her head for everyday display, so a woman should not use only her natural hair covering for worship.

 

 

 

[Willa]

It seems to be that this says that those of us who have hair that is cut above collar length, for instance, do not need to wear a head covering since we have already removed our long hair, which is a source of pride.

[post]

it's not contradictory at all -- i don't think you're understanding what he's saying. don't just focus on one little verse here, read the whole thing. this is, after all, a letter, not a collection of proverbs. 

Paul is making a point, and the point he's making is found just a sentence or two before the ones you're getting hung up on: 

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.
(1 Corinthians 11:3) 

keep that point in mind - and remember that in the place and time that the people originally receiving this letter lived, there were certain customs Paul would have taken for granted that they were aware of and most likely accepted. it doesn't mean the customs are true or correct, but that he's using these customs as an example to make the point that Christ is the head of every man, just as in a marriage the man is the head of the woman. the point is about authority, and our place under it. 

if we were to claim Christ as our Lord, but not show submission to Him, we might as well not call Him Lord at all. analogously, if a woman should by custom have her head covered, but she doesn't, she may as well have her head shaved - which was, by custom, symbolic of even lower character than doing certain things without her head covered. just as Christ, taking the form of man, if He had not shown submission to the Father, would not have lived righteously as a man, so we, being men, should exhibit what is characteristic of being in submission to Him - which is also to submit to the Father. 

Edited January 1, 2016 by post
quoted ESV instead of NIV because i think it is the better translation here

[Ezra]

9 hours ago, Pamelasv said:

Why does this passage seem contradictory?  In the beginning it says women should shave their heads if they don't wear one. Then at the bottom it says long hair is given as a covering. What am I missing here?  

Nothing contradictory. What Paul says is if the woman wants to display shameless behaviour, take it to the extreme -- get her head shaved. That remark is meant to shame the woman into wearing a head covering during worship.

And the woman's long hair is give her for a natural covering in order to teach her that the woman's head covering (which actually hides the natural covering) is a spiritual covering to show (a) submission to her husband, (b) submission to Christ and (c) submission of the whole assembly to its Head (Christ).  And this submission is being shown not only to Christ, but to the angels who observe Christian gatherings.

[post]

footnotes from ESV Bible on this chapter include: 

a 3 Greek gunĒ. This term may refer to a woman or a wife, depending on the context
b 5 In verses 5–13, the Greek word gunĒ is translated wife in verses that deal with wearing a veil, a sign of being married in first-century culture

in most instances of the word gunĒ. here the ESV translates it as "wife" -- which contextually makes a whole lot more sense. it's my understanding that a shaved-headed woman in Corinth in that day would have been identified as a prostitute - so the contrast with a "wife" here seems a lot more appropriate than a "woman" in general, and as i explained in previous post, i think he is merely using an example from contemporary cultural norm, not giving a "rule" for the church. backing that opinion up, he says at the close of these remarks (verse 16) that if anyone wants to stir up controversy over this issue, or over the length of men's hair, that he & the churches of God have 'no such custom.' 

so i contend that this is meant to be an analogy to explain how that Christ is our head, and we should display submission to Him, and i agree with the ESV that within the analogy, by way of the cultural context, he's talking about "wives" in particular, not "women" in general. 

[Pamelasv]

Verse 5 says clearly that (I'm not arguing that you need to wear one) every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman who's head is shaved. 

Now that sounds pretty straight forward.  ( now I am not being argumentative, just stating what I see, as in a discussion. No need to get our shorts in a knot).  I see no hidden meaning here. 

BUT in verse 6, For if a woman does not cover her head, let her have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or head shaved, let her cover her head.'  Now here is proving a point, not saying literally she should do that.  That must mean her hair is still long, and it is a shame because she is not wearing a head covering!  

Vs. 15 then says her long hair is given to her for a covering.  See the contradiction? 

Well I sure am. 

[Pamelasv]

3 hours ago, Willa said:

It seems to be that this says that those of us who have hair that is cut above collar length, for instance, do not need to wear a head covering since we have already removed our long hair, which is a source of pride.

Now that sounds like something to think about.