What should the position on 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 be? These verses deal with head coverings for women praying and a lack of head coverings for men praying. I assume prophecy in the church is a thing of the past.
1 Corinthians 11:2-16 NASB
2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that [a]Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. 4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
So, it appears men are not to wear hats or other head coverings while praying.
5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman [c]whose head is shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover [d]her head, let her also [e]have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to [f]have her hair cut off or [g]her head shaved, let her cover [h]her head.
It appears women should have their heads covered when praying.
7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
This is the reason given for these two controversial rules. It goes back to the created order. Man originates from God directly. Women originate from man and are designed for the man as a helpmate. This is the context given, along with a difficult to interpret reference to the angels.
11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman [j]independent of man, nor is man [k]independent of woman. 12 For as the woman [l]originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things [m]originate from God.
A deeper truth is given here. Everything, including woman, originates from God. Man is also born of woman, despite woman originally originating from man. We see here some of God's wisdom pertaining to the created order.
13 Judge [n]for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 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 one is inclined to be contentious, we have no [o]other practice, nor have the churches of God.
The church at Corinth is hammered home that men are to have no head covering in prayer and women are to have a head covering in prayer. Long hair on a man is even called a dishonor, while a woman's long hair is called a glory to her. Lastly, this principle is applied to all the churches in verse 16.
OK, this analysis shocks me. I see a key thing here.
1. These rules are clearly, by the text, not for the Corinthians alone. The created order is appealed to. All churches are mentioned as holding to these rules.
That said, the vast majority of churches do not practice these rules. Often because it is argued in study bibles that this text is only for the Corinthians, despite the scriptures within context that speak contrarily.
Now, considering the text, what should be the response of modern Christians? Is this just one of those rules in the bible we distrust due to the modern spirit of the age we live in? Are churches making a mistake currently when men wear hats when praying and when women have no symbol of authority on their head when praying? Is there a deeper cultural issue here that I am missing that applies to the whole Roman world?
1 Corinthians 11:2-16 NASB
2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that [a]Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. 4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
So, it appears men are not to wear hats or other head coverings while praying.
5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman [c]whose head is shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover [d]her head, let her also [e]have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to [f]have her hair cut off or [g]her head shaved, let her cover [h]her head.
It appears women should have their heads covered when praying.
7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
This is the reason given for these two controversial rules. It goes back to the created order. Man originates from God directly. Women originate from man and are designed for the man as a helpmate. This is the context given, along with a difficult to interpret reference to the angels.
11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman [j]independent of man, nor is man [k]independent of woman. 12 For as the woman [l]originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things [m]originate from God.
A deeper truth is given here. Everything, including woman, originates from God. Man is also born of woman, despite woman originally originating from man. We see here some of God's wisdom pertaining to the created order.
13 Judge [n]for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 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 one is inclined to be contentious, we have no [o]other practice, nor have the churches of God.
The church at Corinth is hammered home that men are to have no head covering in prayer and women are to have a head covering in prayer. Long hair on a man is even called a dishonor, while a woman's long hair is called a glory to her. Lastly, this principle is applied to all the churches in verse 16.
OK, this analysis shocks me. I see a key thing here.
1. These rules are clearly, by the text, not for the Corinthians alone. The created order is appealed to. All churches are mentioned as holding to these rules.
That said, the vast majority of churches do not practice these rules. Often because it is argued in study bibles that this text is only for the Corinthians, despite the scriptures within context that speak contrarily.
Now, considering the text, what should be the response of modern Christians? Is this just one of those rules in the bible we distrust due to the modern spirit of the age we live in? Are churches making a mistake currently when men wear hats when praying and when women have no symbol of authority on their head when praying? Is there a deeper cultural issue here that I am missing that applies to the whole Roman world?
