A Study of I Corinthians 11 Pastor Rex Deckard Calvary Apostolic Church Using materials adapted from Daniel Seagraves “A Study of I Corinthians 11:2- 16”

Background to the Corinthian letter Apparently Paul wrote this letter to answer certain questions that had arisen in the Church in Corinth. He deals with a variety of issues in the Epistle.

Issues included…. Taking brethren to court Eating food offered to idols Proper administration of the Lord’s Supper Fornication Marriage Giving Self Indulgence

It is possible that he addressed the questions in some kind of order, perhaps dealing with weightier issues first.

He first establishes that he is not expecting anything from them that he is not himself doing. Also, he introduces the chapter with a statement about the order of spiritual authority. (1 Corinthians 11:1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

He then gives a commendation (1 Corinthians 11:2) Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. “ordinances” ( paradosis ) may also be translated as ‘teachings’ or traditions

The major focus is on authority and submission. Notice Ephesians 5…. (1 Corinthians 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;

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. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

I Peter 3:1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; …. 5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: ….. 7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

I Corinthians 11:3 ….and the head of Christ is God. This does not denote two in the godhead but rather the manifestation of flesh (Christos) and the invisible deity, or Spirit. Jesus Himself said “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28) with respect to His humanity, but could also say, “He which hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9) with respect of His divinity.

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. “Head covered” refers to the literal head, while “dishonoureth his/her head” may refer to the literal head OR the one who is their head in terms of authority

The literal Greek translation of “having his head covered” is “ kata kephales echon” It means “having the (hair) hanging down” (if in fact the term covering refers to hair, as it appears to in the context of the chapter.)

Is the covering hair, or is the covering a veil? Verse 4-7 uses the Greek word “katakalupto” which some have translated literally “veil” but it literally means “kata”= “down from” and “kalupto ”=“ to cover”

To assume this ‘covering’ referred to a hat or a veil does not make sense in the context that in verse 14 Paul literally assumes the covering is “komao” (to wear tresses of hair:--have long hair) Further, if the covering were a headdress or veil, he would not begin the discussion of it being cut or shaved, as that would make no sense if he wasn’t referring to hair.

There is little to no Scriptural foundation for veil wearing in the Old or New Testament Veils were introduced through the Ishtar cult Pagan Romans and Greeks may have been veil wearers In some instances, prostitutes were identified by veils The modern use of veils is traced through Islam, not through Judaism or Christianity

(1 Corinthians 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. The word “shorn” is the Greek word “keiro” which simply means “to have one’s hair cut” without respect to how much is cut. We have two things to ascertain from this. First, the amount of cutting does not matter. It is either cut, or uncut. Long hair is simply uncut hair, regardless of actual length.

Second, Paul is saying that if a woman has cut hair, they should continue in the Church, but stop cutting her hair because it is a disgrace to her head (literal) and to those she is in submission to (figurative).

“if a woman is presently uncovered because she has cut her hair, she should be permitted (“let” KJV) even to be in that condition (of being shorn) while enjoying the fellowship of the church. But since it is a shame for her to be in that condition (of being shorn or shaven), she should allow her hair to grow again.” Another way of translating verse 6 would be, “if a woman is presently uncovered because she has cut her hair, she should be permitted (“let” KJV) even to be in that condition (of being shorn) while enjoying the fellowship of the church. But since it is a shame for her to be in that condition (of being shorn or shaven), she should allow her hair to grow again.” ~Seagraves

(1 Corinthians 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. 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. Paul again references back that the fundamental discussion is not about coverings and hair, it is about what they symbolize, which is submission to those we wish to glorify

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (1 Corinthians 11:10) For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

Interpretation #1 A woman with her covering (uncut hair) has power due to her submission to authority, and so she is protected Angels and Spirits which have little control over her. In the NIV, this verse is translated, “ because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.”

Interpretation #2 The Fall of the Angels which followed Lucifer was due to rebellion- for God to then allow rebellion in men and women would give them cause to accuse God of not being Just and Fair.

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. Paul seems to insert this verse to remind the Church that men and women are in fact equal before God in terms of their relationship with Him, even though their roles are different.

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. The obvious question is, What is Long?

Long hair means uncut It does not require a specific length since that measurement would exclude since physical and hereditary factors greatly influence the length of uncut hair. “For a covering” means exactly that. The hair (not some artificial headdress) is used AS the covering.

The NIV translates it as thus…. 14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.

Thus long hair on a woman and short hair on a man: Brings power over the Angels Brings glory to them Brings glory to those in authority over them Is a sign of submission

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge explains the situation in Bible times: “Women never cut their hair (cf.Jeremiah 7:29), and long hair was their greatest ornament. To cut off a woman’s hair…was the greatest contumely (humiliation).”

(1 Corinthians 11:16) But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. The NIV translates it clearer when it says, “If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice-- nor do the churches of God.”