Head Coverings

I always understood that passage as a cultural issue, which would not be applicable today. If it were, every woman attending church should be wearing a head covering.

 

Webdog,

You indeed are correct. it was a cultural thing. We know this from studying history and seeing when the heathen went into the pagan places of worship, many women were shaved bald, men wore hats. Paul wanted the church at Corinth to be different than those of the pagan establishments... set apart.

Paul wrote many letters to many churches, yet the Church at Corinth was the only one Paul addressed in this manner.

 

And we all know what it's like to sit behind a woman in a hat???

 

Remember, Man looks on the owtward, God looks on the heart.
God always hears the prayer of a righteous man.
We as Christians need to get away from the "uniform" and trying to get our outward appearances in line so we can please God.
Remember, without FAITH it is impossible to please HIM.

When a man's heart is right with God, his outward appearance will follow.
It is a matter of getting the cart before the horse.

I hope this helps

 

There are many variable and eisogetic expressions of understanding of this passage. Many who claim to be literalists-- which means, for one thing, opposed to the idea that scripture applied only in the 'culture of its time'-- who are definitely nonliteralists on this topic. "It's a cultural thing," they say; women are not required today to wear a headcovering. However, there is also a verse in there that says a woman's 'long' hair is a covering... which leads to the debate of what is meant by "long," and how short must a man's hair be so that it will not be 'long' in the scriptural meaning. And then, if a woman has "short" hair, does she then have to wear a headcovering? And how short is short, to go with the alternative how long is long?

That's the direction the debate usually goes. However, a focal point in the passage is about praying or prophesying with/without the covering. That point is overlooked in regard to "must a man take his hat off in church," which the passage does not actually say. I did a poll on this not too long ago (the old board with the better and broader poll function), and most who answered said it's "disrespectful" (many said "immoral") for a man to enter the sactuary with his hat on. How that is derived from the actual wording of the scripture... well, we really do want things to argue about, don't we?

 

If it's in the Bible, then you should do it.

 

You get problems on this issue when people do not study it, and study when and where they were living, who know no history. Corinth was a city of false worship, they worshipped everything there, part of one groups false worship was temple prostitutes who shaved their heads, it was not unusual for women to walk around with shaved heads as part of this worship. Corinthian women who became christians still wore their 'hair', or lack of, like this, and they were associated with the false worship and temple prostitutes. Thats why this verse was written to them.
You absolutely can not take one verse from the bible and get a doctrine from it, it must be supported from other scriptures if it is correctly interpreted, if it is not supported then you can never know for sure if you have correctly interepted the meaning and intent.
If it's in the bible and you should do it, then makes me wonder if you wear clothing made of 2 different types of fabric or base materials, because the bible also forbids it.

 

I agree. It's also not strictly a cultural issue.

We can argue all day about what "because of the angels" means, but it certainly can't be a reference to cultural issues.

 

unless you can explain it then, we can not get a doctrine from it, plus once explained it must be supported in scripture elsewhere, for proper interpetation and context.

 

Head coverings were - and still are - a symbol of male headship in the Mediterranean region. There is a lesson here about Christ's headship over the church, and the husband's headship over his wife, of which that head covering was a visible symbol.

It is important for us to remember the line of authority that Paul is defending, even though in our society we have no such visible symbol. Nor is there a biblical need to adopt one, simply because we don't follow one already.