- Exodus 28:40-43
40 "For Aaron's sons, make tunics, sashes, and
special head coverings that are glorious and beautiful.41 Clothe your brother, Aaron, and his
sons with these garments, and then anoint and ordain them. Consecrate them so
they can serve as my priests.42 Also
make linen undergarments for them, to be worn next to their bodies, reaching
from their hips to their thighs.43
These must be worn whenever Aaron and his sons enter the Tabernacle or approach
the altar in the Holy Place to perform their priestly duties. Then they will
not incur guilt and die. This is a permanent law for Aaron and all his
descendants after him.
- Exodus 29:9
9 Wrap the sashes around the waists of Aaron and his
sons, and put their special head coverings on them. Then the
right to the priesthood will be theirs by law forever. In this way, you will
ordain Aaron and his sons.
- Leviticus 8:13
13 Next Moses presented Aaron's sons. He clothed them in their
tunics, tied their sashes around them, and put their special head
coverings on them, just as the LORD had commanded him.
- 1
Corinthians 11: the Judeo-Christian purpose for head coverings
2 I am so glad
that you always keep me in your thoughts, and that you are following the
teachings I passed on to you.3 But
there is one thing I want you to know: The head of every man is Christ, the head
of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.4 A man
dishonors his head if he covers his head while praying or prophesying.5 But a
woman dishonors her head if she prays or prophesies without a covering on her
head, for this is the same as shaving her head.6 Yes, if she refuses to
wear a head covering, she should cut off all her hair! But since it is shameful for a
woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, she should wear a covering. 7 A man should not wear anything on his head when worshiping,
for man is made in God's image and reflects God's glory. And woman reflects
man's glory.8 For the first man
didn't come from woman, but the first woman came from man.9 And man was not made for woman,
but woman was made for man.10 For this reason, and because the angels are
watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under
authority. 11 But among
the Lord's people, women are not independent of men, and men are not
independent of women.12 For although the first woman came from man, every other
man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God. 13
Judge for yourselves. Is it right for a woman to pray to God in public without
covering her head?14 Isn't it
obvious that it's disgraceful for a man to have long hair?15 And isn't long hair a woman's pride and joy? For it
has been given to her as a covering.16 But if anyone wants to argue about this, I simply say that we have no other custom than
this, and neither do God's other churches.
Order at the Lord's Supper
17 But in the following
instructions, I cannot praise you. For it sounds as if more harm than good is
done when you meet together.[1]
It was the Greek custom (and so that at Corinth) for men in
worship to be uncovered; whereas the Jews wore the Talith, or veil, to show
reverence before God, and their unworthiness to look on Him.
(Isa
6:2): Attending him were mighty
seraphim, each having six wings. With two wings they covered their faces,
with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew.
- International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Covering, for the Head:
kuv’-er-ing,
(peribolaion): Mentioned in the New Testament only in 1Co 11:15: "For her
hair is given her for a covering," literally, "something cast
round," probably equivalent to "veil." Read in the light of the
context: "Every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled
dishonoreth her head" (verse 5). The meaning would seem to be that Nature
itself, in providing women with a natural veil, has taught the lesson
underlying the prevailing custom, that woman should not be unveiled in the
public assemblies.
Written by George B. Eager
- Easton's Bible Dictionary Head-Dress:
Not in common use among the
Hebrews. It is first mentioned in Exd 28:40 (A.V., "bonnets;” R.V.,
"head-tires"). It was used especially for purposes of ornament (Job
29:14; Isa 3:23; 62:3). The Hebrew word here used, tsaniph, properly means a
turban, folds of linen wound round the head. The Hebrew word peer, used in Isa
61:3, there rendered "beauty" (A.V.) and "garland" (R.V.),
is a head-dress or turban worn by females (Isa 3:20, "bonnets"),
priests (Exd 39:28), a bridegroom (Isa 61:10, "ornament;" R.V.,
"garland"). Eze 16:10 and Jon 2:5 are to be understood of the turban
wrapped round the head. The Hebrew shebisim (Isa 3:18), in the Authorized
Version rendered "cauls," and marg. "networks," denotes
probably a kind of netted head-dress. The "horn" (Heb. keren)
mentioned in 1Sa 2:1 is the head-dress called by the Druses of Mount Lebanon
the tantura.
- David Guzik Study Guide for 1 Corinthians 11 - Concerning Women, and the Lord’s Supper
A.
Instruction concerning women in the worship service.
(1) A
call to follow the example of Paul.
Imitate
me, just as I also imitate Christ.
a. Imitate me:
Paul knew he was following Jesus, so he did not hesitate to tell the Corinthian
Christians to imitate his walk with the Lord. He knew the Corinthian Christians
needed examples, and he was willing to be such an example.
i. In doing so,
Paul was simply doing what he told his young associate Timothy to do: but be an
example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in
purity. (1Timothy 4:12).
ii. How few today
are willing to say what Paul said! Instead, because of compromise and
ungodliness, we are quick to say, “Don’t look at me, look at Jesus.” While it
is true we must all ultimately look to Jesus, everyone one of us should be
examples of those who are looking to Jesus.
iii. In the
specific context, it is a little difficult to know if Paul’s words here relate
to the context before or after. Does Paul refer back to 1 Corinthians 10, and
therefore mean, “Follow my example as I seek to bless others instead of
pleasing myself”? Or, does Paul refer to what is to follow in 1 Corinthians 11,
and therefore mean, “Follow my example as I respect God’s order and authority
in the church”? Though he most likely connects it with what went before in 1
Corinthians 10, Paul was a good example in both cases!
iv. “Interpreters
judge, that these words to properly belong to the foregoing chapter, in the
last verse of which he had propounded his own example to them; but whether they
be applied to that chapter or this, is not much material. They teach us, that
the examples of the apostles are part of our rule; yet the modesty of the
apostle is remarkable, who requires of his people no further to follow him than
as he followed Christ: nor indeed ought any man to require more of those that
are under his charge, than to follow him so far forth as he imitates the Lord
Jesus Christ.” (Poole).
b. Just as I also
imitate Christ: Paul knew he was an example, and a good example at that. At the
same time, he also knew that it was not “Paul” who was a worthy example, but
“Paul the follower of Jesus” who was the example.
i. This also sets
a limit and a direction on the way we imitate others. Just as I also imitate
Christ has the idea of “follow me as much as you see me following Jesus.”
2.
(2-3) The principle of headship.
Now I
praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the
traditions just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to know that the
head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ
is God.
a. I praise you
brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions: Paul is
again speaking sarcastically to the Corinthian Christians. In fact, they did
not remember Paul in all things; they disregarded him as they sought fit.
Additionally, they did not keep the traditions as they should have.
i. Keep the
traditions is a scary phrase to many Christians. It brings forth the idea that
Christians are to be bound by ancient, outdated traditions in their conduct and
worship. But the traditions Paul delivered to the Corinthian Christians were
simply the teachings and practices of the apostles, received from Jesus. Paul
was not talking about ceremonies and rituals, but about basic teaching and
doctrine.
b. The head of every man is Christ, the head
of every woman is man, and the head of Christ is God: With these words, Paul
sets a foundation for his teaching in the rest of the chapter. Simply put, Paul
makes it clear that God has established principles of order, authority, and
accountability.
i. Head is an
important word in this chapter. Some consider head to mean nothing more than
source, in the sense that the head of a river is its source. Though this word
can mean this, Paul is not simply saying “man came from Jesus, woman came from
man, and Jesus came from God.” Though that simple understanding is true, it
goes much deeper, because in Biblical thinking, a source has inherent
authority. If something has come from me, there is some appropriate authority I
have over that which has come from me.
ii. In its full
sense, head has the idea of headship and
authority. It means to have the appropriate responsibility to lead, and the
matching accountability. It is right and appropriate to submit to someone who
is our head.
iii. With this
understanding, we see Paul describes
three “headship” relationships: Jesus is head of every man; man is the head of
woman, and God (the Father) is head of Christ. Because Paul connects the three
relationships, the principles of headship are the same among them.
c. Therefore,
women in the Church have two options in their attitude towards their head. They
imitate the kind of attitude men have towards Christ: showing a rebelliousness
that must be won over. Or, women can imitate the kind of attitude Christ
displayed towards God the Father: loving
submission to Him as an equal.
i. The idea of headship and authority is
important to God. In His great plan for the ages, one great thing God looks for
from man is voluntary submission. This is what Jesus showed in His life over
and over again, and this is exactly what God looks for from both men and women,
though it will be expressed in different ways.
ii. It is essential
to understand that being under authority does not equal inferiority. Jesus was
totally under the authority of God the Father (John 5:19; 8:28), yet He is
equally God (John 1:1; 8:58; 10:30). When God calls women in the church to
recognize the headship of men, it is not because women are unequal or inferior,
but because there is a God-ordained order of authority to be respected.
iii. “God is
the Head of Christ, not in respect of his essence and Divine nature, but in
respect of his office as Mediator; as the man is the head of the woman, not in
respect of a different and more excellent essence and nature, (for they are
both of the same nature,) but in respect of office and place, as God hath set
him over the woman.” (Poole).
3.
(4-6) The application of the principle of headship among the Corinthian
Christians.
Every
man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But
every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head,
for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not
covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn
or shaved, let her be covered.
a. Dishonors his
head . . . dishonors her head: Because of this order of authority, it is
inappropriate for men to pray under a head covering, and inappropriate for
women to pray without a head covering.
b. The idea of a head covering was important
in this (and many other) ancient cultures. To wear the head covering (or,
veil in some translations), was a public symbol of being under the authority
and protection of another.
i. “It was a
custom, both among the Greeks and Romans, and among the Jews an express law,
that no woman should be seen abroad without a veil. This was, and is, a common
custom through all the east, and none but public prostitutes go without veils.”
(Clarke).
ii. Even as today, among some, to wear a hat or
some other kind of head covering is a picture of humility and modesty, so the
head covering had an important cultural meaning among the ancient Corinthians.
iii. “The use
of the word ‘veil,’ . . . is an unfortunate one since it tends to call to mind
the full veil of contemporary Moslem cultures, which covers everything but the
eyes. This is unknown in antiquity, at least from the evidence of paintings and
sculpture.” (Fee).
c. So, for a man
praying or prophesying, having his head covered was for the man to say, “I am
not in authority here. I am under the authority of others.” Because God has
established that the head of woman is man (1 Corinthians 11:3), it would be
dishonoring to Jesus (his head) for a man to say this with the wearing of a
head covering.
i. “Nothing in
this is a further rule to Christians, than it is the duty of ministers, in
praying and preaching, to use postures and habits that are not naturally, nor
according to the custom of the place where they live, uncomely and irreverent,
and ill looked upon.” (Poole).
d. On the same
principle, for a woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered is
saying, “I am not under authority here.” And because God has established that
the head of woman is man (1 Corinthians 11:3), it would be dishonoring to men
(her head) for a woman to say this with the refusal to wear a head covering.
i. Under these
words of Paul, women are free to pray or prophesy, but only when as they
demonstrate that they are under the authority of the male leadership of the
church.
e. That is one
and the same as if her head was shaved: If a woman refuses to demonstrate being
under authority, she may as well be shaved of her hair (let her also be shorn).
In some ancient cultures, the shaving of a woman’s head was the punishment
given to an adulteress.
i. Having a woman’s head shorn or shaved meant
different things in different cultures; in Jewish law, it was the mark of
adultery (Numbers 5:11-31). In the Greek world, it could be the mark of a
prostitute or lesbian.
f. Among the
Corinthian Christians, there were probably certain “spiritual” women who
declared that since Jesus, they did need not demonstrate with a hairstyle or
head covering that they were under anyone’s authority. In essence, Paul says to
these women: “If you are going to forsake your head covering, go all the way
and shave your head, and identify yourself with the women of the world, in all
their shame.”
4.
(7-10) Why is it important to respect the principle of headship in the church?
For a
man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God;
but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man.
Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the
woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
a. The reason first stated is
found in 1 Corinthians 11:3: the head of woman is man. God has established
an order of authority, the principle of male headship, both in the church (1
Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2) and the home (Ephesians 5:23).
b. He is the
image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from
woman, but woman from man. A second reason is found in the order of creation: God created
Adam first, and gave Him responsibility over Eve.
i. Since one reason for male headship is the
order and manner in which God created man and woman - something which was
present before the fall - this passage makes it clear that before and after the
fall, God has ordained there be a difference in the roles between genders, even
in the church. Difference in gender roles (in the church and in the home) are
not the result of the fall, and are not erased by our new life in Jesus.
ii. Trapp on
woman is the glory of the man: “Either because he may glory in her, if she be
good; or because she is to honour him, and give glory to him.” Clarke also
observes: “As the man is, among the creatures, the representative of the glory
and perfections of God, so that the fear of him and dread of him are in every
beast of the field . . . so the woman is, in the house and family, the
representative of the power and authority of the man.” Poole adds: “But the
woman is the glory of the man, created for the honour of the man, and for his
help and assistance, and originally made out of man, so as man may glory of
her, as Adam did of Eve, Gen. Ii. 23, This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of
my flesh.”
iii. Nor was man
created for the woman, but woman for the man: Simply put, Adam was not created
for Eve, but Eve was created for Adam – and this principle applies to every
“Adam” and every “Eve” through history. Genesis 2:18 declares God’s intention in creating Eve: I will make him
a helper comparable to him. Eve was created to be a helper to Adam, meaning
that Adam was “head” over Eve, and she was called to share and help his vision
and agenda. Genesis 2:22 says, He brought her to the man. Adam was not
brought to Eve, Eve was brought to Adam – her head. It is an idea offensive to the spirit of our age, but the Bible in this
passage clearly teaches that (in the church and in the home) man was not made
for the benefit of woman, but woman for the benefit of man. “For the man,
signifies to serve and help the man.” (Poole).
c. Because of the
angels: A third reason
God has established male headship in the church is the presence of angels in
corporate worship.
i. Angels are present at any assembly of Christians for worship and note
any departure from reverent order; and apparently, angels are offended by any
violation of propriety.
ii. Passages
such as this remind us that our struggle is bigger than ourselves. God has
eternal things to teach the universe through us (Eph 3:10-11; 1Cr 4:9; 1Pe
1:12).
iii. John
Stott, commenting on Ephesians 3, explains the broader idea: “It is as if a
great drama is being enacted. History is the theatre, the world is the stage,
and the church members in every land are the actors. God himself has written
the play, and he directs and produces it. Act by act, scene by scene, the story
continues to unfold. But who are the audience? They are the cosmic
intelligences, the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.”
(Stott).
iv. “And so it teaches us, that the
good angels, who are ministering spirits for the good of God’s elect, at all
times have a special ministration, or at least are more particularly present,
in the assemblies of people for religious worship, observing the persons,
carriage, and demeanour; the sense of which ought to awe all persons attending
those services, from any incident and unworthy behaviour.” (Poole).
d. Significantly,
none of these reasons are
culture-dependent. The order and manner of creation and the presence of angels
do not depend on culture. We cannot say, “Paul said this just because of the
thinking of the Corinthian culture or the place of women in that culture.” The
principles are eternal, but the out-working of the principles may differ
according to culture.
e. In this, we see God has established a
clear chain of authority in both the home and in the church, and in those
spheres, God has ordained that men are the “head” - that is, that they have the
place of authority and responsibility.
i. Our
culture, having rejected the idea in a difference in role between men and
women, now rejects the idea of any difference between men and women! The
driving trends in our culture point towards men who are more like women, and
women who are more like men - and styles, clothes, perfumes, and all the rest are
pushing this thought.
ii. The Bible
is just as specific: there is no general submission of women unto men commanded
in society; only in the spheres of the home and in the church. God has not
commanded in His word that men have exclusive authority in the areas of
politics, business, education, and so on.
iii. It also does not mean that every
woman in the church is under the authority of every man - ridiculous! Instead
it means that those who lead the church - pastors and ruling elders - must be
men, and women must respect their authority.
iv. The failure of men to lead in
the home and in the church, and to lead in the way Jesus would lead, has been a
chief cause of the rejection of male authority - and is inexcusable.
v. Some feel this
recognition and submission to authority is an unbearable burden; that it means,
“I have to say that I’m inferior, I’m nothing, and I have to recognize this
other person as being superior.” Not at all! Inferiority or superiority has nothing to do with it!
Remember the relationship between God the Father and God the Son - they are
completely equal in their being, but have different roles when it comes to
authority.
vi. Some may
say that the church cannot work, or cannot work well, unless we get along with
the times and put women into positions of spiritual and doctrinal authority in
the church. From the standpoint of what works in our culture, they may be
right. But how can such a church say they are led by the word of God?
f. The issues of
headship and submission should be seen in their broader context - not just
as a struggle between men and women, but as a struggle with the issue of
authority in general. Since the 1960’s, there has been a massive change in
the way we see and accept authority.
i. Citizens do not have the same respect
for government’s authority, students do not have the same respect for teacher’s
authority, women do not have the same respect for men’s authority, children do
not have the same respect for parent’s authority, employees do not have the
same respect for their employer’s authority, people do not have the same
respect for the police’s authority, and Christians no longer have the same
respect for church authority.
ii.
It’s important to ask: have the changes been good? Do we feel safer? Are we
more confident in our culture? Have television and other entertainment gotten
better or worse? In fact, our society is presently in, and rushing towards,
complete anarchy - the state where no authority is accepted, and the only thing
that matters is what I want to do.
iii. It is fair
to describe our present moral state as one of anarchy. There is no moral authority in our culture. When
it comes to morality, the only thing that matters is what one wants to do.
And in a civil sense, many neighborhoods in our nation are given over to
anarchy. Do you think that government’s authority is accepted in gang-infested
portions of our inner city? The only thing that matters is what one wants to
do.
iv. We must see the broader attack
on authority as a direct Satanic strategy to destroy our society and millions
of individual lives. The devil is accomplishing this with two main attacks:
first, the corruption of authority; second, the rejection of authority.
v. This idea of authority and
submission to authority are so important to God that they are part of His very
being. The First Person of the Holy Trinity is called the Father; the Second
Person of the Holy Trinity is called the Son. Inherent in those titles is a
relationship of authority and submission to authority. The Father exercises
authority over the Son, and the Son submits to the Father’s authority - and
this is in the very nature and being of God! Our failure to exercise Biblical
authority, and our failure to submit to Biblical authority, isn’t just wrong
and sad - it sins against the very nature of God. Remember 1 Samuel 15:23: For
rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.
5.
(11-12) Headship in light of the interdependence of men and women.
Nevertheless,
neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.
For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all
things are from God.
a. Nevertheless:
On top of all Paul has said about male headship in the church, it would be
wrong to consider headship as the only dynamic at work between men and women in
the church. They must also remember neither is man independent of woman, nor
woman independent of man. Men and women need each other,
so there is no place for a “lording over” of the men over the women.
i. “Even after
he has stressed the subordination of women, Paul goes on to stress even more
directly the essential partnership of man and woman. Neither can live without
the other. If there is subordination, it is in order that the partnership may
be more fruitful and lovely for both.” (Barclay).
b. Though Paul
has recognized the order of creation, and related it to the principle of male
headship in the church, he is also careful to remember even so man also comes
through woman. There is a critical
interdependence which must be recognized, within the framework of male headship
in the church and in the home.
i. “But on the
other side, since the creation of the first man, all men are by the woman, who
conceives them in her womb, suckles them at her breasts, is concerned in their
education while children, and dandled upon her knees; the man therefore hath no
reason to despise and too much to trample upon the woman.” (Poole).
ii. Therefore, the man, or men, who rule in the church or in the home
without love, without recognizing the important and vital place God has given women,
is not doing God’s will.
iii. “A man who can only rule by stamping his foot had better
remain single. But a man who knows how to govern his house by the love of the
Lord, through sacrificial submission to the Lord, is the man who is going to
make a perfect husband. The woman who cannot submit to an authority like that
had better remain single.” (Redpath).
iv. G. Campbell
Morgan recalls the story of the older Christian woman who had never married,
explaining “I never met a man who could master me.” She had the right idea.
6.
(13-16) Appealing to experience, nature, common sense, and apostolic authority.
Judge
among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head
uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair,
it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her;
for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if anyone seems to be
contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.
a. Judge among
yourselves: Paul appeals to something the Corinthian Christians should be able
to figure out on their own.
b. Is it proper
for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Here, Paul speaks to
those Christians who come from a Jewish environment. In the Jewish community,
even men would cover their heads while praying. It was therefore inconceivable
for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered. Their own experience taught
them that women should observe the custom of the head covering when the church
meets.
c. Does not even
nature itself teach: In
both Jewish and Greek cultures, short hair was common for men. Therefore it was
a dishonor for a man to wear long hair, because it was considered feminine.
i. From as
long as we have known, women have generally worn their hair longer than men. In
some cultures and at some times, men have worn their hair longer than others,
but no matter how long men have worn their hair, women have always worn their
hair longer.
ii. Based on this
verse, many people have thought that it is a sin for a man to wear long hair –
or, at least hair that is considered long by the culture. But long hair in
itself can be no sin; after all, Paul apparently had long hair for a time in
Corinth as a part of a vow (Acts 18:18). But, the vow would not have meant
anything if long hair was the norm; that’s what Paul is getting at!
iii. While it
is true that it is wrong for a man to take the appearance of a woman
(Deuteronomy 22:5), longer hair on a man is not necessarily an indication of
this. It is far better for most preachers to be concerned about the length of
their sermons instead of the length of people’s hair!
d. Her hair is
given to her for a covering: Because women wear their hair
longer than men, Paul thinks of this longer hair as “nature’s veil.” So, if
nature has given women long hair as a covering, that in itself points to their
need to be covered (according to the ancient Corinthian custom).
e. If anyone seem to be contentious, we
have no such custom: In this appeal to apostolic authority, Paul is telling
the Corinthian Christians to not be contentious – especially because the other
churches of God have adopted their custom according to God’s truth.
Source
http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/
OOW
2012
[1]
This verse is included merely to illustrate the transitions made by the apostle
Paul from addressing one issue/concern/problem to dealing with another
contentious approach to worship plaguing the Corinthian Christians. Simply put,
the Corinthians were a problem-riddled
church and Paul, exercising his apostolic authority, writes to this fellowship
of believers to correct, rebuke, and encourage them with sound doctrine
(2Tim 3:16-17-4:1-4).
OOW
2012
No comments:
Post a Comment