Sunday, November 10, 2013

Why Women should not wear head coverings?

I found this article very interesting. I give my comments in red.



1Cor 11:3 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. 
1Cor 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 
1Cor 11:5 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. 
1Cor 11:6 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. 

1Cor 11:7 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.
1Cor 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 
1Cor 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 
1Cor 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.1Cor 11:11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. 
1Cor 11:12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. 

1Cor 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 

1Cor 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 

1Cor 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 

1Cor 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. 

Some people have misinterpreted 1 Corinthians 11 and believe that it is commanding women to wear hats or "head-coverings" of some kind. In this chapter, God is dealing with gender roles and the authority that a man has over his wife. In verse 3, the authority that a man has over his wife is likened unto the authority that God has over a man. God is the "head" (authority figure) of the man, and the man is the "head" (authority figure) of the woman. This matches perfectly with what the Bible says in Ephesians 5:

Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 

As we continue in 1 Corinthians 11, verses 4-6 state:

1Cor 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 1Cor 11:5 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. 
1Cor 11:6 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. 

According to these verses women should have their heads "covered," and men should not. In fact, if a woman's head is not covered, that is just as bad as if she were "shorn" or "shaven." Notice that the Bible says that it is a "shame" for a woman to be shorn or shaven. We all know what "shaven" means, but what does the word "shorn" mean? The Bible uses the word "shorn" one other time in the New Testament:

Acts 18:18 And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shornhis head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.

The vow that the Bible is referring to here is a Nazarite vow from the Old Testament. Notice what the Bible commands about the Nazarite vow in Numbers 6:

Num 6:5 All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the LORD, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow. 

Num 6:18 And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings. 

Once again, the Bible is its own dictionary. Being "shorn" is another word for being "shaven." Paul having his head shaved with a razor is referred to as him being "shorn." Therefore God is saying that a woman being "uncovered" is just as shameful as her shaving her head completely bald as Paul did in Acts 18.

So, what is this "covering"?

1Cor 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered
1Cor 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is ashame unto him? 

1Cor 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 

According to verses 13-15, a woman is "uncovered" if she does not have "long hair." A woman is therefore commanded to have long hair, and a man is commanded not to have long hair.

Those who believe in women wearing external "head-coverings" or bonnets on their heads will argue that even though long hair is a covering (indefinite article), women still need to wear an additional covering or bonnet on their heads. This is easily disproved with the Bible. The same passage that tells women to be covered tells men not to be covered. Therefore, if this were talking about something other than long hair (i.e. a "head-covering" or bonnet), it would be a sin for a man to wear it while praying or prophesying. This is directly in contradiction with many Old Testament passages that command the Old Testament priests to wear bonnets and mitres while ministering in the priests office:


Exo 28:40 And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty.
Exo 28:41 And thou shalt put them upon Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office. 

Exo 29:9 And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest's office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons.

Exo 39:27 And they made coats of fine linen of woven work for Aaron, and for his sons,
Exo 39:28 And a mitre of fine linen, and goodly bonnets of fine linen, and linen breeches of fine twined linen,
Lev 8:13 And Moses brought Aaron's sons, and put coats upon them, and girded them with girdles, and put bonnets upon them; as the LORD commanded Moses. 

Eze 44:17 And it shall come to pass, that when they enter in at the gates of the inner court, they shall be clothed with linen garments; and no wool shall come upon them,whiles they minister in the gates of the inner court, and within. 
Eze 44:18 They shall have linen bonnets upon their heads, and shall have linen breeches upon their loins; they shall not gird themselves with any thing that causeth sweat. 

Notice that the priest's clothing consisted of coats, britches (pants), and bonnets. Why would God tell us that "nature itself" teaches us that a woman should wear a head-covering, and that men should not, when he commanded over and over again that the priests (who were men of course) were required to wear bonnets when they prayed and prophesied in the priests office! The covering referred to in 1 Corinthians 11 is long hair, as defined in the passage itself; it is not a bonnet or head-covering.
If we are using the special priests' garments to interpret 1Cor.11, then men should wear bonnets in church today.
If we don't are we in contradiction to these OT passages? It makes no sense. The women of the OT wore head coverings. Nature doesn't teach that a man should not wear a head covering, but not have long hair. 
This is consistent with the Old Testament, which commanded the priests not to have long hair:

Eze 44:20 Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll their heads. 

They were commanded to be neither completely bald nor long-haired, but rather to "poll" (i.e. cut short the hair on) their heads.

 A woman's hair is given to HER for a covering, a man's hair is NOT given to Him for a covering. There is a reason God gave that distinction. This is not rightly dividing.

Other proponents of "head-coverings" on women will say that if you "go back to the Greek," you'll see that the word for "covering" in verse 15 is different than the other words used for "covering" in the passage. Of course, they are not fluent in Greek, but because the words look a lot different, they assume that they must be talking about completely different things. However, there are many examples in our language of words that look completely different as different parts of speech, but that are actually the same. Here are a few examples:

- having faith (noun) means that you believe (verb).
- being undressed (adjective) means you aren't wearing any clothes (noun).
- doing something manually (adverb) means that you did it by hand (noun).
- thing that are lunar (adjective) have to do with the moon (noun).

You see how identical words can look completely different as different parts of speech. Therefore a woman can be uncovered (adjective - ακατακαλυπτω) because she is not wearing a covering (noun - περιβολαιου). Just because the words look the same in English does not mean that they will look the same in Greek. Apparently these head-covering advocates who couldn't even order a meal in a Greek restaurant think they know more than the KJV translators. This is why one should always beware when anyone has to "go back to the Greek" to prove their doctrine.
I don't agree with trying to go to the Greek either. The KJB interprets itself. Greek mumbo-jumbo is a weak argument for either side in this case, but there is nothing wrong with studying the Greek to gain a fuller understanding of a passage.
Now that we understand what "covering" is referring to in 1 Corinthians 11 (i.e. long hair-Not so fast, we haven't come up with a satisfactory answer yet), let's go back and look at the passage with this definition in mind:

1Cor 11:3 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. 
1Cor 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered 
(i.e. having long hair), dishonoureth his head (i.e. dishonours Jesus Christ - see previous verse). 
1Cor 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered (i.e. with short hair) dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. (i.e. if a woman doesn't have long hair, she might as well be bald!)
1Cor 11:6 For if the woman be not covered 
(i.e. she has short hair), let her also be shorn : but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. (i.e. in God's eyes, it is just as much of a shame for a woman to have short hair, as it is for her to be completely shaved bald). I agree completely with this statement.
But it is not all-inclusive of God's meaning here.
You may say, "Okay, Pastor Anderson, I get it. Women do not have to wear head-coverings, but they do have to have long hair. But can't they wear head-coverings if they want to? Why are you against head-coverings?"

I am against head-coverings on women for two reasons:

1. I am against head-coverings because they associate you with the wrong crowd spiritually. Every church or pastor I have ever seen or known that taught that women were commanded to wear head-coverings was wrong on the Gospel. A blanket statement is very likely to be untrue.  I have never seen or heard of a church that taught that women must wear head-coverings that believed that salvation was by faith alone.I have been to many. Maybe Pastor Anderson doesn't get around much, so I guess I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. The churches and teachers promoting head-coverings on women teach a works-based salvation in one of the following forms:

- some teach you can lose your salvation 
A false teaching, but to say that this means all their doctrine is wrong is complete fallacy.
- some teach you must repent of your sins in order to be saved
What does Bro. Anderson believe? You don't have to stop sinning, but you must repent, which means literally "change your mind" before you are going to accept Christ. Acts 26:20 "that they should repent and turn to God"
- some teach you must surrender your life to Christ in order to be saved
- some teach Calvinist doctrines of "grace" which teach that if you don't have works, you aren't saved, and that God is the one who chooses who will be saved and who will be damned (TULIP).
Again false, but does this mean everything they teach is false? That would not stand in a courtroom.
The Bible on the other hand states that salvation is by faith alone:

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. 
Rom 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 
Rom 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 
Rom 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, thatwhosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 

I have never seen or heard of any church that preached Bible salvation that taught women to wear head-coverings. Here we go again. Therefore, wearing a head-covering will lump you in with unsaved false teachers such as the Amish, Pentecostals, etc. Not all amish are unsaved. I've known them personally; pentacostals too. Are we to be concerned about what we MIGHT be lumped with or what God, who sees our hearts, thinks?

Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. 

1Thess 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 
It's going pretty far to call a head covering an appearance of evil.

2. I am against head-coverings because they are not modest apparel. Yes, you got that right, I said that they are not modest apparel:

1Tim 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 
1Tim 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 

The word "modest" in these verses is often misinterpreted to only mean "not revealing" or "not promiscuous." However, there is nothing revealing or promiscuous about broided hair, gold, or pearls. This passage is telling ladies not to dress in a way that draws attention to themselves. Their good works should be what stand out, not their appearance, clothing, hair, or jewelry. Instead of a "Christian uniform," it should be thegood works of Christian ladies that stand out to the world.

mod·est

[mod-ist]
–adjective
1.having or showing a moderate or humble estimate of one's merits, importance, etc.; free from vanity, egotism, boastfulness, or great pretensions.

Women who wear head-coverings or Amish-looking dresses are doing so in order to purposely look different and stand out. We are not a judge of men's hearts.There are many beautiful and stylish dresses for women to wear that are very modest and and not revealing whatsoever, but that do not purposely draw attention and cry out, "Look at me! Look how 'modest' I am!" Maybe, if they are strutting around with their nose up, but that means the problem is their failure to be shamefaced and sober. And if they are doing it in obedience to their father or husband, you'd better watch your judgement of modest women.  Purposely drawing attention to yourself is neither modesty nor humility!Beautiful and stylish clothes, designed by the world, ARE to draw attention. We are to be a "peculiar people" 1 Peter 2. That means strange, different. God has always wanted his people to look different and stand out, men and women, in the countenance and the clothing, in appearance and actions. 

If ladies who practice "head-covering" were truly just trying to obey scripture and not draw attention to themselves, then why not wear a "head-covering" something like this:


or this:

(Pictures changed, but the same concepts) These are originally men's working headgear, and so are not very suggestive of the proper, honored role of a woman.Instead, this is what you usually see:


or this:

What about this?

Conclusion:Ladies are commanded by the Bible to have long hair. They are not commanded to wear an external head covering of any kind. If they do wear one, people will probably associate them with religions that preach a false Gospel.
Bro. Anderson failed to look at a couple of texts that are too important to be ignored. They are both Old Testament, but they are principles that have not been changed in the New Testament, as the Aaronic priesthood has.

1. Numbers 5:18 If a man thought his wife had been unfaithful, he brought her to the priest. And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head... The symbol of her husband's authority was removed. Her head was not shaved.

2. Isaiah 47:2 A Judgement. Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers.  The sense of the word is shame, judgement. Uncovering locks means taking an article off the hair. What the Lord told Babylon in judgement is what the world, and sadly many Christians, are saying today. Remove the symbol of authority under your father or husband. Wear short dresses that reveal the leg, and then eventually even more.

I did not grow up in covering-wearing circles and did not believe it was necessary to use it, until I prayerfully sat down and studied it out fully.

4 comments:

Gregory Bush said...

Well put Mr. P.
On the point of modesty. I was always taught that things were not modest if they draw attention away from the eyes, which are the windows to the soul.
Also, we are supposed to be in the world, but not of the world. So why shouldn't we look different, men and women?

Greg

Jamie Parfitt said...

You aren't going to like my comment, but here it is:

It should be up to the husband or father.

1Cor 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
1Cor 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

HER HAIR IS GIVEN FOR A COVERING. What does that mean? If long hair cannot be considered enough of a covering, what does this verse mean? I can't even tell how long a woman's hair is when she has it hidden in an official religious covering. What is the definition of long hair?

Mom

Elliott Parfitt said...

Thanks Mom you said it. If a man doesn't want his wife/daughter to wear one, she would be violating 1 Cor. 11 to wear one. Hair is A covering but that is an indefinite article. I prefer coverings that still show that the hair is long. The glory of young men is strength, which is why we should "veil" our muscles. You get my drift.

Jamie Parfitt said...

Hey, thanks. Yes, I do. We need to think seriously about how our dress affects the weak (which is just about all of us).

Love, Mom