Are Christian women neglecting the command for head-coverings in church? Some consider this section of Scripture as completely cultural and identify all parts as the custom of contention (1 Cor 11:16). However, Christians cannot avoid that the apostle Paul commanded that Christians must maintain tradition just as delivered to them (1 Cor 11:2). Many believe that 1 Corinthians 11 teaches that women must wear cloth coverings hanging over their heads when practicing their faith around men. The interpretations of this passage vary among believers concerning whether the covering is spiritual, garment, or hair. This study draws observations from the Scriptures with consideration of historical background.
Covering and Glory
Long hair is the only covering that Paul specifically mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11. However, some women may not have long hair and need another covering. The text reveals, “But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering” (1 Cor 11:15). Verses 6 and 7 use the Greek word katakalupto, which literally means “to cover downward” (Gingrich and Danker’s lexicon, BDAG). A woman’s head being uncovered was the same personal shame as having her hair sheared or shaved (1 Cor 11:4–6).
Starting from verse 4, this passage is about what will personally shame the woman’s head. Verse 5 indicates that a personal shame for a woman to shear or shave her head. As other scriptures explain, the woman who elaborately arranged her hair uncovered her head and disregarded her God-given glory and God’s headship. Having long hair is a God-given glory to the woman (1 Cor 11:15). The Scriptures teach that the Christian woman should cover her head in subordination to God’s order of headship and thereby glorify God, Christ, and man (1 Cor 11:3–6). God made male and female in His image and yet He has given each a different glory. “Woman is the glory of man” because man is the “glory of God” (1 Cor 11:7).
Humility, Modesty, and Hair
The woman who washed Jesus’s feet demonstrated how a woman letting her hair down was an act of humility (Luke 7:36–50; cf. Matt 28:9). Lazarus’s sister, Mary of Bethany, demonstrated humility by wiping Jesus’s feet with her hair and anointing him with oil in preparation for his burial (John 12:1–8). In the Journal of Biblical Literature, Charles Cosgrove cited numerous ancient sources depicting how women let their hair down as an act of humility within the Greco-Roman and Jewish societies.[1]
Both Paul and Peter instructed modesty and humility among women in 1 Corinthians 11. In 1 Peter 3:1–6, Peter also applied caution to the external decorating of hair and clothing where a woman’s adornment must exist within her heart. Peter explained, “Your adornment must not be merely external — braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God” (1 Pet 3:3–4 NASB). The braiding of hair appears to mean putting up the hair against the head rather than hanging and covering the head. This practice of braiding with gold and peals demonstrated a lack of humility and modesty.
In Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Ferguson noted,
Portrait sculpture of the Flavian period gives specificity to the type of hairstyles and jewelry forbidden in 1 Timothy 2:9 and 1 Peter 3:3. The braiding of the hair was very elaborate and ostentatious, quite unlike the simple braid of modern times. The items mentioned in the biblical texts were characteristic of the wealthy upper classes and those who imitated them.[2]
God also instructed the Christian women in 1 Timothy 2:9–10, “Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided [woven] hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.” The apostle Paul described elaborately adorned hair as immodest, insubordinate, and not proper for a woman’s claim to godliness. The immodest women in the church at Corinth most probably had put their hair up and probably elaborately adorned their hair woven with gold and pearls demonstrating immodesty, wealth, and authority that was not proper in the church.[3]
Headship and Head-Covering
By not letting their hair hang down, women dishonored God’s headship by dishonoring the man who is head of woman. This headship is not dominance of one over another, but this is like God’s headship to Christ and Christ’s headship to man. Headship implied servant leadership (Mark 10:42–45). Christ led by service, and so men are to lead women by service. By elaborately braiding and adorning hair with gold and pearls, women behaved or appeared as wealthy and immodest, and thus some women exercised authority over men. Thereby, they appeared to reject the man’s God-given instruction to lead and teach because God created man first for this purpose (1 Tim 2:13–14; cf. 1 Cor 11:3, 7–9).
In the Greco-Roman world, the custom for powerful women of authority was to braid their hair with gold and pearls and dress as though higher than others. Pagan women in this time led worship to Diana and Dionysus, and thus women exercised power and influence through the cults.[4] Among the churches, some women arranged and adorned their hair with gold and pearls, and they did not let their long hair hang down to show the God-given glory of woman and the glory of man in woman (1 Cor 11:7, 15). The apostles taught that a woman’s hair was to demonstrate modesty and humility to glorify her God-given glory of man and God’s headship. However, the shame of a woman cutting her hair short was her personal shame. The Greek word for this “shame” is kataischuno appearing in verses 4 and 5, and this word specifically refers to a personal shame or humiliation among people. This word also appears in 1 Corinthians 11:22 where those who partook of the Lord’s Supper without waiting for other Christians were trying to humiliate and shame them (cf. 1 Cor 1:27).
Custom and Contention
The context of 1 Corinthians 11 is that a Christian is not to offend another’s conscience with one’s liberty (1 Cor 10:23–33). The message is a matter of modesty between men and women under the headship of God and Christ. Christian women must display Godly principles of modesty and humility even in dress. Women are not to shame their heads with claims of authority or shame of cutting her hair short. These Scriptures guide Christians to present God’s headship as God is head of Christ, Christ is head of man, and man is head of woman. Christians should remain considerate of demonstrating humility and modesty.
Because of contention, the apostle Paul affirmed that the churches of God have no such custom of women praying with their heads uncovered (1 Cor 11:13–16). Christians must avoid contention over customs. In 1 Corinthians 11:13, Paul expressed, “Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?” (NASB). The use of the word “proper” indicates whatever is for modesty and to respect authority. That same Greek word for “proper” also appears in 1 Timothy 2 to a related matter. In 1 Timothy 2:10, Paul revealed what is proper that Christian women are to adorn themselves with good works “as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.” The translators interpret “proper” from the Greek word prepo meaning “becoming,” “appropriate,” or “fitting” (Matt 3:15; Eph 5:3; Titus 2:1; Heb 2:10; 7:26). Therefore, these Christian women were to pray with their hair hanging to cover their heads as is proper and fitting for demonstrating the headship that God established. In this setting, these Christian women were to allow their hair to hang down in humility because long hair is a God-given covering and glory. In other words, women are to maintain feminine appearance especially in how they keep their hair.
Nature reveals that men and women differ in their pattern of hair. The apostle Paul exhorted, “Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering” (1 Cor 11:13–15). The apostle Paul observed that long hair for a man and cropped hair for a woman is a “disgrace” according to nature. Nature as God’s created order affects customs and culture despite society’s resistance.
Coffman’s Commentary
Furthermore, consider the insight of James B Coffman who comments upon a woman’s hair as her covering:
Verse 4
Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth his head.
Having his head covered…
Here is where the misunderstanding of this passage begins. This clause, as rendered in the popular versions, is commentary, not Bible. As Echols noted:
“Having his head covered” is a commentary, not a translation. Lenski translated the sense correctly: “having something down from his head.” What the “something” is is neither stated nor implied in 1 Corinthians 11:4.
The logical understanding of this would refer it to “long hair,” being long enough to hang down from the head, as clearly indicated by the apostles’ words a moment later: “If a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him” (1 Corinthians 11:14).
The ancients accepted Paul’s dictum on this and went so far as to define the length of hair that was considered an infraction of Paul’s words.
“The hair of the head may not grow so long as to come down and interfere with the eyes … cropping is to be adopted … let not twisted locks hang far down from the head, gliding into womanish ringlets.”
Significantly, the words “hang far down” strongly resemble Paul’s words “having something down from his head.” The above is from Clement of Alexandria and was written in the second century.[5]
However, some may ask about verses 5–6. These verses seem to imply that not covering with a garment is like a woman’s hair being sheared or shaved. Paul is simply affirming that short hair and hair drawn up on the head is the same as a cropped or shaved head. A literal translation is:
Every woman praying or prophesying with head uncovered disgraces her head; for this is also one and the same as being shaved. For if the woman is not covered, she must also become sheared; and if this is a disgrace to the woman to become sheared or shaved, she must remain covered. (1 Cor 11:5–6)
Coffman noted,
If Paul meant “hair,” why did he use the word “covered”? The answer is that in the vocabulary of the Old Testament “to uncover the head” was to shave off the hair. When Nadab and Abihu sinned (Leviticus 10:1ff), God commanded Aaron not to “uncover his head” in mourning at their death; and this meant not to cut off his hair (the customary sign of mourning). Job shaved his head when he learned his children were dead (Job 1:20). Many examples of this usage could be cited.[6]
“If it is a shame to a woman to be cropped or shaven, let her be covered” in verse 6 clearly refers to a covering of hair as seen in 1 Corinthians 11:15, “And if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her long hair is given to her for a covering.”
Because of the Angels
What about verse 10’s reference to angels: “because of the angels”? Verse 10 is referring to authority. This scripture shows how women should have authority on their heads. The woman who prophesies also receives revelation from God through angels to prophesy and angels also deliver prayers (Heb 2:2; Rev 1:1; 8:3–4). This instruction has to do with the woman’s service in prayer and teaching before God. She is to serve with apparent respect and modesty. Therefore, “every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered dishonors her head” (1 Cor 11:5).
By not covering her head, the Christian woman dishonors herself being that God created her as the glory of man and in the image of God. Paul revealed, “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” (1 Cor 11:3). The woman is subordinating to the man by her modesty and covering. Her hair hanging down is her glory for she is the glory of man. This is how the Christian woman honors the headship of God, Christ, and man.
[Last edited June 28, 2021]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Charles Cosgrove, “A Woman’s Unbound Hair,” JBL 124 (2005): 675–92.
- Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003) 97.”
- Ferguson reported, “In which cultures in the first centuries women wore veils in public, in what numbers, and with what significance are not perfectly clear now. Jewish sources rather uniformly call for women to be veiled in public, but Greek and Roman sources are mixed in their evidence. In classical Greece the veil was worn outside the house by women who had reached sexual maturity — married and young women of marriageable age, and Jewish sources may be read the same way. In depictions in a Greek wedding, the bride lifts her veil to her husband. A Roman woman on her wedding day was a given a red veil. Statuary makes clear that the Greco-Roman veil was the top of the garment pulled over the head; one should not think of the modern Arabic and Islamic veil that covers most of the face as well as the head. In Roman religion the men as well as women were veiled when offering a sacrifice. The Jewish custom for men to cover their heads when praying and studying the law is later than New Testament times” (97).
- Bruce Morton, Deceiving Winds, (Nashville: 21st Century Christian, 2009).
- James Burton Coffman, “Commentary on 1 Corinthians 11.” Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, <www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/1-corinthians-11.html> (Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, TX) 1983-1999.
- Ibid.
- Coffman perceived, “With her head unveiled…
The word here rendered ‘unveiled’ is [Greek: akatakaluptos]. ‘There is no intrinsic meaning in this word which suggests either the covering material or the object covered; it is simply a general word.’ (See under 1 Corinthians 11:15.) Only in 1 Cor. 11:15 does Paul mention any kind of garment ([Greek: peribolaion]) and even there he stated that the woman’s hair took the place of it. [Katakaluptos] means covered completely. [Akatakaluptos] means not completely covered. Thus again, the passage falls short of mentioning any kind of garment. To suppose that Paul here meant ‘mantle’ or ‘veil’ or any such thing is to import into this text what is not in it. We have seen that he was speaking of ‘hair’ in 1 Cor. 11:4; and that is exactly what he is speaking of here. ‘Not completely covered’ would then refer to the disgraceful conduct of the Corinthian women in cropping their hair, after the manner of the notorious Corinthian prostitutes; which, if they did it, was exactly the same kind of disgrace as if they had shaved their heads. It is crystal clear that Paul is not speaking of any kind of garment; because he said in 1 Cor. 11:15, below, ‘For her hair is given her instead of a covering.'”
The Breath of God 
Radical feminist lies were introduced by Roman Catholic idolatrous heretics through their Jesuit freemason axis to destroy innocent people to eternal hell fire (Revelation 21:8) by bringing them into catholic idolatry of intercession/veneration of saints.
Freemasonry infiltrated radical feminist lies in UK, USA and other originally Christian countries that abstained from catholic idolatry to save their souls from eternal hell fire. These freemasons were controlled by Catholic Jesuits. Thus when the society collapses by these radical feminist lies and promotion of homosexuality , Jesuits vainly thought they could present their idolatry of intercession/veneration of saints that send people to eternal hell fire as a solution.
Those who serve God almighty, are all Christians who abstain from catholic/orthodox idolatry of intercession/veneration of saints and all christians who abstain from feminist lies- female pastors and homosexual promotion in some protestant sects.
Rome can be identified as the mystery babylon from Daniel 9:26- which says people of the “prince” (beast/antichrist) who will come (in the future) will destroy the City and the sanctuary- Jerusalem destroyed by romans under vespasian in AD70. Thus people of the prince to come/antichrist are Romans. Rome is also the city with 7 hills and 7 rulers – Roman Ceasers (Revelation 17: 9-11) at the time of writing of Revelation by Apostle John which is about AD 68, when ceaser Galba ruled the Roman empire.
Notice that in Revelation 7: 11 God says of 7 kings that ruled from the city of which 5 have fallen, one is still ruling, while one is yet to come who will only rule for a short period. These kings are roman ceasers of 5 have fallen at the time when Apostle John was given this Revelation from God at about 68 AD while ceaser Galba was ruling Rome . Galba ruled Rome from June 68 to January 69 AD. The next ceaser Otho ruled only for a very short period , that is from January 69 to April 69 AD. So the beast (antichrist) is one among the five fallen kings which are Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius Caligula, Claudius and Nero. Among these ceaser Nero is probably the antichrist/beast as only his numerology is 666 when transliterated to Hebrew – Revelation 13:18.
If God’s eternal word says Rome – Mystery Babylon In her was found the blood of prophets and of God’s holy people, of all who have been slaughtered on the earth, then there could be deceptions and subversive activities by Rome for global power consolidation .
Apart from radical feminist lies that caused much destruction in western society , Vatican- Rome -created Islamic lie for its power consolidation in middle east through Warraqah- Kadijah axis. Thus all these people killed by Islam through terrorism in the last 1400 years of its existense is done by Rome – Vatican.
Again Rome – Vatican Jesuits planted the Evolution lie through Darwin’s grandfather Erasmus Darwin a freemason controlled by Catholic Jesuits. Evolution lie has made the societies collapse by causing people to be deceived by idolatry and homosexuality (Romans 1:18-32).
Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin was a very early influence on him. Erasmus Darwin was a freemason and was taught by jesuits the lie that species changed over time and thus evertything was formed without God’s supernatural creation and he indirectly shared this lie with his grandson through his peoetry and other literary works although he died a few years before Charles Darwin was born. Instead of publishing his ideas in a traditional book, Erasmus originally put his thoughts about evolution into poetry form. Eventually, he did publish a book about how adaptations result in speciation. These ideas, passed down to his grandson made him fall for the lie of evolution through natural selection in which evertything was formed over vast periods of time with slow changes (natural selection) , without God’s supernatural creation.
Charles Darwin was also influenced by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck a French catholic who was taught in a Jesuit Seminary to spread lie of naturalism. Naturalism is the idea or belief that only natural laws and forces (as opposed to supernatural ones) operate in the universe thus vainly trying to exclude the truth and reality of supernatural creation and interventions of the almighty living eternal God.
Again Jesuits planted communist lie through freemason Friedrich Engels who controlled Karl Marx. Socialist Communist lie was initially promoted by Vatican with the aim of complete extermination of Jews whom catholics even today consider an obstacle for their global power consolidation just like their muslim slaves. Result was massacre of 6 million Jews by National Socialist Hitler and 25 million slavic people ( 20 million by the Jesuit Stalin and 5 million by the catholic Hitler). Add to this countless other innocent people killed around the world such as by communist dictators in Cambodia, China , Cuba etc.
The fact that roman catholic sect created and actively supported the Nazi ( National Socialist German Workers Party ) party is cofirmed by Hitler’s own words in 1941 that he was born a catholic and will die a catholic. Also the catholic Zentrum party ( Centre party that even exists today as catholic extremist party in Germany ) played an active role in rise of Hitler and his Nazi party as confirmed by all historians and scholars of the WW2 period. The staunch support for Hitler and his Nazi ( National Socialist German Workers Party ) party by catholic extremist dictators like Franco of Spain, Mussolini of Italy, catholic extremist groups like Ustase ( Ustashe ) in Croatia- balkans and the silent support of Pope and his office for Hitler and his Nazi ( National Socialist German Workers Party ) party also cofirms the reality that the roman catholic sect created and actively supported the Nazi ( National Socialist German Workers Party ) party.
Stalin’s involvement with the socialist movement (or, to be more exact, the branch of it that later became the communist movement) began at the Jesuit seminary at Tiflis at the age of 15. Stalin joined a Georgian Social-Democratic organization, and began propagating marxism. Stalin quit the Jesuit seminary in 1899 just before his final examinations; official biographies preferred to state that he was expelled. He then worked for a decade with the political underground before emerging with Lenin in USSR poltics.
This mystery Babylon – Rome which decieved all world with her idolatry, lies and sexual immorality and other sins will be destroyed in one day during the 7 year great tribulation period as revealed in – Revelation 17:16-19:10. And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. – Revelation 17:16.
I am interested in the interpretation of this scripture with regards to African women’s hair.
The African woman should cover her head when praying or prophesying ( 1 Corinthians 11:5-10). I understand praying and prophesying to represent worship Just as coming together on the first day of the week to break bread (Lords Supper) takes in all other acts of worship.
Women are allowed to do all other public ministry in church like apostolic healing/miracle ministries, evangelization, teaching (both Men and women,but authoritarian teaching of men cannot be done by women), giving testimony,music ministry,prophesying. But while doing these ministries they must cover their head with veil to show that she is in submission to God.(1 Corinthians 11:2-16). This is to show that the women doing God’s ministry is doing it in submission to the Godly order of God-Christ-Man-Woman and also wear appropriate clothing with modesty and self control – 1 Thimothy 2:9-11.
Why this covering required for women?- Answer is beacuse of the order of creation in which man is the head of woman and head of every man is Christ and head of Christ is God the Father-1 Corinthians11:3 and beacuse of this man is the glory of God (Christ) , woman is the glory of man-1 Corinthians11:7, if woman who doesn’t cover her head with veil , to show that she is in submission to God , while praying or prophesying in public it will cause doubt among angels ( 1 Corinthians 11:10-2/3rd of angels who obey God ), for angels are servent spirits sent out to help those who are being saved ( Christians ) and angels like to look into this salvation work of God-1 Peter1:12.
This is the meaning of scriptures from 1 Corinthians 11:1 – 16 – The natural glorious state of Man is without covering ( with natural short hair ) which points to the supernatural / spiritual reality that man reflects glory of Lord Jesus Christ ( glory of God ) and therefore man doesn’t require a head covering in front of God.
Likewise a woman’s natural glorious state is with a covering ( her natural long hair) which points to the supernatural / spiritual reality that woman reflects the glory of man which needs to be blocked / covered in the presence of God with a head covering veil. For this reason and because of angels (angels are servent spirits of God, sent out to help those who are being saved and angels like to look into things of the church – 1 Peter 1:12 ) women should have authority on their heads in the form of a veil covering -v.10
So every women who pray/prophesy (preach) without covering their head with veil , dishonors her head- husband, God and angels. It’s same as being shaven because dishonor in supernatural / spiritual points back to dishonor in the natural – which means women has to cut off her hair with scissors (shorn) or razor (shave) -v5,6.
Likewise every man who bring dishonor in the spiritual by covering his head by veil should also have long hairs,since dishonor in the spiritual , points back to dishonor in the natural.
This covering for women is not needed while women is not projecting the glory of God to other people. That is only when a woman is doing public christian ministry which involves praying and prophesying and or deliberate active private prayer she needs to be cover her head with veil. Likewise when a man does public christian ministry involving prayer and prophesy or deliberate active private prayer he should not cover his head.
In Ephesians 6:18 and 1 Thessalonians 5:17 we are instructed to pray at all times in the spirit and to pray without ceasing respectievely, but these scriptures means living a Holy Spirit filled life which is in constant communication with God or in simpler words walking with God at all times rather than deliberate active prayer.
In Romans 8:26-27 we read that – Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
So only when women projects the glory of God ( as in public praying/prophesying and deliberate active personal or private prayer ) she needs to block the glory of man projected by her , by covering it with veil .
In 1 Corinthians 11:14,15 we read – Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
In original greek text the word for “for” in verse 1 Corinthians 11:15 is “anti” it can be translated variously as for, upon etc. according to context . In John 1:16 (NASB, WEB) – From his fullness we all received grace upon grace. So in John 1:16 the greek word “anti” means – added upon or complimentary. This is the meaning in 1 Corinthians 11:15 also. So correct translation of 1 Corinthians 11:15 would be – But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her as compliment of veil .
So in the natural state God has given long hair to women which points to the reality that woman needs to covered in the prescence of God as she reflects the glory of man. Since this long hair points to this reality that woman needs to be covered in the prescence of God with veil as she reflects the glory of man, her long hair is compliment of veil. Since the long hair is also a part of the body of woman who is the glory of man , the long hair also needs to be covered in the presence of God and so long hair cannot be used intstead of veil. So the correct meaning of the greek word “anti” in 1 Corinthians 11:15 is “as compliment or added upon” and not “instead of”.
Notice that Apostle Paul could have used the Greek word for long hair – “koma” that he uses in 1 Corinthians 11:14 and 15 in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 and 13. But instead he used the words denoting down of head – “kata kephales” in verse 4 , undown cover of the head – “akatakalupto te kephale” in verse 5 , not is being down covered – “au katakaluptetai” and let her being down covered – “katakaluptestho” in verse 6, to be being down covered the head- “katakaluptesthai ten kephalen” in verse 7 and undown covered – “akatakalupton” in verse 13.
Thus we clearly understand that the meaning of greek word “anti” used in 1 Corinthians 11:15 is “in addition to” and not “instead of”, because if long hair could be used instead of cloth head covering (greek – peribolaiou in verse 15) then Apostle Paul should have used the greek word for long hair “koma” in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 and 13.
Also Apostle Paul didn’t use greek word for cloth head covering – “peribolaiou” in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 and 13. This invalidates the meaning of greek word “anti” as being opposite of head cloth in verse 15 as some ignorantly claim. Also if anti” is used as being opposite of cloth head covering – “peribolaiou” in verse 15 then long hair cannot be “doxa”- glory as mentioned in verse 15 , rather it would be “atimia” – dishonour as we see in verse 14 regarding men having long hair – “koma”.
Apostle Paul didn’t use the word for cloth head covering – “peribolaiou” in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7 and 13 because he needed to give the message that long hair – “koma” is a covering in addition to cloth head covering – “peribolaiou” as he confirms in 1 Corinthians 14 and 15.
Also not that the covering of head is not some hat or crown as some ignorantly claim, but it is something that come down from the head – and cover like long hair – down of head – “kata kephales” in verse 4 , undown cover of the head – “akatakalupto te kephale” in verse 5 , not is being down covered – “au katakaluptetai” and let her being down covered – “katakaluptestho” in verse 6, to be being down covered the head- “katakaluptesthai ten kephalen” in verse 7 and undown covered – “akatakalupton” in verse 13. Greek word “kata” means “down from” , that is it is something that come down from the head as long hair or veil – cloth covering of head and not hat or crown as some ignorantly claim.
Obeying of this simple and seemingly unimportant commandment of God in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, requiring women to cover their head with veil while they pray or prophesy publicly and in deliberate active private prayer, is the key to Christian revival all across the world.
For public prayer and prophesying and deliberate private active prayer women’s dressing should have always a cloth head covering – veil accessory. According to 1 Timothy 2:9-11 women should dress with modesty and sanity. Many of the modern western dressings tend to be unisex cross dressings and immodest dressings which are considered sinful in God’s eternal word in Deutronomy 22:5 and in 1 Timothy 2:9-11.
May God bless you to see the reality and truth
Presumably if a headscarf isn’t available a dog collar and lead will do in its place to show a woman’s subjection to men and to ensure she is degraded. No wonder so many incels enjoy religion. As Daly said when god is male, the male becomes god. Dream on boys.
Hi Janine,
How did you come to these conclusions? Do you believe that man and woman being made in God’s likeness is degrading? How would you reason that men being created in God’s glory and women in the glory of men is degrading to any gender? Would you also conclude that Jesus being a male degrades women?
I look forward to your reply.
Long hair is indeed the natural head covering.
Some here have twisted the argument saying if short hair is a shameful thing then women should shave of all their hair- God’s word doesn’t say such a thing – it is your vain illogical imaginations that twist and corrupt God’s word. – 1 Corinthians 11:5-6.
In 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, God’s word says if it is shameful for a women to cut or shave off her hair then she should cover her head with long hair or veil.
This long hair covering is the natural God given universal principle (1 Corinthians 11:15) which Angels also looks into – 1 Corinthians 11:10.
Verse 14 says that nature teaches long hair to be a disgrace for a man. However, what about the Nazirites in the Old Testament? They took a vow not to have their head shaved Numbers 6:5 says,
“5 “All the days of his vow of separation, no razor shall touch his head. Until the time is completed for which he separates himself to the Lord, he shall be holy. He shall let the locks of hair of his head grow long.” (ESV)
The most famous example of a Nazirite was probably Samson. The Lord blessed him with great strength until his head was shaved, then the Lord left him.
Does anyone have any insight on how this fits together with 1 Corinthians 11:14?
Michael, I think you have noted the Nazirite exception.
I was raised that a woman was not allowed to cut her hair. Are we allowed to trim or get a haircut?
I have read nothing of not being able to cut hair in the Scriptures.
We see pictures of Jesus as white with long hair my study by being African Hebrew show me that Jesus was black with cutly wooly low cut hair howevet if he had long hair then being s follower why could not have one also have long hair?
It is a myth that Jesus had long hair. No one has pictures of Jesus. History tells us men during the time of Jesus wore short hair. Paul the apostle points out a lesson from nature how that it is a shame for man to wear long hair (1st Corinthians 11:14). Men should look like men and women should look like women. We must allow what is revealed in God’s word to lead us, not pictures and painting based on the imaginations of me. Thanks for your question.
Men’s hair is to be short in comparison with women’s hair, which should not be cut short.
As a man of northern European ancestry, if I did not cut my hair it would be down to my shoulders. My wife and daughters do not cut their hair short. Their hair is down to the small of their backs, even longer. They do on occasion clip split ends off.
My eldest daughter cut her hair very short as a donation to make wigs for women who have lost their hair to chemotherapy. This is an honorable sacrifice. Her purpose was not to appear “unisex” or “neuter.” She has not cut it again; is letting it grow out.
A Black of African ancestry may have short woolly hair. That is what God endowed her with.
You are right. I don’t know who’s idea it was to come up with Jesus being a long-haired white man. He was a Jew and at the time they had short hair. He was neither white, black, Chinese, or Native American.
Pls crosscheck do Greek septuagint for 1st corinthians 11 vs 4 as discussed word “un” was being omitted .Pls go back for the original Greek translation of the New testament.
What do you mean? A textual variant?
πᾶς ἀνὴρ προσευχόμενος ἢ προφητεύων κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ·
This passage translates: “Every man praying or prophesying having something hanging down from his head dishonors his head.”
Why has God not preserved the New Testament with the precision that the extremely fastidious Jewish scribes preserved the Old (Torah, Psalms, Proverbs, prophets)?
Can you clarify what you are saying?
Scholars have discussed and argued over the differences in the ancient copies of the NT for centuries. How are we confident that the Greek copies we have today are accurate?
Thank You for you commentary. I have always taught in this manner. I am a woman. I was a Pastor for twenty some years. My Husband was my covering I am retired now We now have a young women leading she is covered by her husband. God is so good and loves us much. why will we not live in our liberty in Christ.
I understand what you mean. We are on different camps here: With headcoverings gone, female pastors will come. I am not questioning your personal sincerity and faith here, Ms Flowers, but the concept. Biblical leadership is male, confessed by the veil. When the churches of Christ let go of it in the 1960ies they most probably thought itt’s just a debatable symbol. But since I have herard a female pastor calling God “Parent” instead of “Father” and since the Gender-Ideooogy got a foothold in the churches, I am vehemntly FOR the restauration of the biblical headcovering as it was understood and practiced for well over 1900 years. As a restaurationist I cannot cope with progressivism and modernism anway, since I view this as a disloyalty to our Lawgiver Christ.
Amen! When we depart from God’s pattern, this is what happens. The Gender-neutral movement has taken hold and it all started with women’s liberation. People do not respect God’s order of headships any longer. Do they think they will not have to answer for this on the day of Judgment?
Women’s liberation, feminism, was started by women homosexuals (“Lesbians”) in the mid-1800s. The Socialist-Communist movement was started in the same period, with many members of each members of both feminism and Marxism.
One of the priorities of Marxism is to break up marriage and the personal family, shifting individuals’ loyalty to the state (“proletariat”).
Sexual perversions help break up marriages and prevent the unmarried to desire marriage.
That’s very true. Karl Marx professed in the Communist Manifesto that the family and religion are kept in support the bourgeoisie and these must decline in support of common property assumed by proletariats whose revolution is to unionize workers.