1 Corinthians 11 1-16 Should women wear prayer veils?

[Heleadethme]

4 hours ago, Servant of the Lord said:

Thank you for your contribution Heleadethme.  I agree we should not add or take away, but I do believe we should look closely what scripture tells us and the plain meaning of the text. Please read the below carefully...

1 Corinthians 11:1-16 (KJV)
¹  Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
²  Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
³  But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
⁴  Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
⁵  But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
⁶  For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
⁷  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
⁸  For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
⁹   Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
¹⁰  For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
¹¹  Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
¹²  For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
¹³  Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
¹⁴  Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
¹⁵  But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
¹⁶  But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Excerpt used for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (pp. 1785–1787). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

11:2 The apostle first of all commends the Corinthians for the way in which they remembered him in all things, and held fast the traditions just as he had delivered them. Traditions refer not to habits and practices that have arisen in the church down through the years, but rather, in this case, to the inspired instructions of the Apostle Paul.
11:3 Paul now introduces the subject of women’s head coverings. Behind his instruction is the fact that every ordered society is built on two pillars—authority and subjection to that authority. It is impossible to have a well-functioning community where these two principles are not observed. Paul mentions three great relationships involving authority and subjection. First, the head of every man is Christ; Christ is Lord and man is subject to Him. Secondly, the head of woman is man; the place of headship was given to the man, and the woman is under his authority. Third, the head of Christ is God; even in the Godhead, One Person has the place of rule and Another takes the place of willing subordination. These examples of headship and submission were designed by God Himself and are fundamental in His arrangement of the universe.
At the outset it should be emphasized that subjection does not mean inferiority. Christ is subject to God the Father but He is not inferior to Him. Neither is woman inferior to man, though she is subordinate to him.
11:4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, that is, Christ. It is saying, in effect, that the man does not acknowledge Christ as his head. Thus it is an act of gross disrespect.
11:5 Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, that is, the man. She is saying, in effect, that she does not recognize man’s God-given headship and will not submit to it.
If this were the only verse in the Bible on the subject, then it would imply that it is all right for a woman to pray or prophesy in the assembly as long as she has a veil or other covering on her head. But Paul teaches elsewhere that women should be silent in the assembly (1 Cor. 14:34), that they are not permitted to teach or to have authority over the man but to be in silence (1 Tim. 2:12).
Actually meetings of the assembly do not come into view until verse 17, so the instructions concerning the head-covering in verses 2–16 cannot be confined to church meetings. They apply to whenever a woman prays or prophesies. She prays silently in the assembly, since 1 Timothy 2:8 limits public prayer to the men (lit., males). She prays audibly or silently at other times. She prophesies when she teaches other women (Titus 2:3–5) or children in the Sunday school.
11:6 If a woman is not covered, she might as well be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, then she should be covered. The unveiled head of a woman is as shameful as if her hair were cut off. The apostle is not commanding a barber’s operation but rather telling what moral consistency would require!
11:7 In verses 7–10, Paul teaches the subordination of the woman to the man by going back to creation. This should forever lay to rest any idea that his teaching about women’s covering was what was culturally suitable in his day but not applicable to us today. The headship of man and the subjection of woman have been God’s order from the very beginning.
First of all, man is the image and glory of God whereas woman is the glory of man. This means that man was placed on earth as God’s representative, to exercise dominion over it. Man’s uncovered head is a silent witness to this fact. The woman was never given this place of headship; instead she is the glory of man in the sense that she “renders conspicuous the authority of man,” as W. E. Vine expresses it.
Man indeed ought not to cover his head in prayer; it would be tantamount to veiling the glory of God, and this would be an insult to the Divine Majesty.
11:8 Paul next reminds us that man was not created from woman but woman was created from man. The man was first, then the woman was taken from his side. This priority of the man strengthens the apostle’s case for man’s headship.
11:9 The purpose of creation is next alluded to in order to press home the point. Nor was man created primarily for the woman, but rather woman for the man. The Lord distinctly stated in Genesis 2:18, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”
11:10 Because of her position of subordination to man, the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head. The symbol of authority is the head-covering and here it indicates not her own authority but subjection to the authority of her husband.
Why does Paul add because of the angels? We would suggest that the angels are spectators of the things that are happening on earth today, as they were of the things that happened at creation. In the first creation, they saw how woman usurped the place of headship over the man. She made the decision that Adam should have made. As a result of this, sin entered the human race with its unspeakable aftermath of misery and woe. God does not want what happened in the first creation to be repeated in the new creation. When the angels look down, He wants them to see the woman acting in subjection to the man, and indicating this outwardly by a covering on her head.
We might pause here to state that the head-covering is simply an outward sign and it is of value only when it is the outward sign of an inward grace. In other words, a woman might have a covering on her head and yet not truly be submissive to her husband. In such a case, to wear a head-covering would be of no value at all. The most important thing is to be sure that the heart is truly subordinate; then a covering on a woman’s head becomes truly meaningful.
11:11 Paul is not implying that man is at all independent of the woman, so he adds: “Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.” In other words, man and woman are mutually dependent. They need one another and the idea of subordination is not at all in conflict with the idea of mutual interdependence.
11:12 Woman came from man by creation, that is, she was created from Adam’s side. But Paul points out that man also comes through woman. Here he is referring to the process of birth. The woman gives birth to the man child. Thus God has created this perfect balance to indicate that the one cannot exist without the other.
All things are from God means that He has divinely appointed all these things, so there is no just cause for complaint. Not only were these relationships created by God, but the purpose of them all is to glorify Him. All of this should make the man humble and the woman content.
11:13 The apostle now challenges the Corinthians to judge among themselves if it is proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered. He appeals to their instinctive sense. The suggestion is that it is not reverent or decorous for a woman to enter into the presence of God unveiled.
11:14 Just how does nature itself teach us that it is a shame for a man to have long hair is not made clear. Some have suggested that a man’s hair will not naturally grow into as long tresses as a woman’s. For a man to have long hair makes him appear effeminate. In most cultures, the male wears his hair shorter than the female.
11:15 Verse 15 has been greatly misunderstood by many. Some have suggested that since a woman’s hair is given to her for a covering, it is not necessary for her to have any other covering. But such a teaching does grave violence to this portion of Scripture. Unless one sees that two coverings are mentioned in this chapter, the passage becomes hopelessly confusing. This may be demonstrated by referring back to verse 6. There we read: “For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn.” According to the interpretation just mentioned, this would mean that if a woman “does not have her hair on,” then she might just as well be shorn. But this is ridiculous. If she does not “have her hair on,” she could not possibly be shorn!
The actual argument in verse 15 is that there is a real analogy between the spiritual and the natural. God gave woman a natural covering of glory in a way He did not give to man. There is a spiritual significance to this. It teaches that when a woman prays to God, she should wear a covering on her head. What is true in the natural sphere should be true in the spiritual.
11:16 The apostle closes this section with the statement: “But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.” Does Paul mean, as has been suggested, that the things he has just been saying are not important enough to contend about? Does he mean that there was no such custom of women veiling their heads in the churches? Does he mean that these teachings are optional and not to be pressed upon women as the commandments of the Lord? It seems strange that any such interpretations would ever be offered, yet they are commonly heard today. This would mean that Paul considered these instructions as of no real consequence, and he had just been wasting over half a chapter of Holy Scripture in setting them forth!
There are at least two possible explanations of this verse which fit in with the rest of the Scripture. First of all, the apostle may be saying that he anticipates that certain ones will be contentious about these matters, but he adds that we have no such custom, that is, the custom of contending about this. We do not argue about such matters, but accept them as the teaching of the Lord. Another interpretation, favored by William Kelly, is that Paul was saying that the churches of God did not have any such custom as that of women praying or prophesying without being covered.

 

I agree with your stance, at least in principle.  Paul gave all the reasons there are for why women need to have a sign of authority on their heads.  If it had to do with medical reasons and beliefs regarding how pregnancy came about, or any other reason, he would have just said so.....but he didn't give other reasons,  he gave perfectly sound reasons having to do with God creating the woman for the man and not the other way around.....as well as the woman being more easily deceived and because of the angels.....and marriage being a picture of Christ and the church in the natural realm.  He didn't mention anything having to do with prevailing ideas concerning reproduction.  If we only would avoid the temptation to look for other reasons and accept what he wrote under the inspiration and wisdom of God then we do well.

Even recently I heard someone teaching that women are to submit to their husbands because of how God CURSED Adam & Eve in the fall.....that husbands are to therefore "rule over" their wives in agreement with and in accordance to the curse of the FALL.  Erk!  And of course that was ADDING to what Paul said.  Nothing I said could budge this person from that error, and instead of correcting him the other men there circled their wagons.  Talk about disheartening.  You hear all sorts of strange theories around this subject.  The marriage relationship is supposed to be a beautiful representation of Christ and the church.......it's a blessing not a curse, and submission of the woman is  entirely voluntary, and we do well to remember that in Christ, in spirit, there is neither male nor female.  They were even teaching that Christ rules the church by force, under threat.   Such fleshly understanding of how Jesus treats His body is scary and dangerous.....we ought to take warning from all the polygamy cults out there.....for that is not at all the SPIRIT in which Christ rules.  Even His warnings and chastisements are in spirit and can only be received by FAITH...they are not fleshly and eating of the Tree of Knowledge.   But when there are no ears to hear what the SPIRIT is saying there is not much one can do, no matter what is being discussed.  Just please lets' not either add or take away from what Paul said....it was all perfectly sufficient if only we can apprehend it all aright, and seek God for the understanding.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Heleadethme

[Heleadethme]

And if I may get this off my chest as well.......Paul always spoke of the relationship of men and women in a single teaching, he didn't put the women over in one corner and give them a list of their exclusive rules and roles, while putting the men in a separate lonely corner across the room with their exclusive list.  But he spoke of these things together.  Marriage is a relationship between two people.....if we do this wrong, we will have a situation where a man never picks up a dish towel to give his wife a hand, not to mention his companionship, in the kitchen, and we will have women refusing to listen to their husbands talk about their challenges at work and offer their support and advice.  It would be a recipe for DIS unity in the marriage.  Notice also how Paul always gave equal weight to how both husbands and wives should be.  There so often seems to be an emphasis on the women submitting to and respecting their husbands with only token mention of how husbands need to love and honour their wives, if at all.  It even seems to me that if husbands are the head of the wife, then they should really be the ones leading, yes?  and setting the right example.  And since marriage is a relationship of two becoming one, then these things need to be taught accordingly, like Paul did.....rather beautifully and not in a dogmatic manner, if we can but see this.

[Servant of the Lord]

4 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

If you were truly a 'servant of the Lord' perhaps you would not be so abrasive??

I am sorry that you feel that way... I do believe neutral observers of this thread will come to the conclusion I have supported all positions with scripture and have not "gone through the bible to cherry pick verses out of context to support unsound doctrine."  Let me first say in love brother that we live at a time when it is unpopular to confront others for immoral or improper actions and words. The popular belief of today is that everyone should be able to do their own thing, and others have no right to “judge” or correct them. What a mess this idea has created in our society and in our churches.

Sadly, many Christians have embraced this complacent attitude toward correcting others, and, as a result, sin and false doctrine in the church are seldom confronted and curbed.

However, the Bible tells us that:

2 Tim. 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Tim. 4:1-2
1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:
2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction.

God tells us that His Word is not only to be used to teach and encourage but also to “correct” and “rebuke.” And in 2 Timothy 4: 3, He tells us why we must be faithful to use His Word to correct others who are in the wrong:

2 Tim. 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

This prophetic writing began its fulfillment shortly after it was penned and has escalated to what is happening in churches today. There are presently a great number of teachers willing to say what itching ears want to hear, instead of telling the truth as revealed in God’s Word.

However, many who embrace certain views about doctrine inevitably end up altering the clear meaning of passages that contradict what they believe. And as a result, they pass their tainted understanding of the Scriptures on to those they share with. Sadly, this in turn distorts other people’s knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ and His Word. Why does it matter? Because this is very serious. That is why God urges us to contend for the faith:

Phil. 1:27 Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in one spirit, contending as one man for the faith of the gospel…

Jude 3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

 

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Servant of the Lord
typos

[BeauJangles]

On 12/17/2019 at 3:32 AM, Adstar said:

Woman should have long hair..

Why? Many women especially those who are more mature in age prefer shorter more practical styles.

On 12/17/2019 at 3:32 AM, Adstar said:

For the most part woman desire to have long hair anyway..

Not even all young women feel this way. Where are you getting this information? 

[Adstar]

9 minutes ago, BeauJangles said:

Why? Many women especially those who are more mature in age prefer shorter more practical styles.

Not even all young women feel this way. Where are you getting this information? 

Well the Bible declares..

1 Corinthians 11: KJV

5 "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. {6} For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

That a woman prays without her head being uncovered it is a dishonor..

But then in the same Chapter it reveals the following..

1 Corinthians 11: KJV

15 "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering."

That long hair on a woman is her covering ..

So a woman who has long hair and who is praying is honorable.. A woman who is praying with short hair is doing something dishonorable..

[BeauJangles]

1 Corinthians 11 1-16 Should women wear prayer veils?

I'm sorry, but extensive posts cause both a problem with dyslexia and eye strain from suspected macular degeneration. Dry Eye Syndrome is also a concern, so I end up having to scroll through posts that are too lengthy. Are you saying women need to wear this or not? For those of Jewish Orthodox, head covering for both men and women are traditional. Even with Reformed men still wear a kippah. I'm just curious if you feel this should be the current status with the body of Christ today. 

What do reform Jews wear as clothing?

New answer: Reform Jews tend to be less strict than Orthodox, Ashkenazi, Sephardic Jews, but that doesn't mean that they are not observant at all.

They wear the kippah (skull cap), tallitot, kittel, etc.

Reform services are a lot more relaxed in terms of dress codes, though. However, that doesn't mean the Jew is more relaxed in their attitude to G-d.

[BeauJangles]

5 minutes ago, Adstar said:

So a woman who has long hair and who is praying is honorable.. A woman who is praying with short hair is doing something dishonorable..

Oh. I get it. You're into legalism. This means your doctrine is not only incorrect, but unbalanced. Are you from the United Pentecostal denomination? Even a church outside of town who are "Oneness" have numerous congregants with shorter hair and also wear tasteful women's trousers. Are you in opposition to this as well?  

[Alive]

I would add a hit and run comment...

I got a kick out of that phrase, btw. Thanks for the chuckle @Heleadethme

Anyway, regarding 'authority' as it pertains to Christ and His Church and Husband and Wife.

I was blessed with the following many years ago when this subject came into focus in the context of a local church.

Is it not true that when we as 'sons' (regardless of gender), submit to our Head Christ that we find the experience of 'freedom'?

We are freed from the burdens and harm that come along with rebellion in whatever form or degree. When we trust and repose in our Lord, there is peace and the struggles with the flesh fall behind us. We look to Him in trust and obedience and the things of the world become more dim and less vital.

Christ loves the Church and desires that we know this experience...yes, this Rest.

Does it make sense that the 'wife' having this same attitude will share the same? Albeit of a different sort toward the 'husband', but ultimately in realizing this 'principle' be experiencing as through her 'husband' an added blessing--as she is also submitting to her Lord Jesus Christ?

In either and any case, not by force, but willingly as the result of a desire to please the Lord. In the same way the husband loves and cherishes his wife and sets an example for her--as Christ has for His Church.

There is freedom in submission as a principle of Life. And never as a purely mechanical thing.

[Adstar]

7 minutes ago, BeauJangles said:

Oh. I get it. You're into legalism. This means your doctrine is not only incorrect, but unbalanced. Are you from the United Pentecostal denomination? Even a church outside of town who are "Oneness" have numerous congregants with shorter hair and also wear tasteful women's trousers. Are you in opposition to this as well?  

Where in my post did i ever say that salvation for a woman was dependent on her having long hair????

Nope i never ever said that.. Legalism is the belief that salvation is dependent on one succeeding in doing the Law.. Nowhere have i said that failure to keep the law causes one to lose their salvation..

Either what i have revealed in scripture is the Truth delivered by Paul while being inspired by God or it is not.. Either it is as the scriptures say an honor for a woman to pray with long hair and a dishonor for her to pray with short hair or those scriptures are false and should be removed from the Bible..

I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God and thus i take the verses i have quoted to be Truth.. If i disbelieve and reject those verses and declare them lies i have rejected the Word of God and thus have disbelieved God.. But i accept those verses as the revealed Word of God given through Paul to all Christians..

Also as a Christian it matters not one jot what i am personally for or against as far as dress and hair styles.. If one believes God then His opinion is what is relevant and the moving of ones conscience by the Holy Spirit is of paramount importance..  So let each woman read His Word and follow their conscience.. May their conscience be clear before the LORD..

[BeauJangles]

1 minute ago, Adstar said:

Where in my post did i ever say that salvation for a woman was dependent on her having long hair????

You didn't. You did say this, however. 

29 minutes ago, Adstar said:

So a woman who has long hair and who is praying is honorable.. A woman who is praying with short hair is doing something dishonorable..

Here is our topic once again. Please remain within the discussion of the subject, unless stating going off-topic. Thanks! 

 1 Corinthians 11 1-16 Should women wear prayer veils?